sanjaymk
07-20 03:56 PM
Why can't we have a fax campaign like NumbersUSA and fax the respective senators.
I think when it is re-introduced again we need to flood the nay/abstained senators with faxes asking them for changing the vote.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
I think when it is re-introduced again we need to flood the nay/abstained senators with faxes asking them for changing the vote.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
wallpaper BURGER KING GUIDE TO BURGER
2BeeNot2Bee
09-14 06:45 PM
If Substution labor was ethical, PD porting from EB3 to EB2 is ethical.
Ithink PD Porting might be legal at this time but not ETHICAL.
If substitution was unethical, July 07 out-of-turn PD flood which has created a HUGE backlog is unethical, if that is unethical, PD porting is also unethical.
Ithink PD Porting might be legal at this time but not ETHICAL.
If substitution was unethical, July 07 out-of-turn PD flood which has created a HUGE backlog is unethical, if that is unethical, PD porting is also unethical.
Raju
07-06 04:05 PM
AILA has reported a very interesting or confusing DOS LegalNet Office letter which one of the members received towards the fact that the consular posts had already been allocated their numbers for the month of July prior to EB visa numbers becoming unavailable on July 2 and that the posts may continue to use their July allocations of EB numbers, and continue to issue Immigrant Visas for the rest of this month, July, for those applicants who were scheduled for IV interviews in July. Hm.....................................
This was what I mentioned earlier. This was reported by AILA a while ago.
This was what I mentioned earlier. This was reported by AILA a while ago.
2011 bowing to the Burger King,
PD_Dec2002
03-17 09:48 PM
--
Did anybody notice this in the IRS communication that was sent out to taxpayers:
For taxpyers, the amount of money will be "reduced" or " completely phased out" for individuals making adjusted gross income or more than $75K ( or more than $150 if married and filing jointly).
How about that?
Not surprising. People who earn $75K (single) or $150K (as a couple) are not the ones who drastically change their lifestyles because of recession or high gas prices. In fact these people are anyways earning much above the national average. It's the low/middle-income folks that bear the brunt of high inflation and soaring gas prices...they are the ones being goaded into spending.
Anyways, think twice before you spend the rebate foolishly. Why not send it to IV, contribute to an IRA or fund your kid's 529 plan?
Thanks,
Jayant
Did anybody notice this in the IRS communication that was sent out to taxpayers:
For taxpyers, the amount of money will be "reduced" or " completely phased out" for individuals making adjusted gross income or more than $75K ( or more than $150 if married and filing jointly).
How about that?
Not surprising. People who earn $75K (single) or $150K (as a couple) are not the ones who drastically change their lifestyles because of recession or high gas prices. In fact these people are anyways earning much above the national average. It's the low/middle-income folks that bear the brunt of high inflation and soaring gas prices...they are the ones being goaded into spending.
Anyways, think twice before you spend the rebate foolishly. Why not send it to IV, contribute to an IRA or fund your kid's 529 plan?
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
xela
07-27 11:31 PM
for what it s worth here is my experience with ohio bmv
i brought h1b approval till feb st 2010 and receipt notice for I 485 and employer letter till feb 1st 2010. I dont have ead or ap.
they told me that cus of i485 i can only get dl for 1 year, however with the employment letter they did give it to me till feb 1st 2010
i brought h1b approval till feb st 2010 and receipt notice for I 485 and employer letter till feb 1st 2010. I dont have ead or ap.
they told me that cus of i485 i can only get dl for 1 year, however with the employment letter they did give it to me till feb 1st 2010
speddi
07-06 09:36 AM
http://avatarsofslavery.googlepages.com/home
more...
ho_gaya_kaya_?
07-14 08:22 PM
Silly question but I need an answer :)...How can I use Bill pay here? I bank with BOA and it asks for a company name if I choose bill pay...
Login to your bank account (This is for BoA)
Go to Bill Pay>>Payees>>Add a Payee
You will see two options
1)Pay a company
2) Pay an Individual
Click the GO button next to Pay an Individual (without entering any information)
In the next page
You will see a small form
Payee- is the name- in whose favor the check will be made
Nickname is for your reference
In Identifying information- you can put your handle
Rest is obvious
Payee creation is one time setup
Once you have created a payee
Go to Bill Pay>>Overview
and here you will see an option to make a payment
Login to your bank account (This is for BoA)
Go to Bill Pay>>Payees>>Add a Payee
You will see two options
1)Pay a company
2) Pay an Individual
Click the GO button next to Pay an Individual (without entering any information)
In the next page
You will see a small form
Payee- is the name- in whose favor the check will be made
Nickname is for your reference
In Identifying information- you can put your handle
Rest is obvious
Payee creation is one time setup
Once you have created a payee
Go to Bill Pay>>Overview
and here you will see an option to make a payment
2010 Burger King Canada Coupons
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
more...
nogc_noproblem
05-01 10:24 AM
Somebody tried to approve or disapprove your message but he/she already got exhausted. They might be in spraying spree earlier in giving Red and Green dots to others and currently don�t have enough �credit� to approve or disapprove other�s message.
I have some black dots in my Control Panel? What is the meaning of a black dot?
And how does one give black dot to some one? When I try to add reputation to a post, I can only see I approve or I disapprove options. I would imagine I approve=green and I disapprove=red. Where does a black dot fit into this scheme?
I have some black dots in my Control Panel? What is the meaning of a black dot?
And how does one give black dot to some one? When I try to add reputation to a post, I can only see I approve or I disapprove options. I would imagine I approve=green and I disapprove=red. Where does a black dot fit into this scheme?
hair Burger King – King Kolossalz
beppenyc
03-02 04:38 PM
ok, one day is gone, now what`s will happen??
more...
makemygc
07-06 01:04 PM
He is trying to spin a news and get a answer of his comfort. Guyz never stop :)
Or may be he is in some mental shock and need some..you know what.
Or may be he is in some mental shock and need some..you know what.
hot Burger King – King Kolossalz
sriramkalyan
06-09 12:05 PM
i was regular contributor to IV ..I stopped it ..
My request is ..
All postings on IV should identify the user as contributing member or a Free User.
That change will help IV to increase Funding ..
I will sign up for monthly recurring to IV if I see above change ..
My request is ..
All postings on IV should identify the user as contributing member or a Free User.
That change will help IV to increase Funding ..
I will sign up for monthly recurring to IV if I see above change ..
more...
house Burger King
amitjoey
07-18 04:56 PM
Questions about disclosure of funds.
Please check this video for answers
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2115477102106333532&q=immigration+voice&total=149&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2115477102106333532&q=immigration+voice&total=149&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
Please check this video for answers
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2115477102106333532&q=immigration+voice&total=149&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2115477102106333532&q=immigration+voice&total=149&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
tattoo BURGER KING
diptam
07-06 10:50 AM
See - lets not fight within ourselves. We both have the same cause but expressing differently.
Please read my other pots written to DDLMODES - my only intention was to say that if a "USCIS overhaul" has to happen that should be initiated by Senators.... For Senators to do something American peoples need to talk ( like they did for CIR)
Chat with you later - got a meeting.
Let me tell you one thing for clearly. I know that this is a hot button issue in both agencies right now. If you read Zoe Lofgren's letter, both secretaries have to answer her questions and it will be a press release as well. We need to make it a public story, but NOT by digging our own hole. Boat 1 is better for me, If I know for sure that Boat 2 will drown me in the ocean. In the heat of the moment, you might not see the consequences of the security lapse rumors.
The established truth so far is
USCIS used all the numbers ahead of time and shut the door on highly skilled immigrants on day one
DOS revised its July 2007 visa bulletin on day one 1, which has not happened in a long time or never.
The wind mill stories are
Some law firms started hallucinating that the security checks were never done. They themselves do not know for sure. If you go and look towards the end of the blog post where it originated, he asks for confirmation instead of telling his resources.
Do you know that there were people who got their GC in 45-60 days last year? I know some personally. The security check and how they say its done or not done has always been esoteric to us. Last year, some one put up the blog of a Taiwanese guy who got labor,140,485 approved in a span of 5-6 months. How can this happen? AFAIK, all the people who got their GC's have PD's like 2003 and 2004. Please do not sling mud, when we do not know for sure, esp when the issues are of paramount importance like security. I will leave things for your discretion.
