snathan
05-19 04:27 PM
yup. you should have completed 180 days I guess after getting 140 approved. There are many threads for this discussion. try to find it.
Its not for the I-140. If you have completed 180 days after applying I-485 & I-140 approved, you can use the AC21. But if you have only I-140, there is no use.
Its not for the I-140. If you have completed 180 days after applying I-485 & I-140 approved, you can use the AC21. But if you have only I-140, there is no use.
wallpaper Funny Pictures of Valentines
mohitb272
12-07 05:05 PM
Anyone in similar boat?
MU1234
01-30 07:37 PM
I got laid off from Company A in Jan.2009 but I filed transfer for my H1-B to Company B based on receipt notice which I have for Company A. but Just now I came to know from USCIS that Transfer which I filed for Company A in Oct.2008 has RFE and Company A denied to answer RFE cos I am no longer their employee.
Question:
1. Can I get a receipt notice for Company B ?
2. Is there really an Issue for my Transfer to company B due to RFE in previous filing?
Appreciate your responses.-Thank you
Question:
1. Can I get a receipt notice for Company B ?
2. Is there really an Issue for my Transfer to company B due to RFE in previous filing?
Appreciate your responses.-Thank you
2011 girlfriend Funny Valentine#39
StuckInTheMuck
07-16 11:53 AM
There are several threads dealing with your question (for example here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18737) is a popular thread), all you need to do is spend a few minutes browsing the forums.
more...
Macaca
02-20 10:10 AM
Some paras from Information, Please (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/18/AR2007021801064.html): Watchdog Groups, Some Lawmakers Say Congressional Reports Should Be Made Public.
Elizabeth Williamson (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/elizabeth+williamson/), Washington Post Staff Writer.
Deep inside the Library of Congress, 500 researchers pound out the secret intelligence Congress uses to make law.
Legislators request 6,000 Congressional Research Service reports a year, on weapons systems and farm subsidies, prescription prices and energy use. Together, they offer what lobbyists and industry want most: clues to what's next on the Hill.
For years, open-government groups have fought to make the reports public, and for years, many lawmakers have kept them under wraps. Or so they thought.
By insisting on secrecy, Congress instead created a bootleg market for the research. Every day, a small Texas company compiles the reports and sells them to lobbyists, lawyers and others who pay thousands of dollars for a peek at the reports and what they say about the congressional agenda. And it's all legal.
"How I get them is my trade secret . . . but I get them all," said Walt Seager, who digs up the reports for Gallery Watch, a legislative tracking service.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) was established in 1914 as Congress's supplier of nonpartisan research and analysis. Its reports are neither classified nor copyrighted, but they've long been the exclusive property of lawmakers, who distribute them as they see fit. Taxpayers supply the agency's $100 million annual budget, inspiring open-government groups and some lawmakers, including Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) to push for public release of CRS reports.
Aftergood and others have fought back by posting every CRS report they can find on their Web sites. But watchdog groups have released only about 10 percent of the total, not enough to reveal the patterns that suggest what Congress might do next.
Subscribers to Gallery Watch pay about $4,000 a year to get all the CRS reports, online and searchable, delivered weekly.
At a recent meeting for potential customers, Riendeau explained that clients scan the reports for intelligence "kind of how the CIA operates," by spotting the political trends suggested by their contents and timing, he said. About a year ago, lawmakers made a flurry of requests for CRS reports related to North Korean counterfeiting of U.S. currency; not until months later, when the Treasury Department cracked down on North Korea, did the issue appear in newspapers.
Resources
CRS REPORTS (http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/crs.shtm)
A peek at "Congress' Brain" (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/19/182559/089)
You'd Know if You Were Congressional (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032102043.html)
Elizabeth Williamson (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/elizabeth+williamson/), Washington Post Staff Writer.
Deep inside the Library of Congress, 500 researchers pound out the secret intelligence Congress uses to make law.
Legislators request 6,000 Congressional Research Service reports a year, on weapons systems and farm subsidies, prescription prices and energy use. Together, they offer what lobbyists and industry want most: clues to what's next on the Hill.
For years, open-government groups have fought to make the reports public, and for years, many lawmakers have kept them under wraps. Or so they thought.
By insisting on secrecy, Congress instead created a bootleg market for the research. Every day, a small Texas company compiles the reports and sells them to lobbyists, lawyers and others who pay thousands of dollars for a peek at the reports and what they say about the congressional agenda. And it's all legal.
"How I get them is my trade secret . . . but I get them all," said Walt Seager, who digs up the reports for Gallery Watch, a legislative tracking service.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) was established in 1914 as Congress's supplier of nonpartisan research and analysis. Its reports are neither classified nor copyrighted, but they've long been the exclusive property of lawmakers, who distribute them as they see fit. Taxpayers supply the agency's $100 million annual budget, inspiring open-government groups and some lawmakers, including Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) to push for public release of CRS reports.
Aftergood and others have fought back by posting every CRS report they can find on their Web sites. But watchdog groups have released only about 10 percent of the total, not enough to reveal the patterns that suggest what Congress might do next.
Subscribers to Gallery Watch pay about $4,000 a year to get all the CRS reports, online and searchable, delivered weekly.
At a recent meeting for potential customers, Riendeau explained that clients scan the reports for intelligence "kind of how the CIA operates," by spotting the political trends suggested by their contents and timing, he said. About a year ago, lawmakers made a flurry of requests for CRS reports related to North Korean counterfeiting of U.S. currency; not until months later, when the Treasury Department cracked down on North Korea, did the issue appear in newspapers.
Resources
CRS REPORTS (http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/crs.shtm)
A peek at "Congress' Brain" (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/19/182559/089)
You'd Know if You Were Congressional (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/21/AR2007032102043.html)
krish01
09-24 02:28 PM
Hi ,
Trying to get my green card (11 Years in the waiting) .
My I-140 was denied / and we have applied for Motion to Reopen . in the meantime, i have my AP approved this 2011. can i switch employer.
Thanks
Krishnan
Trying to get my green card (11 Years in the waiting) .
My I-140 was denied / and we have applied for Motion to Reopen . in the meantime, i have my AP approved this 2011. can i switch employer.
Thanks
Krishnan
more...
Scythe
03-21 02:47 PM
Hey glos, I thought you were a Brit.
2010 pictures Valentine day flowers
askreddy
09-25 12:36 AM
Bump..
more...
jsk1982
08-24 01:51 AM
I have an I-485 that will be current soon, but I am not employed. If they approve it, will that be considered a mistake and make it invalid? Should I withdraw it? Will a letter explaining the situation be sufficient? I have another application as a dependent, just takes longer.
hair Happy Valentine#39;s Day Cats
vishwak
09-09 03:58 PM
By this, we can understand that dates are not going to Retro......good for us.
more...
rakesh_one
03-18 10:51 AM
No. OPT means in F1. As long as you register for enough credits, your status continues. The enough credits is determined by your international advisor.
hot funny valentines day quotes.
EB2IMMIGRANT
08-06 01:15 PM
Bump.
more...
house Funny Valentine Especially For
vsc
01-23 02:19 PM
Hi
presently i am working on h1b for a tech company. I also have my ead (obtained as a result of july 07 fiasco).
Can i start a company, incorporate a llc or a class c company on my ead? What would be my options?
i know that if i had solely my h1b, i could start a class c company but not work for it(use a gc or a citizen) to do it
my question is that can i still continue on my status quo--ie use h1 for my employer and use ead to start a company, or i have to give up my h1 status? since my wife is on h4, i have to continue on h1b until she gets her ead.
thanks!
presently i am working on h1b for a tech company. I also have my ead (obtained as a result of july 07 fiasco).
Can i start a company, incorporate a llc or a class c company on my ead? What would be my options?
i know that if i had solely my h1b, i could start a class c company but not work for it(use a gc or a citizen) to do it
my question is that can i still continue on my status quo--ie use h1 for my employer and use ead to start a company, or i have to give up my h1 status? since my wife is on h4, i have to continue on h1b until she gets her ead.
thanks!
tattoo Funny valentine#39;s day movies
priya777
09-21 10:51 AM
i got ead(secondary person) yestesday.and also i applied H1 B which got approved 1 week back and i want to take SSN. so my question is with
what(H1B or EAD) i should apply for SSN). Do i need to apply SSN with EAD or H1 B? which one will be better ? please let me know.
what(H1B or EAD) i should apply for SSN). Do i need to apply SSN with EAD or H1 B? which one will be better ? please let me know.
more...
pictures Funny valentine#39;s day movies
imnail
01-15 02:34 AM
I send my I485 application on Nov 6th 2007. No receipts yet. Checks have not cashed as well. Anyone in my position?
dresses funny happy valentines day
stevensjd
06-22 04:38 PM
she will be on EOD once she quit the Job. You may not have to file COS to H4.
My wife quit the job last year she was on H1. and we didn't get any RFE till date..
She also went to India and came back on AP this year...
My wife quit the job last year she was on H1. and we didn't get any RFE till date..
She also went to India and came back on AP this year...
more...
makeup My Heart On Valentine#39;s Day
glus
01-19 12:56 PM
Hi Guys,
Some time ago I posted a message asking you guys to contact me via a private email if you needed a good attorney. Today I realized I had a lot of private messages. I just changed my profile so you can e-mail me directly.l
The attorney has a small office, working along without paralegals. She is very nice as a professional and a person. She is not money-driven. If you need her contact, please contact me via a private e-mail or message.
Regards,
Some time ago I posted a message asking you guys to contact me via a private email if you needed a good attorney. Today I realized I had a lot of private messages. I just changed my profile so you can e-mail me directly.l
The attorney has a small office, working along without paralegals. She is very nice as a professional and a person. She is not money-driven. If you need her contact, please contact me via a private e-mail or message.
Regards,
girlfriend Valentine#39;s day math
Templarian
03-18 05:02 PM
Close it's results from a survey I did with like 15 people. Lets say they were in a certain state of mind.
hairstyles valentines day pictures funny
Blog Feeds
10-22 12:00 PM
Ugandan-born Charles Wesley Mumbere, a former nurse's aide in Maryland and Pennsylvania, was crowned king of Uganda's 300,000-strong Rwenzururu Kingdom. Mumbere was sent to the US in 1984 as a young man in order to get an education. In 1987, he sought political asylum due to political upheaval in his country. He trained as a nurse's aide in the US and kept his royal status a secret for most of the last quarter century. The green card holder returned to Uganda earlier this month to assume the monarchy for his people. Good luck, King Charles.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/immigrant-of-the-day-charles-wesley-mumbere-king-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/immigrant-of-the-day-charles-wesley-mumbere-king-.html)
Macaca
08-15 07:28 PM
Honest and Open Thievery (http://www.reason.com/news/show/121947.html) The limits of Congress's ethics reforms By Jacob Sullum, August 15, 2007
In a letter posted at Congress.org, a constituent praises Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.) for his "brilliant intellect." As evidence, Mitchell's admirer cites the congressman's vote for the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.
The margin by which the act passed�411 to 8 in the House, 83 to 14 in the Senate�takes some of the shine off Mitchell's brilliance. Still, he's probably smart enough to realize what his colleagues evidently understand: Congress's new honesty and openness are not what they're cracked up to be.
The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requires that special appropriations added by individual legislators be listed in an online database at least 48 hours before they come to a vote. Critics such as Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) complained bitterly about a loophole: Congressional leaders can certify that a bill contains no earmarks, and there's no way to challenge that determination.
A deeper problem is that publicity does not deter wasteful, parochial spending that legislators want to publicize. Consider what happened last month when Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) challenged a $100,000 appropriation for a prison museum near Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
The earmark's sponsor, Rep. Nancy Boyda (D-Kan.), defended the honor of Leavenworth County, bragging that "we probably have more prisons...than any other county in the United States." She indignantly added that "the local residents are proud of their heritage and rightly so," since Leavenworth has hosted the likes of George "Machine Gun" Kelly and Nazi spy Fritz Duquesne.
The House approved Boyda's earmark by a vote of 317 to 112. Later she told The New York Times, "Democracy is a contact sport, and I'm not going to be shy about asking for money for my community."
So far this year the Democratic House has approved spending bills that include some 6,500 earmarks, not quite keeping pace with the Republicans' record of nearly 16,000 in 2005 but more than twice the whole-year total of a decade ago. Far from shaming legislators into fiscal restraint, the Times reports, "the new transparency has raised the value of earmarks as a measure of members' clout" and "intensified competition for projects by letting each member see exactly how many everyone else is receiving."
Congressional shamelessness likewise may undermine the goals of the new Senate ban on anonymous holds. A hold occurs when a senator refuses to let a bill or nomination proceed by unanimous consent, thereby requiring the measure's supporters to muster 60 votes to allow consideration of the measure.
Holds obviously can be used for purposes that offend supporters of limited government�to extort pork, for example, or obstruct fiscal reform. But any tool that blocks legislation is apt to do more good than harm. Notably, the hold's defenders include fiscal conservatives such as Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) as well as big spenders such as Robert Byrd (D-W.V.).
Still, it's hard to find fault with the new requirement that senators publicly identify themselves and state their reasons when they block legislation. We just shouldn't expect too much as a result of this openness. As with earmarks, legislators don't try to hide their actions when they're proud of them, even if they shouldn't be. Interestingly, no one put a secret hold on the secret hold ban.
Transparency may also prove overrated as a way of preventing lobbyists from influencing legislators by arranging campaign contributions. The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requires public disclosure of "bundles" totaling $15,000 or more in a six-month period. Like the new attention to earmarks, highlighting these donations may simply spur competition, as K Street's denizens strive to keep up with their neighbors.
Although honesty and openness are surely preferable to dishonesty and secrecy (in politics, at least), they're not an adequate solution to a government that does too much and is therefore a magnet for people seeking gifts and favors. If a pickpocket becomes a mugger, he becomes more open and honest, but that doesn't make him more admirable.
In a letter posted at Congress.org, a constituent praises Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.) for his "brilliant intellect." As evidence, Mitchell's admirer cites the congressman's vote for the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.
The margin by which the act passed�411 to 8 in the House, 83 to 14 in the Senate�takes some of the shine off Mitchell's brilliance. Still, he's probably smart enough to realize what his colleagues evidently understand: Congress's new honesty and openness are not what they're cracked up to be.
The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requires that special appropriations added by individual legislators be listed in an online database at least 48 hours before they come to a vote. Critics such as Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) complained bitterly about a loophole: Congressional leaders can certify that a bill contains no earmarks, and there's no way to challenge that determination.
A deeper problem is that publicity does not deter wasteful, parochial spending that legislators want to publicize. Consider what happened last month when Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) challenged a $100,000 appropriation for a prison museum near Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
The earmark's sponsor, Rep. Nancy Boyda (D-Kan.), defended the honor of Leavenworth County, bragging that "we probably have more prisons...than any other county in the United States." She indignantly added that "the local residents are proud of their heritage and rightly so," since Leavenworth has hosted the likes of George "Machine Gun" Kelly and Nazi spy Fritz Duquesne.
The House approved Boyda's earmark by a vote of 317 to 112. Later she told The New York Times, "Democracy is a contact sport, and I'm not going to be shy about asking for money for my community."
So far this year the Democratic House has approved spending bills that include some 6,500 earmarks, not quite keeping pace with the Republicans' record of nearly 16,000 in 2005 but more than twice the whole-year total of a decade ago. Far from shaming legislators into fiscal restraint, the Times reports, "the new transparency has raised the value of earmarks as a measure of members' clout" and "intensified competition for projects by letting each member see exactly how many everyone else is receiving."
Congressional shamelessness likewise may undermine the goals of the new Senate ban on anonymous holds. A hold occurs when a senator refuses to let a bill or nomination proceed by unanimous consent, thereby requiring the measure's supporters to muster 60 votes to allow consideration of the measure.
Holds obviously can be used for purposes that offend supporters of limited government�to extort pork, for example, or obstruct fiscal reform. But any tool that blocks legislation is apt to do more good than harm. Notably, the hold's defenders include fiscal conservatives such as Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) as well as big spenders such as Robert Byrd (D-W.V.).
Still, it's hard to find fault with the new requirement that senators publicly identify themselves and state their reasons when they block legislation. We just shouldn't expect too much as a result of this openness. As with earmarks, legislators don't try to hide their actions when they're proud of them, even if they shouldn't be. Interestingly, no one put a secret hold on the secret hold ban.
Transparency may also prove overrated as a way of preventing lobbyists from influencing legislators by arranging campaign contributions. The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requires public disclosure of "bundles" totaling $15,000 or more in a six-month period. Like the new attention to earmarks, highlighting these donations may simply spur competition, as K Street's denizens strive to keep up with their neighbors.
Although honesty and openness are surely preferable to dishonesty and secrecy (in politics, at least), they're not an adequate solution to a government that does too much and is therefore a magnet for people seeking gifts and favors. If a pickpocket becomes a mugger, he becomes more open and honest, but that doesn't make him more admirable.
NolaIndian32
05-06 09:37 PM
If someone can shed light on why a case would be sent to the National Benefits Center, please advise.
case details:
EB-2 India
PD - Early 2002
I-485 filed July 2007.
EAD and AP rec'd late 2007, FP done 2007
case details:
EB-2 India
PD - Early 2002
I-485 filed July 2007.
EAD and AP rec'd late 2007, FP done 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment