Blog Feeds
09-13 05:10 AM
Reuters talks to Pakistani tennis star Aisam ul-Haq, who made it to the men's doubles finals of the US Open this week about his immigration problems entering the US. He seems to maintain a positive attitude despite being regularly grilled by US immigration officials. Of course, he'll need some luck getting an O-1 or EB-1 approval since he didn't actually WIN the US Open. But that's another rant for another day.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/09/champion-tennis-player-regularly-subjected-to-grilling-at-us-ports-of-entry.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/09/champion-tennis-player-regularly-subjected-to-grilling-at-us-ports-of-entry.html)
wallpaper shia labeouf and megan fox
kumar
02-03 05:07 PM
I have a simple question. The total number of I-485s pending as per USCIS is around 220,000. If we have 130000 EB visas every year, will the backlog be cleared in just 2 years?
PrinceVA
05-19 04:02 PM
My I 140 approved under Eb3 if i want to change my job and my employer is willing to do in EB2 can I use my old PD from I140 EB3 ?
yup. you should have completed 180 days I guess after getting 140 approved. There are many threads for this discussion. try to find it.
yup. you should have completed 180 days I guess after getting 140 approved. There are many threads for this discussion. try to find it.
2011 Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox
sagittarian
04-17 07:32 PM
Thanks for the reply and just to make sure:
I MUST enroll for summer and fall, is that what you are saying?
I MUST enroll for summer and fall, is that what you are saying?
more...
Maria_Mathew
04-03 12:32 PM
Good info...
-Maria
-Maria
tselva
07-20 11:30 AM
You can transfer your H1 to another company and you will get extension of same validity period (check your I94 Expriry period).
You can retain the priority date of your labour when you file I-140 in the new company.
By the way, why dont you start your I485 process now in the current company? You have lived with them for so long, 6 more months after applying I485, may not be a matter I think.....
Do not take a wrong decision.
You can retain the priority date of your labour when you file I-140 in the new company.
By the way, why dont you start your I485 process now in the current company? You have lived with them for so long, 6 more months after applying I485, may not be a matter I think.....
Do not take a wrong decision.
more...
Macaca
09-27 11:40 AM
Following Bush Over a Cliff (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/26/AR2007092602067.html) By David S. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) | Washington Post, September 27, 2007
The spectacle Tuesday of 151 House Republicans voting in lock step with the White House against expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was one of the more remarkable sights of the year. Rarely do you see so many politicians putting their careers in jeopardy.
The bill they opposed, at the urging of President Bush, commands healthy majorities in both the House and Senate but is headed for a veto because Bush objects to expanding this form of safety net for the children of the working poor. He has staked out that ground on his own, ignoring or rejecting the pleas of conservative senators such as Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch, who helped shape the compromise that the House approved and that the Senate endorsed.
SCHIP has been one of the most successful health-care measures created in the past decade. It was started in 1997 with support from both parties, in order to insure children in families with incomes too high to receive Medicaid but who could not afford private insurance.
The $40 billion spent on SCHIP in the past 10 years financed insurance for roughly 6.6 million youngsters a year. The money was distributed through the states, which were given considerable flexibility in designing their programs. The insurance came from private companies, at rates negotiated by the states.
Governors of both parties -- 43 of them, again including conservatives such as Sonny Perdue of Georgia -- have praised the program. And they endorsed the congressional decision to expand the coverage to an additional 4 million youngsters, at the cost of an additional $35 billion over the next five years. The bill would be financed by a 61-cents-a-pack increase in cigarette taxes. If ever there was a crowd-pleaser of a bill, this is it. Hundreds of organizations -- grass-roots groups ranging from AARP to United Way of America and the national YMCA -- have called on Bush to sign the bill. America's Health Insurance Plans, the largest insurance lobbying group, endorsed the bill on Monday.
But Bush insists that SCHIP is "an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American" -- an eventuality he is determined to prevent.
Bush's adamant stand may be peculiar to him, but the willingness of Republican legislators to line up with him is more significant. Bush does not have to face the voters again, but these men and women will be on the ballot in just over a year -- and their Democratic opponents will undoubtedly remind them of their votes.
Two of their smartest colleagues -- Heather Wilson of New Mexico and Ray LaHood of Illinois -- tried to steer House Republicans away from this political self-immolation, but they had minimal success. The combined influence of White House and congressional leadership -- and what I would have to call herd instinct -- prevailed.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) argued that "rather than taking the opportunity to cover the children that cannot obtain coverage through Medicaid or the private marketplace, this bill uses these children as pawns in their cynical attempt to make millions of Americans completely reliant upon the government for their health-care needs."
In his new book, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan wrote that his fellow Republicans deserved to lose their congressional majority in 2006 because they let spending run out of control and turned a blind eye toward misbehavior by their own members. Now, those Republicans have given voters a fresh reason to question their priorities -- or their common sense.
Saying no to immigration reform and measures to shorten the war in Iraq may be politically defensible, because there are substantial constituencies who question the wisdom of those bills -- and who favor alternative policies. But the Bush administration's arguments against SCHIP -- the cost of the program and the financing -- sound hollow at a time when billions more are being spent in Iraq with no end in sight. Bush's alternative -- a change in the tax treatment of employer-financed health insurance -- has some real appeal, but it is an idea he let languish for months after offering it last winter. And, in the judgment of his fellow Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, Bush's plan is too complex and controversial to be tied to the renewal of SCHIP.
This promised veto is a real poison pill for the GOP.
The spectacle Tuesday of 151 House Republicans voting in lock step with the White House against expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was one of the more remarkable sights of the year. Rarely do you see so many politicians putting their careers in jeopardy.
The bill they opposed, at the urging of President Bush, commands healthy majorities in both the House and Senate but is headed for a veto because Bush objects to expanding this form of safety net for the children of the working poor. He has staked out that ground on his own, ignoring or rejecting the pleas of conservative senators such as Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch, who helped shape the compromise that the House approved and that the Senate endorsed.
SCHIP has been one of the most successful health-care measures created in the past decade. It was started in 1997 with support from both parties, in order to insure children in families with incomes too high to receive Medicaid but who could not afford private insurance.
The $40 billion spent on SCHIP in the past 10 years financed insurance for roughly 6.6 million youngsters a year. The money was distributed through the states, which were given considerable flexibility in designing their programs. The insurance came from private companies, at rates negotiated by the states.
Governors of both parties -- 43 of them, again including conservatives such as Sonny Perdue of Georgia -- have praised the program. And they endorsed the congressional decision to expand the coverage to an additional 4 million youngsters, at the cost of an additional $35 billion over the next five years. The bill would be financed by a 61-cents-a-pack increase in cigarette taxes. If ever there was a crowd-pleaser of a bill, this is it. Hundreds of organizations -- grass-roots groups ranging from AARP to United Way of America and the national YMCA -- have called on Bush to sign the bill. America's Health Insurance Plans, the largest insurance lobbying group, endorsed the bill on Monday.
But Bush insists that SCHIP is "an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American" -- an eventuality he is determined to prevent.
Bush's adamant stand may be peculiar to him, but the willingness of Republican legislators to line up with him is more significant. Bush does not have to face the voters again, but these men and women will be on the ballot in just over a year -- and their Democratic opponents will undoubtedly remind them of their votes.
Two of their smartest colleagues -- Heather Wilson of New Mexico and Ray LaHood of Illinois -- tried to steer House Republicans away from this political self-immolation, but they had minimal success. The combined influence of White House and congressional leadership -- and what I would have to call herd instinct -- prevailed.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) argued that "rather than taking the opportunity to cover the children that cannot obtain coverage through Medicaid or the private marketplace, this bill uses these children as pawns in their cynical attempt to make millions of Americans completely reliant upon the government for their health-care needs."
In his new book, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan wrote that his fellow Republicans deserved to lose their congressional majority in 2006 because they let spending run out of control and turned a blind eye toward misbehavior by their own members. Now, those Republicans have given voters a fresh reason to question their priorities -- or their common sense.
Saying no to immigration reform and measures to shorten the war in Iraq may be politically defensible, because there are substantial constituencies who question the wisdom of those bills -- and who favor alternative policies. But the Bush administration's arguments against SCHIP -- the cost of the program and the financing -- sound hollow at a time when billions more are being spent in Iraq with no end in sight. Bush's alternative -- a change in the tax treatment of employer-financed health insurance -- has some real appeal, but it is an idea he let languish for months after offering it last winter. And, in the judgment of his fellow Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, Bush's plan is too complex and controversial to be tied to the renewal of SCHIP.
This promised veto is a real poison pill for the GOP.
2010 Shia LaBeouf Megan Fox
gc_chahiye
06-19 10:51 PM
anybody used this lawfirm for I485 filing?
more...
raysaikat
05-26 02:13 AM
Hi,
I have recently been laid off from my job, I'm thinking of pursuing a associate degree course from a nearby community college and change to F1 status. I already have a MS degree, Would it be a problem for the change of status?
Thanks,
SK
F-1 is a non-immigrant visa that requires the applicant to prove that s/he has no intention for immigration.
I have recently been laid off from my job, I'm thinking of pursuing a associate degree course from a nearby community college and change to F1 status. I already have a MS degree, Would it be a problem for the change of status?
Thanks,
SK
F-1 is a non-immigrant visa that requires the applicant to prove that s/he has no intention for immigration.
hair Megan Fox, Shia LaBeouf
green_pot
01-04 02:40 PM
Hi !
My husband is on H1 and i am on H4. We recently got our EADs. What I want to know is, can i start working right away with my EAD while my husband works on H1 or are there any rules like my husband also needs should change his status from H1 to EAD so that I may use my EAD card?
Thanks in advance.
My husband is on H1 and i am on H4. We recently got our EADs. What I want to know is, can i start working right away with my EAD while my husband works on H1 or are there any rules like my husband also needs should change his status from H1 to EAD so that I may use my EAD card?
Thanks in advance.
more...
santoshmn
06-17 12:47 PM
Hi all,
My PERM labour certification was filed on 25th oct 2006, my case was selected for random audit on dec 06. My attorney replied with all the evidence for the audit. After reviewing the case CO at dol denied my case on Feb 07.
My attorney has asked my case to be reconsidered/reopen on March 2007 as they are confident that they have supplied all the documents required for the case. My attorney says it will take 6-8 months for DOL reopen the case and judicate the same which is Nov 07. what is best option i have as all the dates are current now? i have discussed with my attorney they have told me clearly they are not going to reapply as its a very big company and it will take lot of time for me to get clearance to file my perm again.
Does anybody having experience like my case can share your views it will be really helpful.
Thanks,
Santosh.M.N
My PERM labour certification was filed on 25th oct 2006, my case was selected for random audit on dec 06. My attorney replied with all the evidence for the audit. After reviewing the case CO at dol denied my case on Feb 07.
My attorney has asked my case to be reconsidered/reopen on March 2007 as they are confident that they have supplied all the documents required for the case. My attorney says it will take 6-8 months for DOL reopen the case and judicate the same which is Nov 07. what is best option i have as all the dates are current now? i have discussed with my attorney they have told me clearly they are not going to reapply as its a very big company and it will take lot of time for me to get clearance to file my perm again.
Does anybody having experience like my case can share your views it will be really helpful.
Thanks,
Santosh.M.N
hot Shia LaBeouf Loves Megan Fox,
techno_arch
09-19 07:50 PM
I applied for my AP in June and recently at the end of August my AP was approved. I received the AP a couple of weeks later in mail. However I noticed that instead of receiving the I-512 Authorization of Parole of an Alien into the United States, I received an I-797C Notice of Action document for me an my wife. The contents of this I-797C are exactly the same as the previous I-512s that I have filed for and received over the years.
What I am afraid of is that this may cause problem at the port of entry when I return back from India because of the wrong title of the document.
Has anyone else received such a a document I-797C instead of I-512 and is it safe to travel having such a document? Any advice/input is appreciated.
What I am afraid of is that this may cause problem at the port of entry when I return back from India because of the wrong title of the document.
Has anyone else received such a a document I-797C instead of I-512 and is it safe to travel having such a document? Any advice/input is appreciated.
more...
house shia labeouf and megan fox
GCVictim
06-28 01:21 PM
Hi,
My H1B is getting expire in Oct,2008.I am planning to extend my H1B. My wife came to US on H4 and converted to H1B (expiring on Sep-2009).
I applied I-485 Pending. Me and My wife got EAD and AP expiring Sep-25-2008. (Applied Renewal).Now My wife is working on EAD.
In my H1B ext. application, They are asking about my wife I-94 status. Which one should I give?. H4 (I-94) or Convert H1B (I-94) or EAD information.
Please advise me.
My H1B is getting expire in Oct,2008.I am planning to extend my H1B. My wife came to US on H4 and converted to H1B (expiring on Sep-2009).
I applied I-485 Pending. Me and My wife got EAD and AP expiring Sep-25-2008. (Applied Renewal).Now My wife is working on EAD.
In my H1B ext. application, They are asking about my wife I-94 status. Which one should I give?. H4 (I-94) or Convert H1B (I-94) or EAD information.
Please advise me.
tattoo Megan Fox Signs on for
Green.Tech
10-01 02:13 PM
^^^^^^^^^
more...
pictures shia labeouf and megan fox
cox
August 10th, 2005, 03:22 PM
Animal portraits are my "thing", so I don't mean to be overcritical... Try to get the animal's face in the light. The rooster's a good subject, and you got down to rooster height, which is really good, and you got him when crowing - a great behavior. Unfortunately, the face is in shadow, and that means you don't get the "catchlight" sparkle in the eye. Also, you often don't get the eye quite in focus, since autofocus works on contrast. A lot of faults in a protrait can be overlooked if the eye is sharp. In this case, you're focused on the neck feathers, not quite on the eye, so if you can reshoot it, try for getting light in the eye, and I think you'll like the results even more. Good luck & have fun with it!