Please read my other pots written to DDLMODES - my only intention was to say that if a "USCIS overhaul" has to happen that should be initiated by Senators.... For Senators to do something American peoples need to talk ( like they did for CIR)
Chat with you later - got a meeting.
Let me tell you one thing for clearly. I know that this is a hot button issue in both agencies right now. If you read Zoe Lofgren's letter, both secretaries have to answer her questions and it will be a press release as well. We need to make it a public story, but NOT by digging our own hole. Boat 1 is better for me, If I know for sure that Boat 2 will drown me in the ocean. In the heat of the moment, you might not see the consequences of the security lapse rumors.
The established truth so far is
USCIS used all the numbers ahead of time and shut the door on highly skilled immigrants on day one
DOS revised its July 2007 visa bulletin on day one 1, which has not happened in a long time or never.
The wind mill stories are
Some law firms started hallucinating that the security checks were never done. They themselves do not know for sure. If you go and look towards the end of the blog post where it originated, he asks for confirmation instead of telling his resources.
Do you know that there were people who got their GC in 45-60 days last year? I know some personally. The security check and how they say its done or not done has always been esoteric to us. Last year, some one put up the blog of a Taiwanese guy who got labor,140,485 approved in a span of 5-6 months. How can this happen? AFAIK, all the people who got their GC's have PD's like 2003 and 2004. Please do not sling mud, when we do not know for sure, esp when the issues are of paramount importance like security. I will leave things for your discretion.
more...
pictures Burger King
FraudGultee
04-17 09:04 AM
Many congratulations
dresses Burger King look-a-like King
shukla77
06-11 01:14 PM
Wow ... Although I am not in consulting business so dont know all the fundas, but what seems interesting to me is "making 100K from 100~200K from active trading and investing in other areas". So I can make 50K if I have 50-100K to invest. Pretty hefty returns :D.. I wish we could chat over the lunch or something
It is not a big deal dude...if not for this immigration system, we could be making even more..think about $80-$100/hr if you are an independent contractor. This a minimum for a decent contract with vendor directly.
And if you have ~100-200K for investments, with some experience and any luck..you could be making another 100K out of it from trading and active investing in other areas. That comes to ~250-300K minimum. There are no bounds when life is free and in this great country. Unfortunately, things have turned discriminative and our potentials are being restricted(atleast for non-EAD guys) and you have to be prepared for getting outright kicked out of this country.
It is not a big deal dude...if not for this immigration system, we could be making even more..think about $80-$100/hr if you are an independent contractor. This a minimum for a decent contract with vendor directly.
And if you have ~100-200K for investments, with some experience and any luck..you could be making another 100K out of it from trading and active investing in other areas. That comes to ~250-300K minimum. There are no bounds when life is free and in this great country. Unfortunately, things have turned discriminative and our potentials are being restricted(atleast for non-EAD guys) and you have to be prepared for getting outright kicked out of this country.
more...
makeup Burger King Delivering
chanduv23
11-20 08:54 PM
I can understand attorney's thinking: H1B is good to have. If there is no reason for its revocation (i.e applicant is still working for H1 sponsor), then there is some level of protection for you. Another aspect is a legal status. While EAD gives you an opportunity to continue work legally if I-485 is denied, it does not protect your legal status (accumulate more than 180 days of unlawful presence and you lose eligibility to adjust status and are a subject to re-entry ban). Having H1B gives you a protection in this case. But if H1B is revoked, I-485 is denied and a person does not have EAD, then there is no escape. It's nice to have both, but maintaining EAD should be the priority.
Typically, if someone is doing a AC21 jump + H1b transfer, it means that the h1b gets transferred to the new employer and the new employer is the h1b petitioner. If the h1b is based on an approved 140 - the beneficiary gets it for 3 years and unless the person is completing his 3 years with the new employer when the 140 revoke happens, the h1b is still valid unless the new employer decides he will cancel it or the person is layed off and thats when the person is in deep trouble because he/she does not have EAD. Correct me if I am wrong. H1b revocation by ex employer may not affect the candidate because candidate already did a transfer
Typically, if someone is doing a AC21 jump + H1b transfer, it means that the h1b gets transferred to the new employer and the new employer is the h1b petitioner. If the h1b is based on an approved 140 - the beneficiary gets it for 3 years and unless the person is completing his 3 years with the new employer when the 140 revoke happens, the h1b is still valid unless the new employer decides he will cancel it or the person is layed off and thats when the person is in deep trouble because he/she does not have EAD. Correct me if I am wrong. H1b revocation by ex employer may not affect the candidate because candidate already did a transfer
girlfriend England#39;s Burger King is using
immuser
07-20 04:51 PM
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/dolsta1207.pdf
there were 144,000 PERM's done between oct 2006- march 2007
india, china have retro for both EB2 and EB3
mexico, philippines and bunch of other countries have retro for EB3
PERM is only for the Primary applicant. For I-485 every dependent of Primary applicant needs one separate application
Considering all these 750,000 I-485 filings in next 1 month sounds a reasonable estimate.
Many who had labor pending under the old system, applied in PERM also. So it is 144k minus duplicates. But, I have no idea know many are duplicates
there were 144,000 PERM's done between oct 2006- march 2007
india, china have retro for both EB2 and EB3
mexico, philippines and bunch of other countries have retro for EB3
PERM is only for the Primary applicant. For I-485 every dependent of Primary applicant needs one separate application
Considering all these 750,000 I-485 filings in next 1 month sounds a reasonable estimate.
Many who had labor pending under the old system, applied in PERM also. So it is 144k minus duplicates. But, I have no idea know many are duplicates
hairstyles Where: Burger King
natrajs
07-18 09:23 PM
Contributed $ 100 Yesterday , and Will do Again
Thank Q You All
Thank Q You All
ind_game
05-18 03:05 PM
Those continuous LUDs are pre adjudication processes - means your name check status, other statuses. FP etc... are all processed.
ANOTHER UPDATE
I just spoke to Congressional office and this is what she has to say:
Quote"""""""""""
I just spoke with our liaison at the Nebraska office and she confirmed that your motion to reopen was approved on Friday (05/15/2009). That, I am told, means Nebraska agrees to re-examine your I-485 denial and a decision should be forthcoming within 60 days. I suggest that we wait to see what that decision is before our office initiates any formal inquiries with the USCIS Nebraska Director.
""""""""""""""Unquote
But she agreed that my second MTR might have been on sidelines and the congressional office inquiry into the matter could have influenced USCIS to review my case ( probably with a supervisor) immediately. She told me that she would put another inquiry with NSC in 4 weeks if nothing comes up. Finally we have decided to forgo (just for now) the process of writing letter to the NSC Director as it might not add much weight to the process, as congressional office would be repeating the same argument that my Attorney has made regarding the AC21, which a supervisor is already looking at.
I have already waited for 3 months. Another 2 months might take its toll on my emotional drain.
God save AC21............
ANOTHER UPDATE
I just spoke to Congressional office and this is what she has to say:
Quote"""""""""""
I just spoke with our liaison at the Nebraska office and she confirmed that your motion to reopen was approved on Friday (05/15/2009). That, I am told, means Nebraska agrees to re-examine your I-485 denial and a decision should be forthcoming within 60 days. I suggest that we wait to see what that decision is before our office initiates any formal inquiries with the USCIS Nebraska Director.
""""""""""""""Unquote
But she agreed that my second MTR might have been on sidelines and the congressional office inquiry into the matter could have influenced USCIS to review my case ( probably with a supervisor) immediately. She told me that she would put another inquiry with NSC in 4 weeks if nothing comes up. Finally we have decided to forgo (just for now) the process of writing letter to the NSC Director as it might not add much weight to the process, as congressional office would be repeating the same argument that my Attorney has made regarding the AC21, which a supervisor is already looking at.
I have already waited for 3 months. Another 2 months might take its toll on my emotional drain.
God save AC21............
prinive
07-19 02:20 PM
This is what I heared even before the flower campaigns started.
it seems they are planning to honor the July VB and make chanes in Aug VB. So I guess they will accept the applications in July. :rolleyes:
it seems they are planning to honor the July VB and make chanes in Aug VB. So I guess they will accept the applications in July. :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment