Madhuri
05-27 03:19 PM
What will the answer to the question Current immigration status while filing EAD electonically, i am on EAD rite now and i have never used my advance parole.* Pls help..
In e-file this question is not mandatory, so I guess we can leave it blank in case we have doubt.
In e-file this question is not mandatory, so I guess we can leave it blank in case we have doubt.
wallpaper art lesson+plans kids Matisse
gc2
09-29 07:20 AM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13697
prasadn
06-22 04:27 PM
My wife currently is on an H1-B visa and she also has EAD/AP based on my I-485 filing. Due to personal reasons she plans to quit her job soon (next 2-3 weeks or so). What will be her status? Should we be filing COS to H-4? Can we get a RFE for proof of her employment when I-485 is processed?
Thanks,
Prasad
Thanks,
Prasad
2011 picasso-guernica
Ann Ruben
01-20 08:50 AM
An I-140 petition filed for you by your current employer will have no impact on the pending I-140 appeal filed by your future employer.
more...
r2d2
02-26 04:08 PM
Hello,
Is there a limit of time a GC holder can remain unemployed if GC obtained through employment and will that have a negative impact on the naturalization process?
Thank you
Is there a limit of time a GC holder can remain unemployed if GC obtained through employment and will that have a negative impact on the naturalization process?
Thank you
pinkam
11-18 11:10 PM
hi everybody,
hope I will get guidance..Here is my case....
I am an Indian and I have been living in USA for about one year as a dependent of F1 visa holder.Recently I got my I-20 and now I want to change my status from F2 to F1.I have only 2 months left to start my classes.And I have some Questions regarding changing status...
1.Is 2 months period is sufficient if I file from USA?
2. what are the chances of changing status (from F2 to F1) if I file from India?
In case, my visa status does not change,will I be able to come back to USA on F2 ? will they reject my current F2 visa as well?
please.. help me with these questions.I will appreciate if somebody could advise me...
Regards.
hope I will get guidance..Here is my case....
I am an Indian and I have been living in USA for about one year as a dependent of F1 visa holder.Recently I got my I-20 and now I want to change my status from F2 to F1.I have only 2 months left to start my classes.And I have some Questions regarding changing status...
1.Is 2 months period is sufficient if I file from USA?
2. what are the chances of changing status (from F2 to F1) if I file from India?
In case, my visa status does not change,will I be able to come back to USA on F2 ? will they reject my current F2 visa as well?
please.. help me with these questions.I will appreciate if somebody could advise me...
Regards.
more...
smaram1
08-15 11:55 AM
Q6: What happens if an application is filed at the wrong Service Center?
A6. Forms I-485 should be filed at either the Texas or Nebraska Service Centers. However, through August 17, 2007 only, employment-based adjustment applications filed at the California and Vermont Service Centers will not be rejected and will be relocated to the appropriate Service Center. Filing at the wrong location could result in processing delays.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
A6. Forms I-485 should be filed at either the Texas or Nebraska Service Centers. However, through August 17, 2007 only, employment-based adjustment applications filed at the California and Vermont Service Centers will not be rejected and will be relocated to the appropriate Service Center. Filing at the wrong location could result in processing delays.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
2010 As an art teacher there#39;s
go_guy123
02-15 01:23 PM
Remember, the worse the grade, the more we love 'em. And where's Jeb Bush? He'd definitely get a D-. Thanks NUSA for making it easy for the pro-immigration folks as well.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/02/numbers-usa-grades-2012-presidential-hopefuls.html)
Jeb Bush D-...pro immigrant. I do see Jeb Bush or his son making a presidencial run in future. But they will only be for the CIR folks.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/02/numbers-usa-grades-2012-presidential-hopefuls.html)
Jeb Bush D-...pro immigrant. I do see Jeb Bush or his son making a presidencial run in future. But they will only be for the CIR folks.
more...
Macaca
11-01 05:36 PM
Democrats Again Look to Change GOP Motions; After Defeats, Leaders Studying Ways to Neuter Republicans' Motions to Recommit (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_52/news/20763-1.html) By Jennifer Yachnin | ROLL CALL STAFF, October 31, 2007
Exasperated over Republicans' continued efforts - and occasional success - in thwarting the House floor schedule, Democratic leaders acknowledged Tuesday they are reviewing the chamber's rules to determine how to curb the minority's ability to put up roadblocks at critical moments in the legislative process.
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D) said the committee's Democrats have begun meeting with both current and former Parliamentarians to discuss the chamber's rules and potential changes.
The New York lawmaker said those discussions have focused in part on the motion to recommit - one of the few procedural items in the minority party's toolbox that allows them to offer legislative alternatives when a bill hits the floor, and that Republicans have used to force difficult votes on Democrats or prompted legislation to be pulled from the floor - as well as other procedures, which she declined to detail.
Slaughter said no timeline exists for the review or potential alterations, however. "Nothing is imminent. We want to take our time and do it right," she said.
But one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the majority is considering neutering the motion-to-recommit process and converting it to little more than a last-chance amendment for the minority party.
Under current House rules, the minority's motion can effectively shelve legislation through minor alterations to the language of their motion - specifically designating for a bill to be returned to its committee "promptly," rather than the usual "forthwith."
Republican leaders have used that strategy to force Democrats to either vote against measures they would otherwise support or vote to kill their own bill. Earlier this month, the GOP used that procedure to target a bill governing federal wiretapping and surveillance programs, prompting Democrats to scrub an expected vote.
Another Democratic lawmaker, who also is familiar with discussions and asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of those conversations, said that is only one option under consideration.
"We don't want to limit the minority's ability to have legitimate motions to recommit," the Democrat said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) railed against Republicans' use of that particular tactic at his weekly press conference Tuesday, echoing complaints Democrats have raised off-and-on since March.
"The Republicans continue to use the motion to recommit for political purposes, not substantive purposes. Substantive purposes would be trying to change policy. For the most part, what they do with their motions to recommit are not change policy, but try to construct difficult political votes for Members," Hoyer said. "We understand that. To some degree, we did that as well. So it is not surprising."
While Hoyer acknowledged that Democrats had at times employed the same approach in the past, he criticized Republicans for using the method 22 times thus far in the 110th Congress, asserting that Democrats used the tactic only four times between 1995 and 1998.
"This is a game. It is a relatively cynical game," Hoyer added. "That doesn't mean it is not an effective game and causes questions. So we are trying to deal with that."
Democrats earlier had sought to alter the House rules on motions to recommit in May - an unusual step, given that the chamber's rules are rarely reopened mid-session - but Republicans rebelled on the House floor, and Democratic leaders agreed to forgo the changes, at least temporarily.
Democratic leaders suggested in August that they planned to offer legislation on the House floor aimed at dissuading Republicans from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to such hot-button issues as immigration. At the same time, Democrats hoped to provide insulation to their own Members with a separate vote on those topics, but have yet to produce any such resolutions.
Republicans have succeeded in winning 21 motions to recommit - the majority of which would not shelve the legislation they amend - in the past 10 months, a point that President Bush praised in a Tuesday meeting at the White House with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), according to a GOP aide.
"Republicans and Democrats alike have lived under the very same germaneness rules since 1822, and changing them won't solve the majority's inherent inability to govern," Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said. "This isn't a question of rules, it's one of competence."
Exasperated over Republicans' continued efforts - and occasional success - in thwarting the House floor schedule, Democratic leaders acknowledged Tuesday they are reviewing the chamber's rules to determine how to curb the minority's ability to put up roadblocks at critical moments in the legislative process.
House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D) said the committee's Democrats have begun meeting with both current and former Parliamentarians to discuss the chamber's rules and potential changes.
The New York lawmaker said those discussions have focused in part on the motion to recommit - one of the few procedural items in the minority party's toolbox that allows them to offer legislative alternatives when a bill hits the floor, and that Republicans have used to force difficult votes on Democrats or prompted legislation to be pulled from the floor - as well as other procedures, which she declined to detail.
Slaughter said no timeline exists for the review or potential alterations, however. "Nothing is imminent. We want to take our time and do it right," she said.
But one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the majority is considering neutering the motion-to-recommit process and converting it to little more than a last-chance amendment for the minority party.
Under current House rules, the minority's motion can effectively shelve legislation through minor alterations to the language of their motion - specifically designating for a bill to be returned to its committee "promptly," rather than the usual "forthwith."
Republican leaders have used that strategy to force Democrats to either vote against measures they would otherwise support or vote to kill their own bill. Earlier this month, the GOP used that procedure to target a bill governing federal wiretapping and surveillance programs, prompting Democrats to scrub an expected vote.
Another Democratic lawmaker, who also is familiar with discussions and asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of those conversations, said that is only one option under consideration.
"We don't want to limit the minority's ability to have legitimate motions to recommit," the Democrat said.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) railed against Republicans' use of that particular tactic at his weekly press conference Tuesday, echoing complaints Democrats have raised off-and-on since March.
"The Republicans continue to use the motion to recommit for political purposes, not substantive purposes. Substantive purposes would be trying to change policy. For the most part, what they do with their motions to recommit are not change policy, but try to construct difficult political votes for Members," Hoyer said. "We understand that. To some degree, we did that as well. So it is not surprising."
While Hoyer acknowledged that Democrats had at times employed the same approach in the past, he criticized Republicans for using the method 22 times thus far in the 110th Congress, asserting that Democrats used the tactic only four times between 1995 and 1998.
"This is a game. It is a relatively cynical game," Hoyer added. "That doesn't mean it is not an effective game and causes questions. So we are trying to deal with that."
Democrats earlier had sought to alter the House rules on motions to recommit in May - an unusual step, given that the chamber's rules are rarely reopened mid-session - but Republicans rebelled on the House floor, and Democratic leaders agreed to forgo the changes, at least temporarily.
Democratic leaders suggested in August that they planned to offer legislation on the House floor aimed at dissuading Republicans from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to such hot-button issues as immigration. At the same time, Democrats hoped to provide insulation to their own Members with a separate vote on those topics, but have yet to produce any such resolutions.
Republicans have succeeded in winning 21 motions to recommit - the majority of which would not shelve the legislation they amend - in the past 10 months, a point that President Bush praised in a Tuesday meeting at the White House with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), according to a GOP aide.
"Republicans and Democrats alike have lived under the very same germaneness rules since 1822, and changing them won't solve the majority's inherent inability to govern," Boehner spokesman Brian Kennedy said. "This isn't a question of rules, it's one of competence."
hair Private Art Lessons; Murals
mannishk
09-28 10:08 PM
Hello Attorney`s
I am in a weird situation here, I was Laid off on July 21st with pay in lieu until 4th August. I had applied for Change of Status to F2 (my wife is on F1) on 17th August. On 31st August I got a job offer and applied for H1B transfer to USCIS on 8th September (using 15th august paystub as the latest).
At the same time i filed to USCIS to revoke my F2 application.
Today I got a notice from USCIS that my application for change of status to F2 is approved as of 09/21/2009.
Now, I dont know what to do, does it mean I am now on F2? Is my H1B transfer application still valid or I need to apply again this time on premium processing.
What should be my next course of action. Any help in this regard would be highly appreciated.
Thanks so much..!!
Have a great day..!
I am in a weird situation here, I was Laid off on July 21st with pay in lieu until 4th August. I had applied for Change of Status to F2 (my wife is on F1) on 17th August. On 31st August I got a job offer and applied for H1B transfer to USCIS on 8th September (using 15th august paystub as the latest).
At the same time i filed to USCIS to revoke my F2 application.
Today I got a notice from USCIS that my application for change of status to F2 is approved as of 09/21/2009.
Now, I dont know what to do, does it mean I am now on F2? Is my H1B transfer application still valid or I need to apply again this time on premium processing.
What should be my next course of action. Any help in this regard would be highly appreciated.
Thanks so much..!!
Have a great day..!
more...
j751
06-05 04:57 PM
People,
I filed my I-140 at NSC, but when I check case status online it says my I-140 was transfered to another Service center. It does not say which Service center though. My lawyer says he got all his mails form CSC, which means my I-140 is pending at CSC. Also my case number starts with WAC-XXX-XXXX, which also suggests that my case is pending at CSC. However, I am not convinced if this is correct because CSC does not publish processing times for I-140. Also, recently when I filed AR-11 for an address change I got an email from USCIS with the address of TSC on it. I would like to know if anyone is in the same boat and knows which service center there case is. I will appreciate your feedback.
Thanks,
I filed my I-140 at NSC, but when I check case status online it says my I-140 was transfered to another Service center. It does not say which Service center though. My lawyer says he got all his mails form CSC, which means my I-140 is pending at CSC. Also my case number starts with WAC-XXX-XXXX, which also suggests that my case is pending at CSC. However, I am not convinced if this is correct because CSC does not publish processing times for I-140. Also, recently when I filed AR-11 for an address change I got an email from USCIS with the address of TSC on it. I would like to know if anyone is in the same boat and knows which service center there case is. I will appreciate your feedback.
Thanks,
hot Pablo Picasso cartoon 7
Pagal
04-23 07:40 AM
Hello,
If you have a valid dual purpose visa like H-1B, then you don't need AP to reenter US, but if your visa has expired, then you must hold AP to reenter the US. EAD is work authorization (which allows you to pursue employment without restrictions inside US), but it is not a travel authorization.
If you have a valid dual purpose visa like H-1B, then you don't need AP to reenter US, but if your visa has expired, then you must hold AP to reenter the US. EAD is work authorization (which allows you to pursue employment without restrictions inside US), but it is not a travel authorization.
more...
house pablo picasso from the
alien02k
03-23 09:06 PM
I am on H1B all these days and now my company wants me to mandatory move to EAD. (no option here). I also had my H1B approved for an other 3 years.
1) Is it a good idea to move on EAD now.
2)Its been close to 6 years on my H1 but I still have 8 months left on the initial 6 years. Can i use the left out period on H1B later.
3)Now that I am on EAD, if i need to move my employer, can I invoke the AC21. if yes what should I do... do i just need to resign at the current place and join at the company b.
4)Can my employer revoke the I140, considering that its already been more than 180days since approved.
Note: I have my 485 pending and 140 approved in April 2008 and I am a July 2007 filer with a priority date of June 24th 2007.
Your responses are highly appreciated.
Thank you
1) Is it a good idea to move on EAD now.
2)Its been close to 6 years on my H1 but I still have 8 months left on the initial 6 years. Can i use the left out period on H1B later.
3)Now that I am on EAD, if i need to move my employer, can I invoke the AC21. if yes what should I do... do i just need to resign at the current place and join at the company b.
4)Can my employer revoke the I140, considering that its already been more than 180days since approved.
Note: I have my 485 pending and 140 approved in April 2008 and I am a July 2007 filer with a priority date of June 24th 2007.
Your responses are highly appreciated.
Thank you
tattoo Art Lesson Plans: Abstraction
Karthikthiru
06-10 04:43 PM
Interesting
Karthik
Karthik
more...
pictures art activities lesson
gecceg
05-02 03:25 PM
Thanks
dresses concluded that Picasso had
Dj-Studios
03-08 04:33 PM
I did this thinking it was like that one thread but I was wrong but I'm putting this here anyway... 5 min worth.
http://wacreative.com/12HourDays.jpg
http://wacreative.com/12HourDays.jpg
more...
makeup nudity in Picasso#39;s art?
soms
11-18 01:55 PM
Hello,
I am on a H1B with company A. I've been offered a job with company B which is currently processing my H1 transfer paperwork. I had accepted the offer letter from company B and had submitted all my papers for H1B transfer.
The starting date in the company B is 20th Nov as per offer letter. Now I had decided to stay back with the company A (by 18th Nov) before joining the company B. Is there any issue by doing so?
I am on a H1B with company A. I've been offered a job with company B which is currently processing my H1 transfer paperwork. I had accepted the offer letter from company B and had submitted all my papers for H1B transfer.
The starting date in the company B is 20th Nov as per offer letter. Now I had decided to stay back with the company A (by 18th Nov) before joining the company B. Is there any issue by doing so?
girlfriend th century avant-garde art
black_logs
05-26 03:33 PM
Guys, looks like we are facing a veiled attack from the rival groups. It is evident from some posts. Since morning we are busy repeatedly saying same things to these people. I am deleting all their posts and banning their user ids. If you see any damaging post report it to us clicking on the exclamation mark next to the post.
ED: Please click on the exclamation mark next to the post instead of replying to this thread. Thanks
ED: Please click on the exclamation mark next to the post instead of replying to this thread. Thanks
hairstyles with PIcasso#39;s art.
black_logs
01-24 07:28 PM
As a policy we call and verify each volunteer before we sign up. I will apreciate if you could send me an email with your contact numbers
black_logs@yahoo.com. Or PM me your contact info.
Thanks
Please sign me in for WA state. I live in Vancouver, WA.
black_logs@yahoo.com. Or PM me your contact info.
Thanks
Please sign me in for WA state. I live in Vancouver, WA.
njdude26
07-07 08:19 AM
please...
kamlesh
12-19 05:36 PM
I am on L1 visa since May 10, and have plans to switch to H1 without going back to India. My employer is not ready to provide experience and relieving letters, if I dont resign and I cant resign, since I need to pay 5000$.
1) So, does it make a problem while applying for GC, If I dont have these letters from present employer.
2) Inlcuding present company's experience only , I will be able to qualify for EB2 category. But I will not be having letters from my present employer to show that I am having 5 years experience.
Is it must to have experience and reliving letters from all my employers? What are the options for me now? :confused:
1) So, does it make a problem while applying for GC, If I dont have these letters from present employer.
2) Inlcuding present company's experience only , I will be able to qualify for EB2 category. But I will not be having letters from my present employer to show that I am having 5 years experience.
Is it must to have experience and reliving letters from all my employers? What are the options for me now? :confused:
No comments:
Post a Comment