chanduv23
06-29 09:34 PM
I guess the cases that are pre-adjucated are called for interview.
Well "interview" without PD becoming current is a part of "preadjudication" process. Thats why you see those denials, RFEs and interview notices.
Typically once preadjudication is done - it means the next thing is "wait for visa number". Once visa number is available a final review is done by a officer.
In other words "preadjudicated" means "approvable"
Well "interview" without PD becoming current is a part of "preadjudication" process. Thats why you see those denials, RFEs and interview notices.
Typically once preadjudication is done - it means the next thing is "wait for visa number". Once visa number is available a final review is done by a officer.
In other words "preadjudicated" means "approvable"
wallpaper derrick rose new shoes 2011. Derrick Rose Is Wearing These
fcres
12-10 03:04 PM
My Labor approval uses something that starts with 030-16-**** but there is nothing in SOC with 16 are they changed recently? any clue?
Thats the old D.O.T code. You need to find the corresponding SOC Code.
http://online.onetcenter.org/help/online/crosswalk
Thats the old D.O.T code. You need to find the corresponding SOC Code.
http://online.onetcenter.org/help/online/crosswalk
maxy
10-16 11:48 AM
i think ability 2 pay is fair question under AC21. what future employer will hate to do is put words like petition, labor, immigration, sponsorship, EB preference etc ...
they would just like to issue regular EVL which they are providing to other regular employees. may be salary, role, start date, and permanent nature of job thats it. is that enough for USCIS. thats the question. (they can always look up company papers, tax returns etc.)
they would just like to issue regular EVL which they are providing to other regular employees. may be salary, role, start date, and permanent nature of job thats it. is that enough for USCIS. thats the question. (they can always look up company papers, tax returns etc.)
2011 We supply this new series Nike
fide_champ
06-25 02:42 PM
ask the lawyer what he was thinking
It looks like the lawyer did not find any information that they should not send it before July 1st.
It looks like the lawyer did not find any information that they should not send it before July 1st.
more...
abhijitp
01-26 05:52 PM
I collected 7 letters yesterday by simply talking to people walking in & out of a grocery store. I wanted to see how it will be at the BART station and I am very encouraged by the response received yesterday. Most people (including GC holders and citizens) provided their names and addresses and signatures without hesitation.
The reasons for only 7 letters (could have collected 15):
1. I was on my own after all. When I was talking to someone a bunch of 3 walked out of the store and I could not do anything.
2. Heavy rains which prevented people from getting out in general.
My only worry now... if you guys in and around Fremont continue to look the other way, ignoring this call to your precious 1 hour on any ONE weekday evening, I might get only 200 letters... when you and I together could easily get 1000+ over 2 weeks!
The reasons for only 7 letters (could have collected 15):
1. I was on my own after all. When I was talking to someone a bunch of 3 walked out of the store and I could not do anything.
2. Heavy rains which prevented people from getting out in general.
My only worry now... if you guys in and around Fremont continue to look the other way, ignoring this call to your precious 1 hour on any ONE weekday evening, I might get only 200 letters... when you and I together could easily get 1000+ over 2 weeks!
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
more...
gxr
10-02 09:44 AM
Mine is EB3 with a RD of Oct 6.
LUD was on Oct 26, 2006. No news after that. No RFEs as well.
LUD was on Oct 26, 2006. No news after that. No RFEs as well.
2010 derrick rose shoes 2011 price.
gc_chahiye
08-05 11:54 PM
the number 75K by 7/27 came from USCIS not Pederson
can you post a link please? I read through their press releases on their website and did not see this, must have missed it.
thanks for clarifying that.
can you post a link please? I read through their press releases on their website and did not see this, must have missed it.
thanks for clarifying that.
more...
Madhuri
04-08 07:24 PM
Is it possible to get 7th year extension on the basis of approved LC and pending I-140. My approved LC is PERM filed in March 2006 and approved a week ago. My 6 years oevr in Sep 2006.
Anybody in the same situation?
Anybody in the same situation?
hair pictures new derrick rose
Mo-Ti
06-15 02:44 PM
a very/too late appointment, but I just made this for another kidding "project" (with a few stolen things of fester, trying to make it worse) and thought you guys have to see it :x
http://scu.cutegirl.at
http://scu.cutegirl.at
more...
nav_kri
04-01 08:09 PM
Yes, the info is right
Found this text at http://www.albertacanada.com/immigration/immigrate/srsvisaholder.html
Important note: A new and updated version of the AINP Occupations Under Pressure List for the Strategic Recruitment Stream � U.S. Visa Holder Category will be posted to this site on April 15, 2009. Any applications postmarked before April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the list currently posted. All applications postmarked on or after April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the revised list that will be posted on April 15, 2009.
