fenirpola
08-22 11:45 AM
Hi,
My I-140 finally got approved last week. I'm a concurrent July 2nd 2007 filer. My I-140 was initially denied and was approved on appeal. The process took some time and created a new problem for me.
I looked at the USCIS website and they're currently working on cases filed on July 16. It seems my case (485) came and was passed on as my I-140 was pending at the time.
What can I do now?
My I-140 finally got approved last week. I'm a concurrent July 2nd 2007 filer. My I-140 was initially denied and was approved on appeal. The process took some time and created a new problem for me.
I looked at the USCIS website and they're currently working on cases filed on July 16. It seems my case (485) came and was passed on as my I-140 was pending at the time.
What can I do now?
wallpaper sweeping bangs, Portia De
kernel_flash
01-21 03:24 AM
Here is my first official entry
Made in hurry !!!!
Preview
http://megaswf.com/view/74494201d407c983ec7ffcd16de342e0.html
Cheers
Kernel
Made in hurry !!!!
Preview
http://megaswf.com/view/74494201d407c983ec7ffcd16de342e0.html
Cheers
Kernel
Leo07
02-08 12:09 PM
Your obligations to IRS does not interfere with your GC process. This is not a "work" that you are getting paid for, outside your LCA.
It is very common and people before you have faced it and people after you will face it. Calm down and take this one worry off your list.
It is very common and people before you have faced it and people after you will face it. Calm down and take this one worry off your list.
2011 Side Swept Bangs Hairstyling
martinvisalaw
06-03 06:08 PM
You should change to H-4 (assuming you are eligible) if you are not working. You should be able to change back H-1B later and get the remainder of your 6 years, without being subject to the cap, if you find a new employer. It is important not to violate status now, and not working violates your H-1 status even if the lack of work is not your choice.
more...
Blog Feeds
12-18 09:50 AM
On November 27, the USCIS announced that they had received 58,900 H-1B petitions toward the 65,000 cap. So there are 6,100 numbers remaining, correct? (Update: By December 4, the USCIS had received 61,100 H-1B petitions toward the 65,000 cap.) Not exactly. We have Free Trade Agreements with both Singapore and Chile which set aside 6,800 "H-1B1" numbers for nationals of those countries. Do the math: 65,000 minus 6,800 equals 58,200. This means that the agency has received 700 more H-1B petitions than it can approve. Why then is the USCIS still accepting H-1B petitions? Because some of the petitions that...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/12/why-uscis-is-still-accepting-h1b-petitions.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/12/why-uscis-is-still-accepting-h1b-petitions.html)
sss9i
09-27 02:44 AM
http://www.shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=23415
more...
Blog Feeds
07-31 06:50 PM
I've written a number of times that we need to think about pursuing piecemeal immigration reform and give up on the notion of a comprehensive solution. The reason for this is simple math - you need Republican votes in the Senate to make it happen and the Republican Party has moved so far in to the Tea Party camp that it can't even muster a single pro-immigration voice. Lindsey Graham was that sole voice for much of 2009, but he walked away from the table in the spring and his latest pronouncements on the topic indicate that much like his...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/how-we-know-its-time-to-declare-cir-dead.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/how-we-know-its-time-to-declare-cir-dead.html)
2010 Flattering Haircuts for Curly
jcrajput
01-03 10:08 AM
We have received our EAD cards without having Finger Print done. We have received FP notice and scheduled for the next week but received our EAD cards.
EAD cards says "No Finger print available" on the right corner. Will this cause any problems?
Please advice.
Thank you.
EAD cards says "No Finger print available" on the right corner. Will this cause any problems?
Please advice.
Thank you.
more...
valuablehurdle
07-24 10:19 PM
I am ready to support your move in any way possible. I live in PA. Let nme know how I should move forward.
hair new haircut two, originally
srisai122
12-30 04:06 AM
Company A filed my I-140 and it got approved, however I have not been provided with copy of the approval notice. I don't have the receipt number either. In this case, is it possible to obtain the copy of I-140 thru FOIA (Freedom of Information Act)?
Thank you for the help.
Thank you for the help.
more...
Kullesh
07-22 02:50 PM
Hi, I was in India when my husband applied for my H1B in 2008. I got it picked in lottery and got the approval too. I came to US on H4. After Oct 1st 2008, we applied for Change of Status to H4 to legally complete the work permit process. In the Change of Status applicatin form, my company accidently did a mistake of mentioning that Current status=H1B, New status required=H1B. :mad: USICIS, on seeing the application, took a decision to give me H4 with new I-94. I tried calling the USCIS helpdesk, but in vain. :confused:
1) Now what should I do to start working in H1B?
2) Was I correct in ging throughChange of Status? Or could I start working with the approval copy I had?
3) Could I apply for SSN with the 2008 approval copy?
Any answers would be greatly apprrciated!. Thanks in advance........
1) Now what should I do to start working in H1B?
2) Was I correct in ging throughChange of Status? Or could I start working with the approval copy I had?
3) Could I apply for SSN with the 2008 approval copy?
Any answers would be greatly apprrciated!. Thanks in advance........
hot with sweeping bangs
viva
01-25 09:27 PM
why do u want to move to europe? states is fairly good country.
more...
house and the sweeping bang is a
pussyket
11-10 03:37 PM
Hi,
I have been married to a US Citizen for more than 6 years and my green card was issued 5years ago. My green card was issued thru marriage. On the N-400 application form for citizenship what should I use as my eligibility? marriage or being a lawful permanent resident for at least 5 years? Thanks :)
I have been married to a US Citizen for more than 6 years and my green card was issued 5years ago. My green card was issued thru marriage. On the N-400 application form for citizenship what should I use as my eligibility? marriage or being a lawful permanent resident for at least 5 years? Thanks :)
tattoo Hairstyle with angs for 2011
antwoods
07-04 03:28 AM
I'm a little confused about my options in starting my H1 extension process and applying for my wife's H4 application.
Here is my current status :
6 yr H1-B period is ending on Dec 22, 2009. I'm getting married in India in October and will apply for my wife's H4 immediately after. Here are my questions :
1. Will there be any problem with my wife's H4 application if there are just 2 months of validity left on my H1 visa?
2. I could potentially start my H1 extension process now. I'm eligible for a 3 year extension since the Priority date of Jan 3, 2006, on my EB2 application is not current. If I was to start my extension process now, my approval may not happen before October and my lawyer there may be some problems if I travel outside the country on a pending H1 application. Should I apply for my H1 extension now or after I come back to the US in November?
3. If I was to apply for H1 extension in Nov and don't get an approval by the time of my current H1 expiry in December, will I be out of status?
Thanks.
Here is my current status :
6 yr H1-B period is ending on Dec 22, 2009. I'm getting married in India in October and will apply for my wife's H4 immediately after. Here are my questions :
1. Will there be any problem with my wife's H4 application if there are just 2 months of validity left on my H1 visa?
2. I could potentially start my H1 extension process now. I'm eligible for a 3 year extension since the Priority date of Jan 3, 2006, on my EB2 application is not current. If I was to start my extension process now, my approval may not happen before October and my lawyer there may be some problems if I travel outside the country on a pending H1 application. Should I apply for my H1 extension now or after I come back to the US in November?
3. If I was to apply for H1 extension in Nov and don't get an approval by the time of my current H1 expiry in December, will I be out of status?
Thanks.
more...
pictures eyebrow sweeping bang.
Citizen of the World
01-18 11:01 AM
NVS International--www.nogalesvisaservices.com
The U.S. Consulate in Nogales Mexico has been really efficient in issuing appointments as well as Visa Stampings. You are able to schedule them in one week from the date you apply; the process takes no more than two days. 98% of NVS's Clients in the last month have been in and out on the same day of the appointment with no issues. There have been a few cases where people had to stay one or two extra days for additional proccessing.
If you need any help with anything from: Transportation (From the Airport to Nogales and within Mexico to the U.S. Consulate), Visa Application fee processing (Bank Draft) and Lodging please contact:
NVS International and visit us at: www.nogalesvisaservices.com or e-mail: japujol@nogalesvisaservices.com.
NVS International's staff is fully bilingual (English/Spanish) and all natives of Nogales. They really help make your visit as simple and worry free as possible. The staff makes sure you get to your appointment on time and assists you until you get in and make sure you have no problems until you are back in the USA.
The U.S. Consulate in Nogales Mexico has been really efficient in issuing appointments as well as Visa Stampings. You are able to schedule them in one week from the date you apply; the process takes no more than two days. 98% of NVS's Clients in the last month have been in and out on the same day of the appointment with no issues. There have been a few cases where people had to stay one or two extra days for additional proccessing.
If you need any help with anything from: Transportation (From the Airport to Nogales and within Mexico to the U.S. Consulate), Visa Application fee processing (Bank Draft) and Lodging please contact:
NVS International and visit us at: www.nogalesvisaservices.com or e-mail: japujol@nogalesvisaservices.com.
NVS International's staff is fully bilingual (English/Spanish) and all natives of Nogales. They really help make your visit as simple and worry free as possible. The staff makes sure you get to your appointment on time and assists you until you get in and make sure you have no problems until you are back in the USA.
dresses Sarah Jessica Parker Hairstyle
Macaca
11-11 08:15 AM
Extreme Politics (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/books/review/Brinkley-t.html) By ALAN BRINKLEY | New York Times, November 11, 2007
Alan Brinkley is the Allan Nevins professor of history and the provost at Columbia University.
Few people would dispute that the politics of Washington are as polarized today as they have been in decades. The question Ronald Brownstein poses in this provocative book is whether what he calls “extreme partisanship” is simply a result of the tactics of recent party leaders, or whether it is an enduring product of a systemic change in the structure and behavior of the political world. Brownstein, formerly the chief political correspondent for The Los Angeles Times and now the political director of the Atlantic Media Company, gives considerable credence to both explanations. But the most important part of “The Second Civil War” — and the most debatable — is his claim that the current political climate is the logical, perhaps even inevitable, result of a structural change that stretched over a generation.
A half-century ago, Brownstein says, the two parties looked very different from how they appear today. The Democratic Party was a motley combination of the conservative white South; workers in the industrial North as well as African-Americans and other minorities; and cosmopolitan liberals in the major cities of the East and West Coasts. Republicans dominated the suburbs, the business world, the farm belt and traditional elites. But the constituencies of both parties were sufficiently diverse, both demographically and ideologically, to mute the differences between them. There were enough liberals in the Republican Party, and enough conservatives among the Democrats, to require continual negotiation and compromise and to permit either party to help shape policy and to be competitive in most elections. Brownstein calls this “the Age of Bargaining,” and while he concedes that this era helped prevent bold decisions (like confronting racial discrimination), he clearly prefers it to the fractious world that followed.
The turbulent politics of the 1960s and ’70s introduced newly ideological perspectives to the two major parties and inaugurated what Brownstein calls “the great sorting out” — a movement of politicians and voters into two ideological camps, one dominated by an intensified conservatism and the other by an aggressive liberalism. By the end of the 1970s, he argues, the Republican Party was no longer a broad coalition but a party dominated by its most conservative voices; the Democratic Party had become a more consistently liberal force, and had similarly banished many of its dissenting voices. Some scholars and critics of American politics in the 1950s had called for exactly such a change, insisting that clear ideological differences would give voters a real choice and thus a greater role in the democratic process. But to Brownstein, the “sorting out” was a catastrophe that led directly to the meanspirited, take-no-prisoners partisanship of today.
There is considerable truth in this story. But the transformation of American politics that he describes was the product of more extensive forces than he allows and has been, at least so far, less profound than he claims. Brownstein correctly cites the Democrats’ embrace of the civil rights movement as a catalyst for partisan change — moving the white South solidly into the Republican Party and shifting it farther to the right, while pushing the Democrats farther to the left. But he offers few other explanations for “the great sorting out” beyond the preferences and behavior of party leaders. A more persuasive explanation would have to include other large social changes: the enormous shift of population into the Sun Belt over the last several decades; the new immigration and the dramatic increase it created in ethnic minorities within the electorate; the escalation of economic inequality, beginning in the 1970s, which raised the expectations of the wealthy and the anxiety of lower-middle-class and working-class people (an anxiety conservatives used to gain support for lowering taxes and attacking government); the end of the cold war and the emergence of a much less stable international system; and perhaps most of all, the movement of much of the political center out of the party system altogether and into the largest single category of voters — independents. Voters may not have changed their ideology very much. Most evidence suggests that a majority of Americans remain relatively moderate and pragmatic. But many have lost interest, and confidence, in the political system and the government, leaving the most fervent party loyalists with greatly increased influence on the choice of candidates and policies.
