vivache
02-04 11:00 PM
Was on H4. Have an EAD now. Want to renew.
While renewing, on the form, there are 2 questions:
14 Current Immigration Status
15 Manner of Last Entry
(both seem to have the same answer)
Any idea .. what I need to fill here?
thanks
V
While renewing, on the form, there are 2 questions:
14 Current Immigration Status
15 Manner of Last Entry
(both seem to have the same answer)
Any idea .. what I need to fill here?
thanks
V
wallpaper hairstyles punk short
thesparky007
04-24 01:53 PM
looks nice!
augustus
08-16 09:28 AM
I am seeing people with july 2nd dates getting their checks cashed, and there maybe a quick jump after July 2nd because of the bulletin fiasco we had. And plenty of people have filed after July 17, Could someone tell me if their checks have got cashed? This could be a helpful thread for After 17th filers.
EB3- India
PD- Aug 2005
Application Sent- July 17,reached July 19
Center - Nebraska
EB3- India
PD- Aug 2005
Application Sent- July 17,reached July 19
Center - Nebraska
2011 Girl with bleached short punk
priya777
10-17 12:53 PM
AS my PD is current july2003 EB2 and i have my AP documents.. can i travel to india for 1 month ??? as in case my I-485 is approved when i am in india what will happen to my status?
what all documents do i need to take when i go to india? Please help me
what all documents do i need to take when i go to india? Please help me
more...
newtoh1
05-04 10:46 AM
Hi,
Is there any issues for my Greencard if I work for full time position for a TARP fund received bank using my EAD.?My GC is sponsered by another employer..Now I want to shift to a full time position to a bank which received TARP using EAD.
Is there any issues for my Greencard if I work for full time position for a TARP fund received bank using my EAD.?My GC is sponsered by another employer..Now I want to shift to a full time position to a bank which received TARP using EAD.
medc
02-09 04:53 AM
Do they keep copies of the AOS receipt? Is there any other document which will show the receipt number?
more...
sunnymit
10-12 08:42 PM
Can one work on 1099 when on EAD? My wife just received her EAD and am wondering if she can start working on 1099 or does she need to be on W2? Her 485 was filed based on my EB GC application
2010 punk short hairstyle. Short Punk Rock Hairstyles For
swapwap
April 25th, 2004, 11:42 AM
I have a nikon DSLR and was wondering if anyone out there is purchased a high speed CF card and noticed any improvement in stills?
I have a scan dish 12X speed 512 card and was wondering if it is worht inventing in a lexar 512 40X speed?
I have a scan dish 12X speed 512 card and was wondering if it is worht inventing in a lexar 512 40X speed?
more...
manusingh
09-25 11:13 AM
I used Ap in 2007 and than I filed H-1B extension 6 month prior to my H-1B expiring in sept 2008. which was approved with the sameI-94 as on parolee status.
I want to use AP again, is there any problem.
Has anybody done that.
appreciate your help in advance.
pl. need your advice
I want to use AP again, is there any problem.
Has anybody done that.
appreciate your help in advance.
pl. need your advice
hair punk short hairstyles. Cute Short punk Hairstyles
arnet
10-19 02:27 PM
bump /\/\
more...
vhd999
10-27 01:42 PM
Lawyer Prashanthi Reddy seems to be very helpful.
She was introduced to me by IV through free conference call and we are planning to use her firm to represent my case.
Everyone's experience is different. So, please do your homework.
She was introduced to me by IV through free conference call and we are planning to use her firm to represent my case.
Everyone's experience is different. So, please do your homework.
hot New Punk Short Hairstyles,
stefanv
07-23 07:13 AM
Awesome dude, u got some awesome designing skillz!
more...
house short hairstyles punk. short
yumyum20
08-09 06:06 PM
This is very confusing. I already sent my I-485 along with a new filing fee of $1010 in total $930 for the application and $80 biometric fee last August 3rd. USCIS already received my application my question is are they going to reject my I-485 b/c they just revised that we have to pay the old filing fee for July Bulletin? I used The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y�.
I'm so confused! Due to this, I'm just gonna send another application b/c the chances of them rejecting/returning it back to me is High. If they don't return it back this week then I won't be able to file my I-485 after August 17th. Is ok to send another application? Can I just attach an explanation? I would rather take this chance than not being able to file it again after Aug 17.
Can someone please tell me the old filing fee including the biometric fee??
I just couldn't find this on their website.... I'm so lost.. thanks for the help
I'm so confused! Due to this, I'm just gonna send another application b/c the chances of them rejecting/returning it back to me is High. If they don't return it back this week then I won't be able to file my I-485 after August 17th. Is ok to send another application? Can I just attach an explanation? I would rather take this chance than not being able to file it again after Aug 17.
Can someone please tell me the old filing fee including the biometric fee??
I just couldn't find this on their website.... I'm so lost.. thanks for the help
tattoo New Punk Short Hairstyles,
x1050us
06-15 08:53 PM
My spouse is out of country and she cannot comeback immediately since we are waiting for my H1 extension approval. Taking visa appointment days and airline availability in to consideration, she may not be able to make it back before end of july. I heard you can always add spouse later while 485 is still in progress. What are the implications if I go this path ?
more...
pictures Short Punk hairstyles
rahulpaper
06-14 10:59 AM
With all the uncertainity about dates moving backwards (unpredictable) is it better to go for AOS.
Is it true if you go for CP and dates move back..then your application is not approved untill dates become current?
Please advice
Is it true if you go for CP and dates move back..then your application is not approved untill dates become current?
Please advice
dresses New Cool Short Punk Hairstyles
loku
12-27 07:35 PM
Hi,
I wanted to know how can we find out online whether our company cancelled my I-140 approval or not. I do not want to ask my company so I was looking for any other option telling me whether 140 is still good enough.
let me know.
Thanks in advance.
I wanted to know how can we find out online whether our company cancelled my I-140 approval or not. I do not want to ask my company so I was looking for any other option telling me whether 140 is still good enough.
let me know.
Thanks in advance.
more...
makeup cool short hairstyles
Blog Feeds
11-28 04:21 AM
Roll Call has an interesting analysis of this. Some Democrats believe that they have the votes and they can use immigration reform to brand their party as the true home for the country's Hispanic voters only if they leave the GOP out of the process. And most in the GOP will probably be fine with this except the small number that understand just how dangerous it is for the future of the GOP to be branded the anti-immigrant party.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/the-dems-dilemma-to-bring-or-not-bring-republicans-in-to-immigration-reform-process.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/the-dems-dilemma-to-bring-or-not-bring-republicans-in-to-immigration-reform-process.html)
girlfriend wearing extreme short hair
panchotronera
06-25 03:12 PM
Dear All,
Can someone tell me how long it takes to get 485 filing receipt? Who gets it ,you or the lawyer? What information should a responsible lawyer pass to you after 485 is filed?
Please let me know. It would be good information for everyone.
The thread "June 1st filers" has the responses to your question.
Can someone tell me how long it takes to get 485 filing receipt? Who gets it ,you or the lawyer? What information should a responsible lawyer pass to you after 485 is filed?
Please let me know. It would be good information for everyone.
The thread "June 1st filers" has the responses to your question.
hairstyles Classy Short Punk Hairstyle
arnet
06-12 03:22 PM
:confused: anybody has idea/answers abt this issue?
Macaca
07-24 08:04 AM
Reform, the FDR way (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shlaes23jul23,1,2603353.story) Democrats are right to revere Roosevelt, but even he knew when to reform his own reforms. By Amity Shlaes, AMITY SHLAES is the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg News and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. July 23, 2007
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
garugu
01-12 09:50 AM
Hi,
I am in 7th year of H1B which expires in Dec 2011. I-140 is approved. Applied for H1B extension in Oct2010 (after 6 yrs completed) based on approved I-140 but got extension for only 1 yr till 2011 (got client letter for 1 yr only) . Can i transfer my H1B to new Employer based on my approved I-140 from my current Employer? If so, can i get 3 yr extension with the new Employer or will the new H1B be valid only till 2011?
Thanks
I am in 7th year of H1B which expires in Dec 2011. I-140 is approved. Applied for H1B extension in Oct2010 (after 6 yrs completed) based on approved I-140 but got extension for only 1 yr till 2011 (got client letter for 1 yr only) . Can i transfer my H1B to new Employer based on my approved I-140 from my current Employer? If so, can i get 3 yr extension with the new Employer or will the new H1B be valid only till 2011?
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment