sbmallik
05-25 05:22 PM
If your MIL is not in the US, you cannot technically extend the visa.
wallpaper Carrie Underwood Drawing
jackie3
05-07 05:42 AM
hi jase21. i think .net is the best programming language till date. wat do u think?
ganguteli
04-11 11:27 PM
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/fts_wh4.htm
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/RIGHTS_OF_H1B/REPORT_ABUSE/REPORT_FRAUD
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/RIGHTS_OF_H1B/REPORT_ABUSE/REPORT_FRAUD
2011 Carrie Underwood Drawing.
rockstart
07-20 08:32 PM
Spoke to Virgin Atlantic cust rep last week for flight from US to India via London and they said they cannot accept Advance Parole for transit and I would need UK Transit Visa or Valid US visa.
more...
sanin
01-16 05:31 PM
Hi,
I was working with company A since June to Dec 07. and Now I got offer with company B which they are filing my H1 transfer.
but i dont have the last 2 months (Nov & Dec) paystubs from company A (have paystubs from June to Oct). because my employer dont give the latest 2 months paystub but i have proof of Bank Acccount mentioning the payroll information in bank account for month of Nov & Dec 07.
So does the Bank Account statement will be valid for H1 transfer ?
Please reply me ASAP.
sanin.
I was working with company A since June to Dec 07. and Now I got offer with company B which they are filing my H1 transfer.
but i dont have the last 2 months (Nov & Dec) paystubs from company A (have paystubs from June to Oct). because my employer dont give the latest 2 months paystub but i have proof of Bank Acccount mentioning the payroll information in bank account for month of Nov & Dec 07.
So does the Bank Account statement will be valid for H1 transfer ?
Please reply me ASAP.
sanin.
bpratap
02-19 04:41 PM
got to the SSN office with ur receipt, tell them you are waiting for ...... long for the card. you need the number to give to the employer. most of the officers would look in the system and would give you the number.
more...
ch102
02-22 08:43 AM
Over 500 Indian guest workers sue US company for human trafficking - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/news/Over-500-Indian-guest-workers-sue-US-company-for-human-trafficking/articleshow/7548222.cms)
HOUSTON: Lawyers for a group of Indian guest workers, trafficked to the US from India to work in shipyards after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, have sued an American company, Signal International, along with its co-conspirators and other entities for human trafficking and racketeering.
If class status is granted, the lawsuit could be the largest human trafficking case in US history, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has said in a statement.
Workers were allegedly lured here with dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent US residents, the statement said.
The ACLU joined a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of over 500 guest workers from India charging that the workers were trafficked into the US through the federal government's H-2B guest worker programme with dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent US residents and subjected to squalid living conditions, fraudulent payment practises, and threats of serious harm upon their arrival.
The complaint alleges that recruiting agents hired by the marine industry company Signal International held the guest workers' passports and visas, coerced them into paying extraordinary fees for recruitment, immigration processing and travel, and threatened the workers with serious legal and physical harm if they did not work under the Signal-restricted guest worker visa.
The complaint also alleges that once in the US, the men were required to live in Signal's guarded, over crowded labour camps, subjected to psychological abuse and defrauded out of adequate payment for their work.
The ACLU charges that the federal government has fallen short of its responsibility to protect the rights of guest workers in this country.
According to the lawsuit, the treatment of the workers violates the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (TVPA) and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act (RICO).
In addition to the federal court litigation, in partnership with the ACLU, the workers have testified before the UN special rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, the UN special rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and senior staff at the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Signal, a marine and fabrication company with shipyards in Mississippi, Texas and Alabama, is a subcontractor for several major multinational companies.
HOUSTON: Lawyers for a group of Indian guest workers, trafficked to the US from India to work in shipyards after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, have sued an American company, Signal International, along with its co-conspirators and other entities for human trafficking and racketeering.
If class status is granted, the lawsuit could be the largest human trafficking case in US history, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has said in a statement.
Workers were allegedly lured here with dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent US residents, the statement said.
The ACLU joined a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of over 500 guest workers from India charging that the workers were trafficked into the US through the federal government's H-2B guest worker programme with dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent US residents and subjected to squalid living conditions, fraudulent payment practises, and threats of serious harm upon their arrival.
The complaint alleges that recruiting agents hired by the marine industry company Signal International held the guest workers' passports and visas, coerced them into paying extraordinary fees for recruitment, immigration processing and travel, and threatened the workers with serious legal and physical harm if they did not work under the Signal-restricted guest worker visa.
The complaint also alleges that once in the US, the men were required to live in Signal's guarded, over crowded labour camps, subjected to psychological abuse and defrauded out of adequate payment for their work.
The ACLU charges that the federal government has fallen short of its responsibility to protect the rights of guest workers in this country.
According to the lawsuit, the treatment of the workers violates the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (TVPA) and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act (RICO).
In addition to the federal court litigation, in partnership with the ACLU, the workers have testified before the UN special rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, the UN special rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and senior staff at the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Signal, a marine and fabrication company with shipyards in Mississippi, Texas and Alabama, is a subcontractor for several major multinational companies.
2010 Carrie Underwood Drawing by MichaelT
snathan
09-15 11:33 AM
hello,
Processing Type: Regular Processing
Receipt Number: WAC081-465-XXXX
Received Date: APR,24 2008
Notice Number: N/A
RFE Date:
RFE Responded Date: sep 16 2008
Status: RFE responded and case resumed
iam going to wait since one year.but still its going to be delay.my employer didn't say anything. I was getting frustrated everytime I looked at it, same statment: "Case resumed"
what will i do?can i raise the service request?can i directly call to the uscis?
please suggest me...
Change it to the Premium Processing.
Processing Type: Regular Processing
Receipt Number: WAC081-465-XXXX
Received Date: APR,24 2008
Notice Number: N/A
RFE Date:
RFE Responded Date: sep 16 2008
Status: RFE responded and case resumed
iam going to wait since one year.but still its going to be delay.my employer didn't say anything. I was getting frustrated everytime I looked at it, same statment: "Case resumed"
what will i do?can i raise the service request?can i directly call to the uscis?
please suggest me...
Change it to the Premium Processing.
more...
gene77
07-01 11:52 PM
Ok Guys enough "PREDECTIONS" now go to bed.
Only the coming days will tell us what is going on and what will happen. Everything else is just hear-say.
Go to sleep and remember that we DO have day jobs.
Thanks eb3_nepa, I agree.
Only the coming days will tell us what is going on and what will happen. Everything else is just hear-say.
Go to sleep and remember that we DO have day jobs.
Thanks eb3_nepa, I agree.
hair Carrie Underwood Drawing
crystal
07-01 08:53 AM
are u sure about it ?
Ya thats true but these people must return these GC's as they were processe by mistake, anyday they figure it out these guys will be out of US ....
Ya thats true but these people must return these GC's as they were processe by mistake, anyday they figure it out these guys will be out of US ....
more...
smuggymba
12-18 08:31 AM
Cap on skilled immigration unlawful: UK court - World News - IBNLive (http://ibnlive.in.com/news/cap-on-skilled-immigration-unlawful-uk-court/137822-2.html?from=tn)
London: A temporary cap on the number of skilled workers from India and other countries outside the European Union was introduced in June 'unlawfully', the High Court ruled on Friday.
Home Secretary Theresa May had introduced the cap as an interim measure before a permanent cap to be in place from April 2011. It was challenged on the ground that ministers had 'sidestepped' parliamentary scrutiny before announcing the
temporary cap.
The legal challenge to the cap of 24,100 until April 2011 was brought by the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) and English Community Care Association, and was upheld by judges on Friday.
The Home Office said this did not imperil its flagship immigration policy but the opposition Labour said the police it was in "chaos" after the court ruling.
The ruling has nullified the current temporary cap, meaning it is no longer in force.
The cap was one of the first measures of the coalition government that promised to bring down immigrations from hundreds of thousands every year to 'tens of thousands.
In today's ruling, Lord Justice Sullivan and Justice Burton concluded that the home secretary had not gone through the proper parliamentary procedures before implementing the cap, which took effect without a vote in Parliament.
The judges said: "The secretary of state made no secret of her intentions. There can be no doubt that she was attempting to side-step provisions for Parliamentary scrutiny set up under provisions of the 1971 Immigration Act and her attempt was for that reason unlawful." As a result, it said no lawful limits were now in place for Tier One and Tier Two applicants from abroad. The Home Office said it was still "firmly committed" to reducing levels of net migration. "I am disappointed with today's verdict," Immigration minister Damian Green said, adding: "We will do all in our power to continue to prevent a rush of applications before our more permanent measures are in place".
London: A temporary cap on the number of skilled workers from India and other countries outside the European Union was introduced in June 'unlawfully', the High Court ruled on Friday.
Home Secretary Theresa May had introduced the cap as an interim measure before a permanent cap to be in place from April 2011. It was challenged on the ground that ministers had 'sidestepped' parliamentary scrutiny before announcing the
temporary cap.
The legal challenge to the cap of 24,100 until April 2011 was brought by the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) and English Community Care Association, and was upheld by judges on Friday.
The Home Office said this did not imperil its flagship immigration policy but the opposition Labour said the police it was in "chaos" after the court ruling.
The ruling has nullified the current temporary cap, meaning it is no longer in force.
The cap was one of the first measures of the coalition government that promised to bring down immigrations from hundreds of thousands every year to 'tens of thousands.
In today's ruling, Lord Justice Sullivan and Justice Burton concluded that the home secretary had not gone through the proper parliamentary procedures before implementing the cap, which took effect without a vote in Parliament.
The judges said: "The secretary of state made no secret of her intentions. There can be no doubt that she was attempting to side-step provisions for Parliamentary scrutiny set up under provisions of the 1971 Immigration Act and her attempt was for that reason unlawful." As a result, it said no lawful limits were now in place for Tier One and Tier Two applicants from abroad. The Home Office said it was still "firmly committed" to reducing levels of net migration. "I am disappointed with today's verdict," Immigration minister Damian Green said, adding: "We will do all in our power to continue to prevent a rush of applications before our more permanent measures are in place".
hot Pictures of Carrie Underwood; Carrie Underwood Drawing.
jhaalaa
05-07 02:49 PM
Try nationally reputed folks:
Ron , Shusterman.com , Murthy.com , Rajiv Khanna
Local OK/TX try
1. Farzaneh, Amir M at OKC
Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, A Professional Corporation
Hall Estill Law Firm; Oklahoma, Tulsa, Arkansas, Oklahoma City, Washington, D.C. - Hall Estill (http://www.hallestill.com/)
2. ROHIT SHARMA at OK, TX
Tulsa Oklahoma US Immigration Law Firm | Family, Estate Planning & Business Attorney (http://www.sharmalawfirm.com/)
3. T. Douglas Stump & Associates at OKC
T. Douglas Stump, lawyers in Oklahoma City, OK, Oklahoma (http://www.usvisagroup.net/)
4. Elaine Martin at Dallas, TX
Immigration lawyer expert Dallas Texas and nationwide (http://www.martinvisalaw.com)
Not good experience with
Solano
Leblang and Associates
Ron , Shusterman.com , Murthy.com , Rajiv Khanna
Local OK/TX try
1. Farzaneh, Amir M at OKC
Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, A Professional Corporation
Hall Estill Law Firm; Oklahoma, Tulsa, Arkansas, Oklahoma City, Washington, D.C. - Hall Estill (http://www.hallestill.com/)
2. ROHIT SHARMA at OK, TX
Tulsa Oklahoma US Immigration Law Firm | Family, Estate Planning & Business Attorney (http://www.sharmalawfirm.com/)
3. T. Douglas Stump & Associates at OKC
T. Douglas Stump, lawyers in Oklahoma City, OK, Oklahoma (http://www.usvisagroup.net/)
4. Elaine Martin at Dallas, TX
Immigration lawyer expert Dallas Texas and nationwide (http://www.martinvisalaw.com)
Not good experience with
Solano
Leblang and Associates
more...
house carrie underwood quotes. the
meridiani.planum
05-05 02:08 AM
inline...
I know that an H1B may be extended beyond the 6 year limit as long as the there has been at least a Labor Cert pending for the past 365 days. So basically, as long as you have a LC pending, the H1B is increased in yearly increments until the GC is approved or denied.
However:
1) Once I-140 is approved, do they automatically extend the H1B (the next time it is due for an extension) by three years?
yes, if your PD is not current and you request 3 years (on the H1 LCA) when you file the extension. Otherwise its a 1 year extension
2) Once you're in that "extension zone" (i.e. past your 6 year limit because of a pending GC application) of your H1B can you still switch jobs? (obviously your new company would have to file a new Labor cert once again for you)?
The USCIS does allow you to get an H1 transfer to a new employer based on the I-140, or LC from some other employer. So if you request a transfer it will go through provided the conditions fo rextension (old LC or approved I-140) exist on the day they adjudicate your case.
The gray area here is what happens to the H1 if the underlying LC or I-140 is then revoked by the old employer. The current USCIS position is that the H1 remains valid (they have not come back and revoked anybody's H1 extension because the underlying LC is gone). However neither the law nor USCIS regulations are clear in this matter.
I know that an H1B may be extended beyond the 6 year limit as long as the there has been at least a Labor Cert pending for the past 365 days. So basically, as long as you have a LC pending, the H1B is increased in yearly increments until the GC is approved or denied.
However:
1) Once I-140 is approved, do they automatically extend the H1B (the next time it is due for an extension) by three years?
yes, if your PD is not current and you request 3 years (on the H1 LCA) when you file the extension. Otherwise its a 1 year extension
2) Once you're in that "extension zone" (i.e. past your 6 year limit because of a pending GC application) of your H1B can you still switch jobs? (obviously your new company would have to file a new Labor cert once again for you)?
The USCIS does allow you to get an H1 transfer to a new employer based on the I-140, or LC from some other employer. So if you request a transfer it will go through provided the conditions fo rextension (old LC or approved I-140) exist on the day they adjudicate your case.
The gray area here is what happens to the H1 if the underlying LC or I-140 is then revoked by the old employer. The current USCIS position is that the H1 remains valid (they have not come back and revoked anybody's H1 extension because the underlying LC is gone). However neither the law nor USCIS regulations are clear in this matter.
tattoo Carrie Underwood
phillyag
05-19 03:10 PM
Yates memo dated May 12, 2005 - is it still valid and has there been any change to it since its out ?
I want to specifically focus on the following question:
Question 8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA � 204(j)?
Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a "same or similar" occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed. Second, it may be appropriate to confirm that the new employer and the job offer are legitimate through an RFE to the adjustment applicant for relevant information about these issues. Third, as with any portability case, USCIS will focus on whether the I-140 petition represented the truly intended employment at the time of the filing of both the I-140 and the I-485. This means that, as of the time of the filing of the I-140 and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Does this still hold good ? And if it does can someone help me understand the criteria mentioned here. Too much of technical jargon
I want to specifically focus on the following question:
Question 8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA � 204(j)?
Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a "same or similar" occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed. Second, it may be appropriate to confirm that the new employer and the job offer are legitimate through an RFE to the adjustment applicant for relevant information about these issues. Third, as with any portability case, USCIS will focus on whether the I-140 petition represented the truly intended employment at the time of the filing of both the I-140 and the I-485. This means that, as of the time of the filing of the I-140 and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Does this still hold good ? And if it does can someone help me understand the criteria mentioned here. Too much of technical jargon
more...
pictures Drawing carrie underwood
kirupa
09-28 04:23 PM
Silverlight can be deployed on networks using something more centralized like group policy. I don't believe average end users can install SL3 without admin priviliges.
The best place to learn more is the SL Deployment Guide: http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2007/09/28/deploying-silverlight-in-the-enterprise.aspx
:)
The best place to learn more is the SL Deployment Guide: http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2007/09/28/deploying-silverlight-in-the-enterprise.aspx
:)
dresses Carrie Underwood..love her!
ciber.couger
07-15 12:08 PM
my wife, my 2 years old son, and I will be there. We will do anything to get this thing going:)
more...
makeup Carrie Underwood Drawing. Carrie Underwood – The 68th
apb
10-01 02:39 PM
My friend had applied for GC through B (never worked, PD-2004/EB2, 140 approved and 485 more than 6 months) and he was continuing with company A on H1B.
Company A was laying him off. He tried to go to company B. But Company B was getting folded.
He went out and got a better offer from company C. He had two choice. Apply H1B transfer from A to C or use AC21.
He chose to use AC21 and started with C. Lawyer explained the situation with AC21 info to USCIS.
Now the best part. HE GOT GC last month.
Company A was laying him off. He tried to go to company B. But Company B was getting folded.
He went out and got a better offer from company C. He had two choice. Apply H1B transfer from A to C or use AC21.
He chose to use AC21 and started with C. Lawyer explained the situation with AC21 info to USCIS.
Now the best part. HE GOT GC last month.
girlfriend my drawing of Carrie Underwood
javadeveloper
07-24 10:41 AM
Hi ,
I was working for company A and got my labor and I-140 approved and then i changed to company B. My priority date is jan 2005. Is there any way that i can continue my green card process with company A. WOuld be of great help if somone can tell me if there is any way to do it.
company A can continue your GC process while you working for company B,Talk to company A about this.I guess company A asks you to join their company , for that you need to apply H1 transfer from B to A.It's not a big problem talk to company A first.Good Luck
I was working for company A and got my labor and I-140 approved and then i changed to company B. My priority date is jan 2005. Is there any way that i can continue my green card process with company A. WOuld be of great help if somone can tell me if there is any way to do it.
company A can continue your GC process while you working for company B,Talk to company A about this.I guess company A asks you to join their company , for that you need to apply H1 transfer from B to A.It's not a big problem talk to company A first.Good Luck
hairstyles Carrie Underwood by ~itsleese
k_confused
08-16 07:08 PM
Her passport :( Issues with the passport :(
gotgc?
03-10 11:44 AM
Hi All,
I have recently applied for my wife's EAD to Phoneix Lock box and got the Receipt from NSC with the LIN number. RD: 02/25/11 and ND:02/28/11. Check also got cashed. I tried to access that receipt number in USCIS case status website online to get the status yesterday 03/09/11; it says the case number is not found. I am sure I typed the correct receipt number. Any idea what could be wrong? Has anyone experienced this before? Should I contact the customer service? Please help me.
I have recently applied for my wife's EAD to Phoneix Lock box and got the Receipt from NSC with the LIN number. RD: 02/25/11 and ND:02/28/11. Check also got cashed. I tried to access that receipt number in USCIS case status website online to get the status yesterday 03/09/11; it says the case number is not found. I am sure I typed the correct receipt number. Any idea what could be wrong? Has anyone experienced this before? Should I contact the customer service? Please help me.
ssdtm
05-14 06:10 PM
Lets not generalize it. Everyone is different.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий