eb3retro
03-15 01:15 PM
Filing 485 during visa unavailability, should not be the concern in this bill. Why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category. Specter removed very important provision that eliminate per country limit in EB visas for oversubscribed countries. This is a big blow to India, China. It will stop all the benefits from this bill.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
wallpaper yamaha mio amore set up.
ChainReaction
02-21 12:15 PM
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/ptimes.jsp
that is for last month updated jan 17,2007 not for feb?
that is for last month updated jan 17,2007 not for feb?
santb1975
02-14 06:08 PM
Are we??
2011 Trance - Il Mio Amore;
axp817
02-03 07:14 PM
"The AC21" is just a letter stating that you have switched employers and have a new job in the same occupation, similar wage, etc. under the AC21 law, in no specific format.
My AC21 letter which was drafted by the attorney just states the above and is addressed to the USCIS on my behalf. I am the only person that has signed it, the only attorney reference on there is for sending any correspondence.
My AC21 letter which was drafted by the attorney just states the above and is addressed to the USCIS on my behalf. I am the only person that has signed it, the only attorney reference on there is for sending any correspondence.
more...
nareshg
10-12 01:59 AM
they responded today to USCIS, nothing much here I guess...
one of the forms had my birth date wrong, so USCIS was asking for the actual birth date.
Strange...my 140 was filed on Nov 2006....and then got a REF on August 29th 2007, my pawyer responsed last week...and I thought that as soon as USCIS gets the evidence they will hopefully approve my case....(the evidence was a minor (atleast I thought it was minor) issue about birth date...
and now USCIS has revieved the evidence they asked for...guess what they say...
On October 10, 2007, we received your response to our request for evidence. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. You should expect to receive a written decision or written update within 60 days of the date we received your response unless fingerprint processing or an interview are standard parts of case processing and have not yet been completed, in which case you can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
60 more days...come on....
one of the forms had my birth date wrong, so USCIS was asking for the actual birth date.
Strange...my 140 was filed on Nov 2006....and then got a REF on August 29th 2007, my pawyer responsed last week...and I thought that as soon as USCIS gets the evidence they will hopefully approve my case....(the evidence was a minor (atleast I thought it was minor) issue about birth date...
and now USCIS has revieved the evidence they asked for...guess what they say...
On October 10, 2007, we received your response to our request for evidence. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. You should expect to receive a written decision or written update within 60 days of the date we received your response unless fingerprint processing or an interview are standard parts of case processing and have not yet been completed, in which case you can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
60 more days...come on....
desi3933
02-19 10:57 AM
Great piece of info, dude! :)
Just an additional question, what happens if the parents are in the I-485 applied stage and the baby is born outside of US ?
I would call it expensive mistake.
The child has to apply for immigrant visa as follow-to-join, unless, of course, if child is still eligible for H4 visa. In that case, he/she can file for I-485 in the US if the PD is still current.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Just an additional question, what happens if the parents are in the I-485 applied stage and the baby is born outside of US ?
I would call it expensive mistake.
The child has to apply for immigrant visa as follow-to-join, unless, of course, if child is still eligible for H4 visa. In that case, he/she can file for I-485 in the US if the PD is still current.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
abby17
04-15 12:58 PM
Hello, I think I made a mistake. I recently went from GC to citizenship and it cost me my job. I was
fired shortly after becoming a citizen. I am from a country other than yours. Sorry about that. There is no particular website that represents immigration from the country I immigrated from.
The employer replaced me with a visa card holder. After I trained him, I was fired and my boss was fired.
I am a skilled programmer with advanced degree. Employers from the dice.com website refuse to even acknowledge my resumes. Being unemployed is no way to be a new citizen. So I am ready to give up searching and move to India,in search of programming work. All I want to do is write code. I do not desire to make a point or to annoy anyone, I just want to work and write source code and try to get on with my life.
What are my chances to find work with the giant IT corporations of India? I am ready to move today. Can I revoke my US citizenship and immigrate to your country??? Sorry sorry sorry if this offends anyone, I do not mean to annoy any of you. I just want to have a job and write code and I will be on my way.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, for permitting me to present my delima to this your website.
abby
fired shortly after becoming a citizen. I am from a country other than yours. Sorry about that. There is no particular website that represents immigration from the country I immigrated from.
The employer replaced me with a visa card holder. After I trained him, I was fired and my boss was fired.
I am a skilled programmer with advanced degree. Employers from the dice.com website refuse to even acknowledge my resumes. Being unemployed is no way to be a new citizen. So I am ready to give up searching and move to India,in search of programming work. All I want to do is write code. I do not desire to make a point or to annoy anyone, I just want to work and write source code and try to get on with my life.
What are my chances to find work with the giant IT corporations of India? I am ready to move today. Can I revoke my US citizenship and immigrate to your country??? Sorry sorry sorry if this offends anyone, I do not mean to annoy any of you. I just want to have a job and write code and I will be on my way.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, for permitting me to present my delima to this your website.
abby
2010 mio 3 zr original thailand sale swap sa mio amore plus cash Philippines -
sparky123
07-18 02:12 PM
We're running out of time. Any timely suggestions would be much appreciated.
Please help to expedite Atlanta center.
We just want to get ours filed too and join the rest of the gang in celebration :p
Please help to expedite Atlanta center.
We just want to get ours filed too and join the rest of the gang in celebration :p
more...
yabadaba
06-22 09:40 AM
My colleague told me that he took only chest X-ray and not done skin test he got his GC.
hemasar....dont give wrong information. Just becuse your colleague said that he got it does not make it a law. Please be prudent in providing correct legal information!
hemasar....dont give wrong information. Just becuse your colleague said that he got it does not make it a law. Please be prudent in providing correct legal information!
hair hot mio amore thailand. mio 3
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
go_guy123
04-19 12:08 AM
Hi Folks,
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
in 2007 fellow indian international students in Canada used to get loan from
https://www.isloan.org/faqs.htm
but in 2008 that was closed. However you can call and find out from them.
With the credit crisis I am not sure if they give anymore. ask if u cosign then can they give or not
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
in 2007 fellow indian international students in Canada used to get loan from
https://www.isloan.org/faqs.htm
but in 2008 that was closed. However you can call and find out from them.
With the credit crisis I am not sure if they give anymore. ask if u cosign then can they give or not
hot dresses mio amore thailand.
fromnaija
11-30 11:19 AM
I don't think you are correct. Portability applies after 6 months of I140 approval. But you can not use AC21 for job profile / labor zone change. So, I don't recommend you changing job title.
You are wrong! Portability applies after 485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
You are wrong! Portability applies after 485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
more...
house mio amore thailand. mio 3 zr original thailand sale swap sa mio amore plus
leoindiano
07-09 02:03 PM
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22772
Here's what uscis said...
Here's what uscis said...
tattoo flooring for MIO amore and
dealsnet
06-14 03:53 PM
Living in outside India, we need to learn much caution.
This is a true incident happened in NY.
A boy from south India came to NY by family immigration sponsored by his uncle. He came after his 10th grade exam. Living in uncle's house. After few days in US, he played ball with some kids in the street. Ball strayed into somebody's garden. He went to pick the ball, and then he thought about taking permission from the house owner. He didn't ring the bell, just went inside the house, where he find a girl sitting in a sofa. She is a teenager alone in her home at that time. As soon as she saw this dark colored boy, she screamed and ran outside the house. He saw she is screaming, he also ran outside. All these sound make the neighbors attention and some one call 911 and police arrested this boy for attempted rape. He served 6 months in prison. Rape charge is rejected with a plea bargain for trespassing, all because he is minor 15 years old.
So need to change the behavior with socializing in this country.
Well just to get away a bit from the complications of immigration!
Either the victim (who lost jwelery) has some animosity to you/family/your sister or your sister by her actions has given him/her reason to suspect her for the lost jwelery. Maybe your sister might have been a frequent visitor to that house? Or the jwelery was lost immediately after your sisters visit? First identify what prompted this accusation and then tackle it. Ofcourse consult a good attorney.
Even if the person acuses your sister, she is inocent until proven guilty and unless there is sufficient evidence there is no way your sister will be convicted by any judge/jury.
Lesson to learn; Don't get tooooooooo close to anybody. Helping is good but even with your relatives you have keep a certain distance and respect their privacy and territory. Indians tend to overlook this and often asume that they can enter into other people's lives, think for them and act for them. Its ok in India but once you are here things change quite a bit.......:o:o
This is a true incident happened in NY.
A boy from south India came to NY by family immigration sponsored by his uncle. He came after his 10th grade exam. Living in uncle's house. After few days in US, he played ball with some kids in the street. Ball strayed into somebody's garden. He went to pick the ball, and then he thought about taking permission from the house owner. He didn't ring the bell, just went inside the house, where he find a girl sitting in a sofa. She is a teenager alone in her home at that time. As soon as she saw this dark colored boy, she screamed and ran outside the house. He saw she is screaming, he also ran outside. All these sound make the neighbors attention and some one call 911 and police arrested this boy for attempted rape. He served 6 months in prison. Rape charge is rejected with a plea bargain for trespassing, all because he is minor 15 years old.
So need to change the behavior with socializing in this country.
Well just to get away a bit from the complications of immigration!
Either the victim (who lost jwelery) has some animosity to you/family/your sister or your sister by her actions has given him/her reason to suspect her for the lost jwelery. Maybe your sister might have been a frequent visitor to that house? Or the jwelery was lost immediately after your sisters visit? First identify what prompted this accusation and then tackle it. Ofcourse consult a good attorney.
Even if the person acuses your sister, she is inocent until proven guilty and unless there is sufficient evidence there is no way your sister will be convicted by any judge/jury.
Lesson to learn; Don't get tooooooooo close to anybody. Helping is good but even with your relatives you have keep a certain distance and respect their privacy and territory. Indians tend to overlook this and often asume that they can enter into other people's lives, think for them and act for them. Its ok in India but once you are here things change quite a bit.......:o:o
more...
pictures mio amore thailand; mio amore
my2cents
08-05 11:36 AM
Time and again - there are confilicting opinion from attorneys.
My attorney ( and i trust her) said that if you are maintaining H1/H4 status (not necessairly VISA stamped) . your I-485/I-131 doesn't get considered cancelled and only requirements that you must be in US while filing. Being on purely non immigrant VISA like F1/F2/B1 you must be in US on day of approval.
People normally refer to friend's example but i have 2 collegues whose spouses has done same thing. Spouse's H4 visa stamping is long expired but they were gone to India after filing AP and they have comeback without any issue.
If you have not extended ur H1-B/H4 (dual immigrant) and have take advantage on AC-21 then I believe that you are not maintaining any non-immigrant status and you are just paroled in.
Thanks
My attorney ( and i trust her) said that if you are maintaining H1/H4 status (not necessairly VISA stamped) . your I-485/I-131 doesn't get considered cancelled and only requirements that you must be in US while filing. Being on purely non immigrant VISA like F1/F2/B1 you must be in US on day of approval.
People normally refer to friend's example but i have 2 collegues whose spouses has done same thing. Spouse's H4 visa stamping is long expired but they were gone to India after filing AP and they have comeback without any issue.
If you have not extended ur H1-B/H4 (dual immigrant) and have take advantage on AC-21 then I believe that you are not maintaining any non-immigrant status and you are just paroled in.
Thanks
dresses fitness. mio amore for
samshah
07-14 09:34 PM
We are in Houston and are interested to join.
more...
makeup mio amore whole bodykit for
Redeye
12-12 05:05 PM
I have EB3 PD of 2004 and it will take a while to get GC for sure. I am in a situation where I do not want to go for stamping and want to use AP in Feb 2008. If I do use AP will it invalidate my H1 with the same employer. My H1 6th year ends in 2010. If I get married in India at a later date will it be an issue to bring my spouse on H4 since I am a parolee?
Is there a way around this with a H1 extention at a later date and stamping at a later date?
Thanks
Is there a way around this with a H1 extention at a later date and stamping at a later date?
Thanks
girlfriend amore mio perfume
GumI485
05-14 07:34 PM
We will keep working on this Retrogression issue...
We will fully support IV Core Group in their efforts
Congratulations! to all those who are eligible to apply I-485, but please keep supporting IV's main agenda.
We will fully support IV Core Group in their efforts
Congratulations! to all those who are eligible to apply I-485, but please keep supporting IV's main agenda.
hairstyles mio amore thailand. yamaha mio
keerthi
04-04 03:10 PM
Thanks for that reply. The company's business line is very niche and it started developing a technology for that niche market in India some 5 years back. I have been involved in the design and implementation of that technology right from its inception. In fact I am one of the core persons who designed and implemented the solution.
Our customer base is increasing in the US. This is one of the reasons why I need to be transferred to the US. Several of our customers are coming up with unique requirements and it requires me to analyze them before providing them a solution. Also, some features of the technology are governed by a large set of exacting standards put forth by a consortium in the US. I am one of the members of that consortium and my presence cum contribution for my company in this regard is very much required.
I possess extensive knowledge of my company's specific technology and software skills which are very rare (we do low level software development - not the ones that large software companies do). Also, there are only a handful of companies who deal with this market. I believe this should ideally classify me as a person having "specialized knowledge".
Am I right?
Our customer base is increasing in the US. This is one of the reasons why I need to be transferred to the US. Several of our customers are coming up with unique requirements and it requires me to analyze them before providing them a solution. Also, some features of the technology are governed by a large set of exacting standards put forth by a consortium in the US. I am one of the members of that consortium and my presence cum contribution for my company in this regard is very much required.
I possess extensive knowledge of my company's specific technology and software skills which are very rare (we do low level software development - not the ones that large software companies do). Also, there are only a handful of companies who deal with this market. I believe this should ideally classify me as a person having "specialized knowledge".
Am I right?
IAF
02-01 08:12 AM
Congratulations!
Desi Unlucky
09-20 08:21 PM
Can you please post the URL (Specific URL not the home page of immigration-law) where this was discussed.
This exact issue is clearly discussed by Mathew Q&A section at www.immigration-law.com. He clearly says you are responsible for USCIS mistake if you did not bring that mistake to their notice. You have to get it corrected for one year ASAP and should contact the attorney at the earliest to do this.
YOU WILL BE OUT OF STATUS AFTER ONE YEAR EVEN IF YOU HAVE THREE YEAR EXTN IF USCIS DECIDES TO DO SO.
This exact issue is clearly discussed by Mathew Q&A section at www.immigration-law.com. He clearly says you are responsible for USCIS mistake if you did not bring that mistake to their notice. You have to get it corrected for one year ASAP and should contact the attorney at the earliest to do this.
YOU WILL BE OUT OF STATUS AFTER ONE YEAR EVEN IF YOU HAVE THREE YEAR EXTN IF USCIS DECIDES TO DO SO.
No comments:
Post a Comment