x1050us
06-26 05:03 PM
My attorney says the real problem is, chennai wants a copy of primary applicants valid visa stamp if applying separately. Which means I have to get out of the country to get a visa stamp for sake of my spouse. I am thinking of flying to India and get my visa stamped along with my wife (don't know if vfs will allow me to add an application now). Any other suggestions?
wallpaper i love you baby boy quotes.
jetr
08-27 12:25 PM
Can you please Post the Dates of when you applied for I-140 & when you were APPROVED.
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
bfadlia
03-15 09:26 AM
My wife and I did our medicals last July and applied for our I485. However, my wife was pregnant so the doctor decided to not do x-rays and some vaccinations and inform USCIS it should be done after the pregnancy.
Now after we had the baby, do we have to wait for an RFE to come asking us for the missing part of the medical? Or can we be proactive and go complete the medicals and send it to USCIS?
Our PD and RD are close to becoming current, so we may benefit if the second scenario is possible.
Now after we had the baby, do we have to wait for an RFE to come asking us for the missing part of the medical? Or can we be proactive and go complete the medicals and send it to USCIS?
Our PD and RD are close to becoming current, so we may benefit if the second scenario is possible.
2011 i love you baby boy poems. i
pa_arora
06-25 01:35 PM
Apply with current passport copy. Also attach the receipt of Renewal of Passport.
Don't wait for July to pass.
And for Affidavits, my attorney wants copies not the originals.
Good Luck
Don't wait for July to pass.
And for Affidavits, my attorney wants copies not the originals.
Good Luck
more...
roseball
01-18 01:34 PM
If "if you re-enter US before your extension is valid" is not the case then following is my experience.
Once you get the new H1 visa stamped, the old visa is "cancelled without prejudice" by the consulate. The consulate puts a stamp to that effect on your old visa in the passport. I don't see how an IO would consider the old H1 Valid at that point. I have gone through similar scenario once.
You are right, I stand corrected. I was referring to the scenario when trying to re-enter on the current VISA stamp without getting a new VISA stamp and expecting to get an I-94 till the validity of the approved extension.
Once you get the new H1 visa stamped, the old visa is "cancelled without prejudice" by the consulate. The consulate puts a stamp to that effect on your old visa in the passport. I don't see how an IO would consider the old H1 Valid at that point. I have gone through similar scenario once.
You are right, I stand corrected. I was referring to the scenario when trying to re-enter on the current VISA stamp without getting a new VISA stamp and expecting to get an I-94 till the validity of the approved extension.
gova123
07-27 05:25 PM
Hi Guys:
One of the forum member AbhijitP has a signature that I could not understand. Can anyone give me a little bit more info on his signature.
"I-140: EB-2, approved as EB-3: pending resolution
Successor in Interest I-140: Pending"
Does it mean that his I-140 is approved under EB-2 or EB-3?
So if someone has applied under EB-2, how come it is approved as EB-3
Thanks
One of the forum member AbhijitP has a signature that I could not understand. Can anyone give me a little bit more info on his signature.
"I-140: EB-2, approved as EB-3: pending resolution
Successor in Interest I-140: Pending"
Does it mean that his I-140 is approved under EB-2 or EB-3?
So if someone has applied under EB-2, how come it is approved as EB-3
Thanks
more...
.jpg "i love you baby boy quotes.")
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
2010 i love you baby boy quotes.
bombaysardar
07-23 03:35 PM
J. BARRRET - Jul 2nd at 10:25 AM
same person, same time :)
same person, same time :)
more...
3ZS
May 11th, 2006, 07:36 PM
Hi -
I just bought a nikon d50 kit and the dealer sold me sigma lens' with the kit. I have since upgraded the camera body to a d70S. Now I am having problems with the lens', autofocus doesnt work all the time. Sometimes it works...then other times it wont focus at all.
Does anyone know if the sigma 18-50mm and the 70-300mm af/mf lens' are compatable with the d70s?
The dealer told me the sigma lens were better then the nikor lens' because they have a metal mount whereas the mikor was a plastic mount. is this true and is this somethign i really should have worried about?
I just bought a nikon d50 kit and the dealer sold me sigma lens' with the kit. I have since upgraded the camera body to a d70S. Now I am having problems with the lens', autofocus doesnt work all the time. Sometimes it works...then other times it wont focus at all.
Does anyone know if the sigma 18-50mm and the 70-300mm af/mf lens' are compatable with the d70s?
The dealer told me the sigma lens were better then the nikor lens' because they have a metal mount whereas the mikor was a plastic mount. is this true and is this somethign i really should have worried about?
hair quotes and pics. i love you
rjgleason
January 17th, 2005, 07:10 PM
Thanks guys!
Bob, I'm clueless on portrait photography, but they look very good to me! :)
As far as the games is concerned, I try to keep the shutter speed at 1/500 or maybe 1/400 if necessary, to freeze motion reasonably well. There's still movement visible on sticks and pucks, but that's fine IMO. The arenas I've been to so far (small local areans for lower divisions) generally have poor lighting so... I usually get f/2-f/2.8 and 1/500 or thereabouts, and I'm still underexposing slightly. Use larger apertures and too much is OOF, the DOF is too shallow as it is. I'd love to try hockey in better light.
EDIT: Forgot the lenses... most good ones seem to come from 300/2.8 (mostly from the seats as it's on the long side), 135/2 (best results so far) and 85/1.8. My 70-200/2.8 is a bit of a disappointment, it is nowhere near as good as the 135/2 when used wide open. I've also started playing around a bit with wide-angles, it can give you some unusual action shots as long as you have the nerve to remain by the boards when the players come storming by. :)
Anders, I am sorry I piggybacked on your post......but thanks again for you tips.
Bob, I'm clueless on portrait photography, but they look very good to me! :)
As far as the games is concerned, I try to keep the shutter speed at 1/500 or maybe 1/400 if necessary, to freeze motion reasonably well. There's still movement visible on sticks and pucks, but that's fine IMO. The arenas I've been to so far (small local areans for lower divisions) generally have poor lighting so... I usually get f/2-f/2.8 and 1/500 or thereabouts, and I'm still underexposing slightly. Use larger apertures and too much is OOF, the DOF is too shallow as it is. I'd love to try hockey in better light.
EDIT: Forgot the lenses... most good ones seem to come from 300/2.8 (mostly from the seats as it's on the long side), 135/2 (best results so far) and 85/1.8. My 70-200/2.8 is a bit of a disappointment, it is nowhere near as good as the 135/2 when used wide open. I've also started playing around a bit with wide-angles, it can give you some unusual action shots as long as you have the nerve to remain by the boards when the players come storming by. :)
Anders, I am sorry I piggybacked on your post......but thanks again for you tips.
more...
Student with no hopes
04-21 07:39 AM
Our leaders� promises are meaningless if they don�t turn their rhetoric into concrete actions and legislation. President Obama, Congress, and the bureaucracy in Washington DC have not delivered the action America needs. We�re marching on May 1st to show them, and the world, that we�re not going to let them get away with it.
VERY TRUE! These politicians need to be held accountable for their talks and no actions, and if this march is going to help in that direction, then we should do it.
VERY TRUE! These politicians need to be held accountable for their talks and no actions, and if this march is going to help in that direction, then we should do it.
hot makeup i love you baby boy
sioux
12-21 08:34 AM
There is no limit on the amount of money that a person can bring in. However if a person is carrying $10 k (this includes cash, travellers check, bank draft etc) or >5k in cash then that has to be declared at customs and person should go through Red Channel.
Are there any fees that has to be paid when the amount is declared? And is this for visitors only?
Are there any fees that has to be paid when the amount is declared? And is this for visitors only?
more...
house i love you baby boy quotes. i
eb3_nepa
02-18 11:17 AM
Your reasoning is nearly correct. But you are missing Two points:
1. There will be some cases from BECs which could not file AOSs in time since their labors did not clear for them in the july/aug timeframe. Only when these have cleared will the chances of further retrogression decrease.
2. ALSO - Just as an example, If there are 100000 Eb2s with PDs of 2005. We know that there are NOT 10000 visa #s available for EB2s, in that case too, the dates will retrogress - since thats the only way they can prevent visa #s being used.
Am I making much sense ?
My point here is:
Now there is NO reason for the DOS to miscalculate or not know how many applications are out there for AOS.
Someone mentioned that some BEC ppl were not able to apply for AOS coz their applications did not get released in time, that is a valid point. So maybe we should see one last backward movement if any and then it should be strictly forward movement. VERY SLOW movement i agree but forward movement.
1. There will be some cases from BECs which could not file AOSs in time since their labors did not clear for them in the july/aug timeframe. Only when these have cleared will the chances of further retrogression decrease.
2. ALSO - Just as an example, If there are 100000 Eb2s with PDs of 2005. We know that there are NOT 10000 visa #s available for EB2s, in that case too, the dates will retrogress - since thats the only way they can prevent visa #s being used.
Am I making much sense ?
My point here is:
Now there is NO reason for the DOS to miscalculate or not know how many applications are out there for AOS.
Someone mentioned that some BEC ppl were not able to apply for AOS coz their applications did not get released in time, that is a valid point. So maybe we should see one last backward movement if any and then it should be strictly forward movement. VERY SLOW movement i agree but forward movement.
tattoo i love you baby oy quotes.
BECsufferer
10-02 01:17 PM
Literally, windsor(Canada) and Detroit (USA) are seperated by river, so keeping GC and PR is like riding in two boats ... not possible. While Canadians are liberal in allowing their immigrants to travel daily into US to conduct their jobs ( that brings easy tax $$), it would be inconvienent to track daily movements out of country for GC. Remember at US citizenship, you will be asked to provide detailed log of trvels outside the country. So trip to Windsor is technically outside the country.
I had Canadian PR and am giving it up, because I finally got GC. With GCI can trvel freely into Canada. Plus even before Canadian PR, I never lived in Canada nor do I plan to in future. So why bother.
I had Canadian PR and am giving it up, because I finally got GC. With GCI can trvel freely into Canada. Plus even before Canadian PR, I never lived in Canada nor do I plan to in future. So why bother.
more...
pictures i love you baby boy quotes.
JunRN
07-18 10:29 AM
I discussed this to a lawyer. He said that even if I file in August, it will still be accepted since I am qualified to apply in July. This is a bit confusing.
I was thinking of looking for new employer which already has all the paperworks done (10 + 30 days). These are valid until 180 days. I hope to find one so that I can file this July.
I was thinking of looking for new employer which already has all the paperworks done (10 + 30 days). These are valid until 180 days. I hope to find one so that I can file this July.
dresses hair love you always quotes. i
drirshad
07-09 09:42 PM
White flowers to recovering soldiers, don't make sense to me ..
more...
makeup hairstyles sad love quotes
lost_in_migration
05-25 07:48 AM
Sent
girlfriend i love you baby boy quotes.
trump_gc
07-13 10:57 AM
If she has an EAD she should be fine with the status, if she does not have one, may be u could apply one for her
hairstyles house love you always quotes.
GLIX
02-23 07:37 AM
so how long did it take for them to approve your 485 from the time you had your fingerprinting done.
sertasheep
07-01 06:23 PM
I don't think there's a way one can display the names of the people who participated in this poll.
immgirl
06-03 12:20 AM
Don't be ridiculous. If your I-140 and I-485 are approved, this will not affect it. They are auditing PERM that is in process. FYI- Your employer needs to show that there are no qualified US workers for the position that they are recruiting for on PERM. This audit is about employers using FDBL to try to disqualify qualified US workers. This audit will delay PERM applications, but will not affect I-140 s or I-485's that are approved.
No comments:
Post a Comment