PrayForEveryone
07-11 11:10 AM
140 (EB3) was upgraded to Premium Processing on June 27th 2007 (just before the USCIS suspended premium processing on 140).
It got approved yesterday!
It got approved yesterday!
wallpaper Olympic wallpapers Free
meetpravee
04-20 06:06 AM
Thanks for your responses.
One last question.
After printing the application form, I see that the photograph size is 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms that the consulate requires. But when I check for the passport size photo in walgreens it is 2 inches * 2 inches. Is it fine if I send 2 inches * 2 inches photo or should I cut exactly 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms and paste one in the form and send the other 2 ?
Thanks.
One last question.
After printing the application form, I see that the photograph size is 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms that the consulate requires. But when I check for the passport size photo in walgreens it is 2 inches * 2 inches. Is it fine if I send 2 inches * 2 inches photo or should I cut exactly 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms and paste one in the form and send the other 2 ?
Thanks.
m79
08-03 05:02 PM
Hello,
I am working on H1B and filed for my extention in Mar 2007. My original H1B expired in Jun 2007 and filed for EAD/AP/485 on Jul 22 2007. Today my employer received that h1b extension got denied. He got a RFE in may 2007 to which he replied.
What are my options now? Can I stay here now? Can I work now? Can another employer file for my h1 extension now?
Please help.
Thank you.
I am working on H1B and filed for my extention in Mar 2007. My original H1B expired in Jun 2007 and filed for EAD/AP/485 on Jul 22 2007. Today my employer received that h1b extension got denied. He got a RFE in may 2007 to which he replied.
What are my options now? Can I stay here now? Can I work now? Can another employer file for my h1 extension now?
Please help.
Thank you.
2011 Winter Olympic Wallpaper
sanjaymm
03-06 06:07 PM
I will email the scans, as soon as I get home
more...
puskeygadha
07-23 03:14 PM
this is for cases which will be filed right..
cases which are audited are audited and are in the audit queues ..correct???
we are fucked
cases which are audited are audited and are in the audit queues ..correct???
we are fucked
jettu77
10-05 03:57 PM
^^^
more...
Ramba
03-26 12:16 PM
no, it is not the same position. the two positins have 2 different classifications and requirements. the first position (I have LC certified for) is a financial analyst which requires a bachelor degree. the second position is a senior financial analyst (for which LC was denied) which requires a masters degree and it is supervisory position. I asked my employer to request masters + 2 years experience for the senior position but lawyer said that my experience was acquired while working for the employer (while I was working as a financial analyst) so that experience can not count toward the senior position. this was a genuine promotion and not just to apply for EB2.
any feedback is appreciated.
May be those are two different position. But both are same occupational classification as per SOC/ONET. The employer can not request BS and MS for same occupational class. Conventionaly, the senior/supervisor level will be achived by experience in the occupation not by education.
any feedback is appreciated.
May be those are two different position. But both are same occupational classification as per SOC/ONET. The employer can not request BS and MS for same occupational class. Conventionaly, the senior/supervisor level will be achived by experience in the occupation not by education.
2010 Olympic Games Wallpaper
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
Sprint Nextel Corp. today said that it will lay off about 8,000 workers by April within “all levels” of the company.The carrier also said it will suspend the 401(k) matches for workers for 2009 and extend a freeze on annual salary increases started in 2008 through 2009. A tuition-reimbursement program was also suspended.Source: ComputerworldPosted in [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1237&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/sprint-to-lay-off-8000-by-apri/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/sprint-to-lay-off-8000-by-apri/)
more...
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
hair High Definition Wallpapers
zCool
03-20 04:20 PM
Yes,
Employer can revoke 140 anytime till 485 is approved.
If you are past 180 days after application of 485 then that would not make your 485 invalid. that is the crux of AC21 portability.
Employer can revoke 140 anytime till 485 is approved.
If you are past 180 days after application of 485 then that would not make your 485 invalid. that is the crux of AC21 portability.
more...
vxg
08-06 08:52 AM
I took some time to compile the list of INDIA only EB3 and EB2 categories for past 2 years and from the trend, it is very easy to predict the Oct bulletin.
It does not need a attorney or spies. You just need to work up the numbers.
I did this only for INDIA. Any chinese can complile it for China.
MONTH EB2 EB3
Aug 05 C 01APR01
Sep 05 C U
Oct 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Nov 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Dec 05 01JUL00 1-Jan-99
Jan 06 01JAN01 01JUN99
Feb 06 01AUG01 01JAN00
Mar 06 01JAN02 01JAN01
Apr 06 01JUL02 01FEB01
May 06 01JAN03 01MAR01
Jun 06 01JAN03 08APR01
Jul 06 01JAN03 15APR01
Aug 06 U 01APR01
Sep 06 U 15APR01
Oct 06 15JUN02 22-Apr-01
Nov 06 01JAN03 APRIL01
Dec 06 08JAN03
Jan 07 Jan03 May01
Feb 07 Jan03 May01
Mar 07 Jan03 May01
Apr 07 Jan03 May01
May 07 Jan03 May01
Jun 07 Apr04 Jun03
Jul 07 C C
Aug 07 U U
Sep 07 Jan03 May01
Oct 07 Jan03 May01
Nov 07 Jul03 June02
Dec 07 Jul03 Jun02
Jan 08 Jan04 Jun02
Feb 08 Jan04 Jun02
Here is my analysis.
Bulletin dates moves by six months as max jump for EB2 and 1 month for EB3.
Begining of New year in Oct, they conservatively pull back the numbers so as to flush out pending apps.
Now since they have already flushed apps in June/July, in Nov they will move EB2 by six months and possibly either stop there or make it one full year by moving it by another six months.
For EB3, they like to get it stuck at mid year so Jun02.
Guys, give a thought to this trend and see if you can guess more accurately.
Well they approved EB2 2004 cases in Jul so that means that if there is not a flood of EB2 apps with PD before 2004 the dates should stay in 2004.
It does not need a attorney or spies. You just need to work up the numbers.
I did this only for INDIA. Any chinese can complile it for China.
MONTH EB2 EB3
Aug 05 C 01APR01
Sep 05 C U
Oct 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Nov 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Dec 05 01JUL00 1-Jan-99
Jan 06 01JAN01 01JUN99
Feb 06 01AUG01 01JAN00
Mar 06 01JAN02 01JAN01
Apr 06 01JUL02 01FEB01
May 06 01JAN03 01MAR01
Jun 06 01JAN03 08APR01
Jul 06 01JAN03 15APR01
Aug 06 U 01APR01
Sep 06 U 15APR01
Oct 06 15JUN02 22-Apr-01
Nov 06 01JAN03 APRIL01
Dec 06 08JAN03
Jan 07 Jan03 May01
Feb 07 Jan03 May01
Mar 07 Jan03 May01
Apr 07 Jan03 May01
May 07 Jan03 May01
Jun 07 Apr04 Jun03
Jul 07 C C
Aug 07 U U
Sep 07 Jan03 May01
Oct 07 Jan03 May01
Nov 07 Jul03 June02
Dec 07 Jul03 Jun02
Jan 08 Jan04 Jun02
Feb 08 Jan04 Jun02
Here is my analysis.
Bulletin dates moves by six months as max jump for EB2 and 1 month for EB3.
Begining of New year in Oct, they conservatively pull back the numbers so as to flush out pending apps.
Now since they have already flushed apps in June/July, in Nov they will move EB2 by six months and possibly either stop there or make it one full year by moving it by another six months.
For EB3, they like to get it stuck at mid year so Jun02.
Guys, give a thought to this trend and see if you can guess more accurately.
Well they approved EB2 2004 cases in Jul so that means that if there is not a flood of EB2 apps with PD before 2004 the dates should stay in 2004.
hot Beijing Summer Olympics at
txh1b
04-15 10:46 AM
What took you sooo long to wake up from the slumber and realize that you need to get paid? Look up WH4 and complain to DOL. Look for the contents in the Neufield memo as well.
more...
house Winter Olympics Wallpaper
tnite
09-26 10:13 AM
Hi All,
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
see my signature but I am july 2nd filer.
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
see my signature but I am july 2nd filer.
tattoo Olympic Wallpapers
chintu25
10-31 01:59 PM
Good job guys ...I am back was busy with some office mess that is now cleared . I am all in and active as ever .
more...
pictures 2008 Olympics wallpaper
GCard_Dream
03-15 11:40 AM
Would you please elaborate on "substantially different". If the job title is different and job duties are very different, would that qualify as "substantially different". I have been thinking about doing the same.
If the first labor is done through PERM, can the 2nd labor be filed? I had heard that there is a policy of one PERM per company per employee. Does that not apply if the new job with the same company is substantially different.
Would you please give me as much info as you can cause I am seriously thinking about this option.
Thanks in advance.
You can only file a second LC for the same employee at the same company, if the new position is "substantially different" from the old position. [ I am happy to report, that I just received my PERM approval for doing exactly this :) ]
If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.
- gs
If the first labor is done through PERM, can the 2nd labor be filed? I had heard that there is a policy of one PERM per company per employee. Does that not apply if the new job with the same company is substantially different.
Would you please give me as much info as you can cause I am seriously thinking about this option.
Thanks in advance.
You can only file a second LC for the same employee at the same company, if the new position is "substantially different" from the old position. [ I am happy to report, that I just received my PERM approval for doing exactly this :) ]
If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.
- gs
dresses Olympics Wallpaper 3
cbpds
06-01 07:03 PM
Please note prefiling allows one to file their 485 papers but will not get an EAD unless ur priority date becomes current.
Satya & OP. I agree with you. Point # 3 is very significant to many many people who don't have EAD. I believe that nothing also happened to the pre-filing concept which would have allowed this. I also do very sincerely appreciate IV's efforts for the larger cause of CIR, let�s see what happens.
Satya & OP. I agree with you. Point # 3 is very significant to many many people who don't have EAD. I believe that nothing also happened to the pre-filing concept which would have allowed this. I also do very sincerely appreciate IV's efforts for the larger cause of CIR, let�s see what happens.
more...
makeup 20 Olympic Wallpapers Vol 1
sonia_sd
09-24 06:21 PM
I checked the site, couldn't find this info any more, probably its got archived. Thanks for your efforts in letting the group know.
No worries,
go and check here: The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
in the above link go locating the following news line, read and enjoy
""08/14/2009: Will USCIS Discontinue Concurrent I-140/485 Filing Procedure, Replaced by Preregistration and Two-Tier Filing System? ""
No worries,
go and check here: The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
in the above link go locating the following news line, read and enjoy
""08/14/2009: Will USCIS Discontinue Concurrent I-140/485 Filing Procedure, Replaced by Preregistration and Two-Tier Filing System? ""
girlfriend Beijing 2008 Olympics
emmNemm
07-16 08:57 AM
I agree. I am EB2 and my Prevailing_Wage_Level is Level II
hairstyles Olympic victor
fide_champ
11-06 08:55 AM
Jet airways resumed new service to US recently. That's why you couldn't find many people traveling by Jet airways. I heard the flights are new, service is good and the travel is quite comfortable. I am travelling to chennai from EWR end of november and am looking forward to the trip.
StarSun
02-08 02:21 PM
Thank for the reply. I hope the suggestions will be acted on and implemented at the earliest. It's frustrating to see that the priority dates haven't moved by a single day in last 6 months, something really needs to be done and I will do my support IV with anything.
Take action and register now: ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy Update (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=36)
Thanks for your commitment...if you are frustrated by no movement in 6 months then imagine the plight of folks on this forum who have no priority date movement since Jan 2002 (9 years and counting)....most of them have literally became dormant with the long wait and some of them have become cynical and skeptical of the entire process and quite frankly about IV...it's hard to motivate and make them commit to supporting IV. There are few brave souls who refuse to give up and are fighting for the greater benefit of the entire community!
True.
IV in need of brave souls now :)
Take action and register now: ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy Update (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=36)
Thanks for your commitment...if you are frustrated by no movement in 6 months then imagine the plight of folks on this forum who have no priority date movement since Jan 2002 (9 years and counting)....most of them have literally became dormant with the long wait and some of them have become cynical and skeptical of the entire process and quite frankly about IV...it's hard to motivate and make them commit to supporting IV. There are few brave souls who refuse to give up and are fighting for the greater benefit of the entire community!
True.
IV in need of brave souls now :)
smisachu
11-06 09:38 AM
Any one knows which Airline is good (Cost & Service) from Newark to Bangalore? I have flown AI with stop over in Bom, but would prefer something direct to Bangalore.
Thanks
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment