gccovet
06-16 12:46 PM
TSC 485 processing date says Aug 17,2007.
Does it mean, they reviewed almost all cases before Aug 16,2007?
My receipt date is Aug 13,2007. Notice date is Oct 10,2007.
So wondering whether they touched my case or still not?
Means, they reviewd all cases wherever the VISA dates were allocated/available. As you are from India, you have thousands of cases ahead of you.
GCCovet
Does it mean, they reviewed almost all cases before Aug 16,2007?
My receipt date is Aug 13,2007. Notice date is Oct 10,2007.
So wondering whether they touched my case or still not?
Means, they reviewd all cases wherever the VISA dates were allocated/available. As you are from India, you have thousands of cases ahead of you.
GCCovet
wallpaper free coloring pages of an
gc_chahiye
06-16 12:33 PM
I came to US on L1(worked for 1 year) and then switched to F1 till getting my H1B on May 2005 (which is 2 years old). How many years(3 or 4) do I have left on H1? I mean will the 1 year L1 count towards the total six years allocated for H1B?
Thanks!
AFAIK L1 counts towards that 6. So if you have done 1 on L1, 2 on H1, then you have 3 more years left on H1
Thanks!
AFAIK L1 counts towards that 6. So if you have done 1 on L1, 2 on H1, then you have 3 more years left on H1
chanduv23
12-03 12:00 PM
More evidence things are not going well for Lou.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/cnbc-says-not-to-dobbs.html)
Loo's only place is KKK
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/cnbc-says-not-to-dobbs.html)
Loo's only place is KKK
2011 of free coloring pages for
Blog Feeds
05-19 10:00 AM
Opponents of comprehensive immigration reform often point to the 1986 legalization bill as a great failure that should not be repeated. What they don't want to talk about are the great number of success stories for people who were able to become legal. One story that is making the news 25 years later is that of Ana Hernandez Luna who gave an extraordinary speech on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives where she told her own story of her life as a young undocumented immigrant in the 1980s. The Texas Observer reported on her remarks: Tuesday, after it...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/immigrant-of-the-day-ana-hernandez-luna-legislator.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/immigrant-of-the-day-ana-hernandez-luna-legislator.html)
more...
sw33t
07-27 03:28 PM
SENATOR CORNYN IS THE CHAIR OF THE INDIA CAUCUS IN THE U.S. SENATE
WHO: U.S. Senator John Cornyn of Texas
WHEN: Thursday,August 9,
Lunch: 11:30 a.m.
Speech: 12:30 p.m.
WHERE: Lakeway Inn, New Glass Ballroom
SPONSOR: Rotary Club/Lakeway
Lake Travis
COST: $250 per table of 10,
or $25 per individual
RESERVATIONS: MANDATORY!
10 Tables are being reserved
for Rotary & Guests
20 Table reservations will
be taken and must be paid for
by July 27, 2007!
Please PM me if you are interested.
WHO: U.S. Senator John Cornyn of Texas
WHEN: Thursday,August 9,
Lunch: 11:30 a.m.
Speech: 12:30 p.m.
WHERE: Lakeway Inn, New Glass Ballroom
SPONSOR: Rotary Club/Lakeway
Lake Travis
COST: $250 per table of 10,
or $25 per individual
RESERVATIONS: MANDATORY!
10 Tables are being reserved
for Rotary & Guests
20 Table reservations will
be taken and must be paid for
by July 27, 2007!
Please PM me if you are interested.
hlangmo
June 11th, 2005, 10:13 AM
Here are a few pics from a boat trip i had yesterday.
Hope you like them
Hope you like them
more...
kilubilu46
07-18 03:36 PM
Hi All
Does anyone know answer to my question? GC processing for family based has preferences 1, 2A, 2B, 3, 4 and then employment based has EB1, EB2, EB3 and so on. In what sequence USCIS assigns GC to these categories taking into consideration per country 7% limit? For example, 1 GC to family 1, then 1 to family 2A, then 1 to emp EB1 etc (a hypothetical sequence). Any idea?
Does anyone know answer to my question? GC processing for family based has preferences 1, 2A, 2B, 3, 4 and then employment based has EB1, EB2, EB3 and so on. In what sequence USCIS assigns GC to these categories taking into consideration per country 7% limit? For example, 1 GC to family 1, then 1 to family 2A, then 1 to emp EB1 etc (a hypothetical sequence). Any idea?
2010 Coloring Pictures
Daisy
05-01 03:22 PM
We urgently need stories from people in and around Austin,TX for a leading Austin newpaper. Austin has Intel, Dell, IBM, CISCO. I am sure there will be lot of material to provide to the reporter.
more...
Macaca
03-01 11:02 AM
Some paras from The Myth of the Middle (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801817.html)
One explanation for all this is that politicians are acting against the will of their compromise-loving constituents. Another is that Republicans and Democrats are simply being good representatives. We think the evidence supports the second interpretation.
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) surveyed more than 24,000 Americans who voted in 2006. The Internet-based survey compiled by researchers at 30 universities produced a sample that almost perfectly matched the national House election results: 54 percent of the respondents reported voting for a Democrat, while 46 percent said they voted for a Republican. The demographic characteristics of the voters surveyed also closely matched those in the 2006 national exit poll. If anything, the CCES respondents claimed they were more "independent" than those in the exit poll.
The CCES survey asked about 14 national issues: the war in Iraq (the invasion and the troops), abortion (and partial birth abortion), stem cell research, global warming, health insurance, immigration, the minimum wage, liberalism and conservatism, same-sex marriage, privatizing Social Security, affirmative action, and capital gains taxes. Not surprisingly, some of the largest differences between Democrats and Republicans were over the Iraq war. Fully 85 percent of those who voted for Democratic House candidates felt that it had been a mistake to invade Iraq, compared with only 18 percent of voters who cast ballots for Republicans.
When we combined voters' answers to the 14 issue questions to form a liberal-conservative scale (answers were divided into five equivalent categories based on overall liberalism vs. conservatism), 86 percent of Democratic voters were on the liberal side of the scale while 80 percent of Republican voters were on the conservative side. Only 10 percent of all voters were in the center. The visual representation of the nation's voters isn't a nicely shaped bell, with most voters in the moderate middle. It's a sharp V.
The evidence from this survey isn't surprising; nor are the findings new. For the past three decades, the major parties and the electorate have grown more divided -- in what they think, where they live and how they vote. It may be comforting to believe our problems could be solved if only those vile politicians in Washington would learn to get along. The source of the country's division, however, is nestled much closer to home.
One explanation for all this is that politicians are acting against the will of their compromise-loving constituents. Another is that Republicans and Democrats are simply being good representatives. We think the evidence supports the second interpretation.
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) surveyed more than 24,000 Americans who voted in 2006. The Internet-based survey compiled by researchers at 30 universities produced a sample that almost perfectly matched the national House election results: 54 percent of the respondents reported voting for a Democrat, while 46 percent said they voted for a Republican. The demographic characteristics of the voters surveyed also closely matched those in the 2006 national exit poll. If anything, the CCES respondents claimed they were more "independent" than those in the exit poll.
The CCES survey asked about 14 national issues: the war in Iraq (the invasion and the troops), abortion (and partial birth abortion), stem cell research, global warming, health insurance, immigration, the minimum wage, liberalism and conservatism, same-sex marriage, privatizing Social Security, affirmative action, and capital gains taxes. Not surprisingly, some of the largest differences between Democrats and Republicans were over the Iraq war. Fully 85 percent of those who voted for Democratic House candidates felt that it had been a mistake to invade Iraq, compared with only 18 percent of voters who cast ballots for Republicans.
When we combined voters' answers to the 14 issue questions to form a liberal-conservative scale (answers were divided into five equivalent categories based on overall liberalism vs. conservatism), 86 percent of Democratic voters were on the liberal side of the scale while 80 percent of Republican voters were on the conservative side. Only 10 percent of all voters were in the center. The visual representation of the nation's voters isn't a nicely shaped bell, with most voters in the moderate middle. It's a sharp V.
The evidence from this survey isn't surprising; nor are the findings new. For the past three decades, the major parties and the electorate have grown more divided -- in what they think, where they live and how they vote. It may be comforting to believe our problems could be solved if only those vile politicians in Washington would learn to get along. The source of the country's division, however, is nestled much closer to home.
hair seahorse, Coloring pages
Blog Feeds
03-12 08:40 PM
As Rodney King famously remarked, "Why can't we all get along?" As Democrats and Republicans in Congress have spent the past year beating each other up regarding the health care bill, do we want the same thing to happen with immigration this year? At the moment, President Obama cannot even find two Republican senators out of 40 to support Comprehensive Immigration Reform. And anyone who thinks that all Democrats are united in support of CIR must be drinking the Kool-Aid. But does this mean that immigration reform is DOA in 2010? Not necessarily. There are individual pieces of immigration legislation...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/reform-the-legal-immigration-system.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/reform-the-legal-immigration-system.html)
more...
Macaca
08-16 05:40 PM
Is the Senate Germane? Majority Leader Reid's Lament (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/procedural_politics/19719-1.html) By Don Wolfensberger | Roll Call, August 13, 2007
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
hot Worm, animals, Coloring pages
silpa_23
05-18 08:00 AM
Greetings,
In brief, I have applied for I-485 when I was single and now priority dates are current. I need to add my spouse. Do I need to apply for I-485 for myself again? Below are the timelines.
Thanks in advance.
In August 2006.
1. Employer A
2. I was Single.
3. Files I-140 and I-485 concurrently.
4. Schedule A expired.
5. Application moved to Eb3.
In June 2007
1.Employer B (Moved in June 2007 via H1b transfer).
Married in 2008.
April 2010.
1. Employer B.
2. New I-140 filed in EB2, approved.
3. Ported EB3 PD of Aug 2006.
May 2011.
1. PD will be current in June 2011.
2. I need apply I-485 for my spouse.
Do I need to re-apply for I-485 and G-235a for the principal applicant.
In brief, I have applied for I-485 when I was single and now priority dates are current. I need to add my spouse. Do I need to apply for I-485 for myself again? Below are the timelines.
Thanks in advance.
In August 2006.
1. Employer A
2. I was Single.
3. Files I-140 and I-485 concurrently.
4. Schedule A expired.
5. Application moved to Eb3.
In June 2007
1.Employer B (Moved in June 2007 via H1b transfer).
Married in 2008.
April 2010.
1. Employer B.
2. New I-140 filed in EB2, approved.
3. Ported EB3 PD of Aug 2006.
May 2011.
1. PD will be current in June 2011.
2. I need apply I-485 for my spouse.
Do I need to re-apply for I-485 and G-235a for the principal applicant.
more...
house makeup Free Animal Coloring
stxvr
07-13 02:50 AM
the link is "http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/44667/immigrants-refused-green-cards-take-to-gandhigiri.html"
tattoo Free Coloring Pages of fishes
puja101
07-12 04:45 PM
I received RFE that says" your application contained form I-693 in which the required TB skin test was not conducted. Please note there may be conflicting information on some published form I-693 instructions regarding when the chest X ray Report should be performed. It is required only when the TB skin test indicates a reaction equal to greater than 5 mm, or when the reason for why the TB skin test is medically inappropriate to perform has been annotated on theform I-693. Please submit a newly completed form I-693 indicating the results of the required skin test."
I did TB skin test in 2007 that came negative and it appears to me, civil surgeon did not updated results on I-693 form. After consulting with the doctor they filled up new I-693 from with 2007 test results and gave me in a sealed envelop. I need to know whether 2007 results will be acceptible to USCIS or do I need to do it gain before I submit response. Please advise.
I did TB skin test in 2007 that came negative and it appears to me, civil surgeon did not updated results on I-693 form. After consulting with the doctor they filled up new I-693 from with 2007 test results and gave me in a sealed envelop. I need to know whether 2007 results will be acceptible to USCIS or do I need to do it gain before I submit response. Please advise.
more...
pictures Animal Coloring Pages - 17
Blog Feeds
08-08 09:40 AM
From a press release from the New Orleans Workers' Center for Racial Justice: Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has dispatched her top detention advisor to Basile, Louisiana to meet with detainees who have monitored conditions and staged hunger strikes in the isolated ICE detention center during the last month. Dora Schriro, Director of the newly created Office of Detention Policy and Planning, is on her way to the South Louisiana Corrections Center now. Meanwhile, detainee Edgar Nelson Bojorge Alcantara entered his sixth day on hunger strike today. He and other detainees in the facility have held five hunger strikes...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/08/top-dhs-official-to-meet-hunger-strikers-in-new-orleans.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/08/top-dhs-official-to-meet-hunger-strikers-in-new-orleans.html)
dresses images Free Coloring Pages!
GCBy3000
06-15 11:24 AM
Does anyone have an idea about CP.
1. My 140 is filed and pending. I did not go through premium
2. How to get the CP appointment?
3. Since we dont file 485 if we prefer CP, what happens if the visa dates retrogress,but you have a CP appointment?
4. Is there a way to secure something in CP while the dates are current. ie, in AOS, just filing is enough to avoid several hassles. Is there anything like this in CP.
1. My 140 is filed and pending. I did not go through premium
2. How to get the CP appointment?
3. Since we dont file 485 if we prefer CP, what happens if the visa dates retrogress,but you have a CP appointment?
4. Is there a way to secure something in CP while the dates are current. ie, in AOS, just filing is enough to avoid several hassles. Is there anything like this in CP.
more...
makeup Zoo animals Coloring pages
Blog Feeds
08-03 12:50 PM
For the past few months, there have been no green cards available for persons in the employment-based third preference category (EB-3) and long backlogs in the EB-2 category for persons born in India and China. So, with few green cards to grant, why has the USCIS been scheduling interviews for persons in these categories? The short answer is that just because the USCIS cannot grant most EB-3 and EB-2 applicants green cards, the agency can take advantage of the lull in applications for adjustment of status to deny persons with pending applications. How can they do that? Easy! Let's say...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/how-to-use-your-h-1b-to-qualify-under-section-245k.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/how-to-use-your-h-1b-to-qualify-under-section-245k.html)
girlfriend Animal coloring pages (Cat
Blog Feeds
06-09 10:50 PM
Maybe the 60 Minutes story from a few months ago is making a difference. DHS finally agreed today to show some humanity and not proceed for two year with deporting widows and widowers of US citizens (often American soldiers who die in combat) who only were denied green cards because their spouses died before USCIS could finish processing their cases. The courts have not been consistent in their rulings and it is going to take the US Supreme Court settling the matter (or DHS backing down). Hopefully, this marks the end of USCIS' rabid pursuit of a population that deserves...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/06/dhs-finally-getting-message-on-widows.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/06/dhs-finally-getting-message-on-widows.html)
hairstyles Free Coloring Pages To Print
gandalf_gray
12-08 09:01 PM
Hi All,
2 employers had applied H1B for me with 'change of status' from L1B.
One of them got approved, and I have already moved to that company from October 2008.
Now the other employer is informing me (its december !!!) that the petition has got a RFE, asking proof of valid L1B at the time of applying..
Here is my question:
- Should I tell that guy to withdraw my application ?
- If the RFE is answered , is there any threat to the H1B petition I am currently using for employment.
(I dont want to cause any harm to my current petition under which I am employed).
Please let me know. Thanks.
2 employers had applied H1B for me with 'change of status' from L1B.
One of them got approved, and I have already moved to that company from October 2008.
Now the other employer is informing me (its december !!!) that the petition has got a RFE, asking proof of valid L1B at the time of applying..
Here is my question:
- Should I tell that guy to withdraw my application ?
- If the RFE is answered , is there any threat to the H1B petition I am currently using for employment.
(I dont want to cause any harm to my current petition under which I am employed).
Please let me know. Thanks.
Iammontoya
06-05 10:04 AM
first person view? third person?
either way it's kinda complicated, although 3rd person would be easier, for the room would not be moving.
either way it's kinda complicated, although 3rd person would be easier, for the room would not be moving.
xyz
07-25 05:52 PM
Guys, applied recently for EAD and its pending and 180 days has not passed. I am planning to open a part time business. Does anyone know if its ok to start a part time business before the EAD gets approved ? Any insights will be appreciated.
Thanks
img
If you draw salary as an employee of the business, it is a problem. Consult an immigration attorney. You cannot take up any work other than what is approved as part of your H1-B.
Thanks
img
If you draw salary as an employee of the business, it is a problem. Consult an immigration attorney. You cannot take up any work other than what is approved as part of your H1-B.
No comments:
Post a Comment