Found this text at http://www.albertacanada.com/immigration/immigrate/srsvisaholder.html
Important note: A new and updated version of the AINP Occupations Under Pressure List for the Strategic Recruitment Stream � U.S. Visa Holder Category will be posted to this site on April 15, 2009. Any applications postmarked before April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the list currently posted. All applications postmarked on or after April 15, 2009 will be assessed based on the revised list that will be posted on April 15, 2009.
hot Derrick+rose+adidas+shoes+2011 Player,everyone saw his shiny new may new
blacktongue
01-26 03:30 PM
Waste of time. How many PhD's are there as compared to the others? There is already EB1/EB2-NIW for them
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
more...
house new derrick rose shoes 2011.
fundo14
02-19 12:36 PM
Hi All,
I wanted to share my experience at the port of entry using AP.
Just to give a quick background me and my wife have been working on H1 for last 8 years, we both were working on our H1’s at the time of leaving for vacation one month back.
Our 485/EAD/AP was filed on July 2nd, 2007; my wife is a Primary Applicant.
We have our 485 receipts/ approved EAD’s and AP’s with us.
Also, our H1 Petition’s are valid till 2010 but the stamping on passport is expired, we did not get stamping in India as we intended to enter using AP
At the Port of entry this is how it went:
Officer: Very rudely asked for our passports & I-94
We gave him our Passports, I-94 forms and Original AP’s
Officer: What’s the purpose of your visit?
Our Answer: To join back at our respective work.
Officer: Work? Who’s the primary applicant?
My answer: My wife
Officer: Then how the hell you will work here, you cannot work here, only your wife can work as the petition is on her name, you are a derivative.
My answer: But I have work Authorization (showed our EAD cards)
Officer: That’s all bullhshit, does not mean anything…you can not work here.
My answer: I politely told him that sir when we left country a month ago we both were working on H1’s, now we are seeking entry on AP.
Officer: yeh but don’t do fraud, you cannot work here (Very rudely)...who told you that you can work here.
My Answer: Again I explained politely- Sir, we filed for 485 which made us eligible to get EAD’s, showed him the EAD card again (which clearly states “Authorized to work in US till validity of this card” Our EAD’s are valid till end of 2008)
Officer: listen don’t teach me law, I have been working here for “x” number of years, and you think you know laws better than me.
After this I and my wife decided to keep quite as that moron was not ready to listen and understand anything.
Officer (rudely): I will set this straight for you…then we were asked to follow him in a separate room. Many people were waiting there I guess most of them using AP
The Officer went to one other custom officer there and pointed towards us and explained him something which we could not hear.
We waited � an hour till our named was called…I was worried that they will now create lot problems for us but to my surprise we were just handed our Passports along with AP’s / I-94 stamped as “AOS” and told you are all set... Absolutely No questions asked.
I am worried if he has entered some nasty remarks on my case…not sure.
Now this entire incident makes me wonder what that officer was talking about, my guess is one of the following:
1. He assumed throughout that my wife is entering on H1 and I on H4
2. Or he did realize his mistake but was too egoistic to accept it.
3. Or he was right and I was wrong about working on EAD (being derivative)...am I missing something here??
One of my suggestion from all this experience is that anybody entering on AP always state the purpose of visit is to “Resume pending AOS”
In last 8 years I have re-entered US like 6 times but never faced such a rude Immigration officer or have been treated like this.
Guru’s please advice if there is a possibility to reinstate our status as H1, we would rather work on H1 then on EAD’s
Thanks!
I wanted to share my experience at the port of entry using AP.
Just to give a quick background me and my wife have been working on H1 for last 8 years, we both were working on our H1’s at the time of leaving for vacation one month back.
Our 485/EAD/AP was filed on July 2nd, 2007; my wife is a Primary Applicant.
We have our 485 receipts/ approved EAD’s and AP’s with us.
Also, our H1 Petition’s are valid till 2010 but the stamping on passport is expired, we did not get stamping in India as we intended to enter using AP
At the Port of entry this is how it went:
Officer: Very rudely asked for our passports & I-94
We gave him our Passports, I-94 forms and Original AP’s
Officer: What’s the purpose of your visit?
Our Answer: To join back at our respective work.
Officer: Work? Who’s the primary applicant?
My answer: My wife
Officer: Then how the hell you will work here, you cannot work here, only your wife can work as the petition is on her name, you are a derivative.
My answer: But I have work Authorization (showed our EAD cards)
Officer: That’s all bullhshit, does not mean anything…you can not work here.
My answer: I politely told him that sir when we left country a month ago we both were working on H1’s, now we are seeking entry on AP.
Officer: yeh but don’t do fraud, you cannot work here (Very rudely)...who told you that you can work here.
My Answer: Again I explained politely- Sir, we filed for 485 which made us eligible to get EAD’s, showed him the EAD card again (which clearly states “Authorized to work in US till validity of this card” Our EAD’s are valid till end of 2008)
Officer: listen don’t teach me law, I have been working here for “x” number of years, and you think you know laws better than me.
After this I and my wife decided to keep quite as that moron was not ready to listen and understand anything.
Officer (rudely): I will set this straight for you…then we were asked to follow him in a separate room. Many people were waiting there I guess most of them using AP
The Officer went to one other custom officer there and pointed towards us and explained him something which we could not hear.
We waited � an hour till our named was called…I was worried that they will now create lot problems for us but to my surprise we were just handed our Passports along with AP’s / I-94 stamped as “AOS” and told you are all set... Absolutely No questions asked.
I am worried if he has entered some nasty remarks on my case…not sure.
Now this entire incident makes me wonder what that officer was talking about, my guess is one of the following:
1. He assumed throughout that my wife is entering on H1 and I on H4
2. Or he did realize his mistake but was too egoistic to accept it.
3. Or he was right and I was wrong about working on EAD (being derivative)...am I missing something here??
One of my suggestion from all this experience is that anybody entering on AP always state the purpose of visit is to “Resume pending AOS”
In last 8 years I have re-entered US like 6 times but never faced such a rude Immigration officer or have been treated like this.
Guru’s please advice if there is a possibility to reinstate our status as H1, we would rather work on H1 then on EAD’s
Thanks!
tattoo 8|derrick rose shoes,
RanchCharm
07-17 08:47 PM
Hi Sivamayam,
Thanks for the information. I will listen to the calls. It is soothing though to here something favourable.
I will keep checking this forum & others for similar questions & replies.
Thanks,
Nachi
Thanks for the information. I will listen to the calls. It is soothing though to here something favourable.
I will keep checking this forum & others for similar questions & replies.
Thanks,
Nachi
more...
pictures derrick rose shoes 2011
Pagal
09-27 12:04 PM
Hello,
I think you are fine to do day trading on any visa type.
Just because you conduct multiple transactions per day does not legally imply that you are paying any less attention to your regular job.
If you are called for an AOS interview, a curious IO may ask how did you manage both, but you can always show that you did your job well by providing copies of your performance evaluations and/or letters from your supervisors/HR.
In summary, good luck w day trading! Do donate part of the profits to IV... :)
I think you are fine to do day trading on any visa type.
Just because you conduct multiple transactions per day does not legally imply that you are paying any less attention to your regular job.
If you are called for an AOS interview, a curious IO may ask how did you manage both, but you can always show that you did your job well by providing copies of your performance evaluations and/or letters from your supervisors/HR.
In summary, good luck w day trading! Do donate part of the profits to IV... :)
dresses derrick rose shoes 2011
pns27
06-28 03:26 PM
Did any one heard of EB3 India 485 Approved after June 26? Looks like EB3 visa numbers for this quarter for India is exhausted! If so then who many will be available in next quarter?
When will the 40K unused EB quota of visa numbers will be available /open? In mid September? Can any of the Gurus explain this?
My friend took info-pass and he was told that the EB3 India visa numbers are over for now and his case may be approved in next quota.
Looks like the first 40K in the 485 queue whose processing is done will get there 485�s approved in late September.
For some one like me who files 485 in June chances of approval in this year is less.:confused:
I just want to set the expectations real so that we will not be subjected to perpetual checking of online LUD/Status, forums and also avoid huge disappointment.
Pns27
***********************
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No
PD June 2002-non-RIR
I-140 approved from NSC
I485:--
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Receipt Date: 06/07/07
Notice Date: 06/22/07
FP Noticed Received on:?
When will the 40K unused EB quota of visa numbers will be available /open? In mid September? Can any of the Gurus explain this?
My friend took info-pass and he was told that the EB3 India visa numbers are over for now and his case may be approved in next quota.
Looks like the first 40K in the 485 queue whose processing is done will get there 485�s approved in late September.
For some one like me who files 485 in June chances of approval in this year is less.:confused:
I just want to set the expectations real so that we will not be subjected to perpetual checking of online LUD/Status, forums and also avoid huge disappointment.
Pns27
***********************
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No
PD June 2002-non-RIR
I-140 approved from NSC
I485:--
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Receipt Date: 06/07/07
Notice Date: 06/22/07
FP Noticed Received on:?
more...
makeup A stealth upgrade to Derrick
snathan
04-22 08:24 PM
I am employeed in IT consultancy, and wants to change my employement as a permenent employee of the client.
When i told this to my employeer he is telling me that he can file a lawsuite against my Client(New Employeer) on the bases of Small Business Administantion laws, stated below
Although the contract does not specifically state that the client cannot hire the contractor (you) on a permanent job, it also does not state that the client can. Current Employeer comes under the category of the 'Small Business Administration' under the State and the Federal Governments. Both governments fully support the growth and looks after the interests of small businesses in the country. They have always done it and are even more supportive lately as a result of the struggle small businesses are undergoing in these bad economic times. I have been advised by the company attorney that I contracted you to the client purely on professional and ethical grounds for the benefit of Current Employeer business. If a giant company like Client just takes you away to their advantage, it may not be looked upon favorably by a small business court.
Below is what is in the contract between my Employeer and Client.
1. This agreement is for the sole purposes of providing the services of the Contractor�s employee XXX to (Client).
2. Contractor will be an independent contractor of Company and will work on a Client assignment.
3. Company will pay $XX.00 per hour to Contractor for all the hours of work and expenses approved by Client.
4. All time and expenses should be entered into client�s system and should be approved by the concerned manager or project manager.
5 Company will not pay contractor for any time and expenses not authorized and not approved by Client.
6. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the quality of work performed.
7. Payment terms shall be XX days net and will be made on a bi-weekly basis.
8. The start date and the length of assignment will be determined by Client, and Company shall let the Contractor know in writing before the date on which the consultant starts working for the Client.
9. Contractor reserves the right to offer consultant�s services to other clients until such time the Company and the Contractor executes this agreement as well as a project work order.
10. This is the only agreement between the Contractor and the Company. Changes can be made in writing only and have to be signed by both parties to be effective.
11. This agreement is subject to the laws of the State of Texas.
12. Either party can terminate this contract by giving 2 week�s written notice, via email or physical mail. The notifying party must obtain proof of delivery of such notification to the other party.
Can any one tell if there is any possibility of that
It seems he is trying to scare you...pay few hundered dollars to an attorney and check.
When i told this to my employeer he is telling me that he can file a lawsuite against my Client(New Employeer) on the bases of Small Business Administantion laws, stated below
Although the contract does not specifically state that the client cannot hire the contractor (you) on a permanent job, it also does not state that the client can. Current Employeer comes under the category of the 'Small Business Administration' under the State and the Federal Governments. Both governments fully support the growth and looks after the interests of small businesses in the country. They have always done it and are even more supportive lately as a result of the struggle small businesses are undergoing in these bad economic times. I have been advised by the company attorney that I contracted you to the client purely on professional and ethical grounds for the benefit of Current Employeer business. If a giant company like Client just takes you away to their advantage, it may not be looked upon favorably by a small business court.
Below is what is in the contract between my Employeer and Client.
1. This agreement is for the sole purposes of providing the services of the Contractor�s employee XXX to (Client).
2. Contractor will be an independent contractor of Company and will work on a Client assignment.
3. Company will pay $XX.00 per hour to Contractor for all the hours of work and expenses approved by Client.
4. All time and expenses should be entered into client�s system and should be approved by the concerned manager or project manager.
5 Company will not pay contractor for any time and expenses not authorized and not approved by Client.
6. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the quality of work performed.
7. Payment terms shall be XX days net and will be made on a bi-weekly basis.
8. The start date and the length of assignment will be determined by Client, and Company shall let the Contractor know in writing before the date on which the consultant starts working for the Client.
9. Contractor reserves the right to offer consultant�s services to other clients until such time the Company and the Contractor executes this agreement as well as a project work order.
10. This is the only agreement between the Contractor and the Company. Changes can be made in writing only and have to be signed by both parties to be effective.
11. This agreement is subject to the laws of the State of Texas.
12. Either party can terminate this contract by giving 2 week�s written notice, via email or physical mail. The notifying party must obtain proof of delivery of such notification to the other party.
Can any one tell if there is any possibility of that
It seems he is trying to scare you...pay few hundered dollars to an attorney and check.
girlfriend new derrick rose shoes 2011.
purgan
04-13 10:13 AM
USINPAC, for instance, promotes its role in the India-US nuclear deal.
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
hairstyles new derrick rose shoes 2011.
atul555
12-15 09:52 PM
Atul555:
Cool down. Nothing to be warried. Since you are married, 485 is not of much help. So you should think of maintaining h1b in order to keep your wife status h4.
1. With cool mind start applying for jobs, increase network. To be on safer side. find a good consultant. Ping me if you need help in finding a good consulatant. Yes when say good consualtant..he is good...!!!!
you still have 4 months time. SO cheer up.
My 2 cents..don't think of using EAD & keeping u r wife on foloow to join blah blah....!!!!
Also if you change your job , your GC journey you had so far will not get wasted. You don't have to file Labour/i-40 again. Make sure the new job is same or similiar. Discuss with your potential employer, they will help you.
Whats your area of work..??Are you into IT...????
Thanks everyone, your input has been very helpful.
I am assuming, my EB3 India PD of Mar 2004 would take about two years to become current and once it does, I can file my spouse as dependent and attain EAD for both of us.
Till then based on your inputs I believe I have two recourse.
1> I transfer my H1 and keep the spouse on H4. AC21 would apply in that case and my GC process would continue unabated.
2> I go on EAD and put my wife on F1 to maitain legal status.
Here are the caveats with each.
With no 1 approach there would be very few jobs for H1-b next year and I would probably have to be at the mercy of some unscrouplous desi consultant.
With no 2 approach, I have more choices in job but I have to get my wife on F1 which would be a drain on finances as well as time consuming for the spouse.
I guess either way I have to tough it out for a couple of years and I was leaning towards no. 1.
BTW, tabletpc, thanks for your suggestion, I am in IT (J2EE websphere) background with considerable experience. I would appreciate any input for a good consultant.
Cool down. Nothing to be warried. Since you are married, 485 is not of much help. So you should think of maintaining h1b in order to keep your wife status h4.
1. With cool mind start applying for jobs, increase network. To be on safer side. find a good consultant. Ping me if you need help in finding a good consulatant. Yes when say good consualtant..he is good...!!!!
you still have 4 months time. SO cheer up.
My 2 cents..don't think of using EAD & keeping u r wife on foloow to join blah blah....!!!!
Also if you change your job , your GC journey you had so far will not get wasted. You don't have to file Labour/i-40 again. Make sure the new job is same or similiar. Discuss with your potential employer, they will help you.
Whats your area of work..??Are you into IT...????
Thanks everyone, your input has been very helpful.
I am assuming, my EB3 India PD of Mar 2004 would take about two years to become current and once it does, I can file my spouse as dependent and attain EAD for both of us.
Till then based on your inputs I believe I have two recourse.
1> I transfer my H1 and keep the spouse on H4. AC21 would apply in that case and my GC process would continue unabated.
2> I go on EAD and put my wife on F1 to maitain legal status.
Here are the caveats with each.
With no 1 approach there would be very few jobs for H1-b next year and I would probably have to be at the mercy of some unscrouplous desi consultant.
With no 2 approach, I have more choices in job but I have to get my wife on F1 which would be a drain on finances as well as time consuming for the spouse.
I guess either way I have to tough it out for a couple of years and I was leaning towards no. 1.
BTW, tabletpc, thanks for your suggestion, I am in IT (J2EE websphere) background with considerable experience. I would appreciate any input for a good consultant.
pani_6
08-23 10:49 AM
People who have gotten thier Gc approved recently...by getting pre-approved..LC's applying in e2-rir even though they do not qualify in EB2.people who did MS from top schools and stayed with good companies are in e2/ e3 categories are in BEC.....What an irony..
Is there any use in comming here as a student?? anymore..
Is there any use in comming here as a student?? anymore..
daishwarya
07-23 02:06 PM
@linuxra: Did you get an RFE on your I485??
No comments:
Post a Comment