Brownstein skillfully and convincingly recounts the process by which the conservative movement gained control of the Republican Party and its Congressional delegation. He is especially deft at identifying the institutional and procedural tools that the most conservative wing of the party used after 2000 both to vanquish Republican moderates and to limit the ability of the Democratic minority to participate meaningfully in the legislative process. He is less successful (and somewhat halfhearted) in making the case for a comparable ideological homogeneity among the Democrats, as becomes clear in the book’s opening passage. Brownstein appropriately cites the former House Republican leader Tom DeLay’s farewell speech in 2006 as a sign of his party’s recent strategy. DeLay ridiculed those who complained about “bitter, divisive partisan rancor.” Partisanship, he stated, “is not a symptom of democracy’s weakness but of its health and its strength.”
But making the same argument about a similar dogmatism and zealotry among Democrats is a considerable stretch. To make this case, Brownstein cites not an elected official (let alone a Congressional leader), but the readers of the Daily Kos, a popular left-wing/libertarian Web site that promotes what Brownstein calls “a scorched-earth opposition to the G.O.P.” According to him, “DeLay and the Democratic Internet activists ... each sought to reconfigure their political party to the same specifications — as a warrior party that would commit to opposing the other side with every conceivable means at its disposal.” The Kos is a significant force, and some leading Democrats have attended its yearly conventions. But few party leaders share the most extreme views of Kos supporters, and even fewer embrace their “passionate partisanship.” Many Democrats might wish that their party leaders would emulate the aggressively partisan style of the Republican right. But it would be hard to argue that they have come even remotely close to the ideological purity of their conservative counterparts. More often, they have seemed cowed and timorous in the face of Republican discipline, and have over time themselves moved increasingly rightward; their recapture of Congress has so far appeared to have emboldened them only modestly.
There is no definitive answer to the question of whether the current level of polarization is the inevitable result of long-term systemic changes, or whether it is a transitory product of a particular political moment. But much of this so-called age of extreme partisanship has looked very much like Brownstein’s “Age of Bargaining.” Ronald Reagan, the great hero of the right and a much more effective spokesman for its views than President Bush, certainly oversaw a significant shift in the ideology and policy of the Republican Party. But through much of his presidency, both he and the Congressional Republicans displayed considerable pragmatism, engaged in negotiation with their opponents and accepted many compromises. Bill Clinton, bedeviled though he was by partisan fury, was a master of compromise and negotiation — and of co-opting and transforming the views of his adversaries. Only under George W. Bush — through a combination of his control of both houses of Congress, his own inflexibility and the post-9/11 climate — did extreme partisanship manage to dominate the agenda. Given the apparent failure of this project, it seems unlikely that a new president, whether Democrat or Republican, will be able to recreate the dispiriting political world of the last seven years.
Division of the U.S. Didn’t Occur Overnight (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/books/13kaku.html) By MICHIKO KAKUTANI | New York Times, November 13, 2007
THE SECOND CIVIL WAR How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America By Ronald Brownstein, The Penguin Press. $27.95
Alan Brinkley is the Allan Nevins professor of history and the provost at Columbia University.
Few people would dispute that the politics of Washington are as polarized today as they have been in decades. The question Ronald Brownstein poses in this provocative book is whether what he calls “extreme partisanship” is simply a result of the tactics of recent party leaders, or whether it is an enduring product of a systemic change in the structure and behavior of the political world. Brownstein, formerly the chief political correspondent for The Los Angeles Times and now the political director of the Atlantic Media Company, gives considerable credence to both explanations. But the most important part of “The Second Civil War” — and the most debatable — is his claim that the current political climate is the logical, perhaps even inevitable, result of a structural change that stretched over a generation.
A half-century ago, Brownstein says, the two parties looked very different from how they appear today. The Democratic Party was a motley combination of the conservative white South; workers in the industrial North as well as African-Americans and other minorities; and cosmopolitan liberals in the major cities of the East and West Coasts. Republicans dominated the suburbs, the business world, the farm belt and traditional elites. But the constituencies of both parties were sufficiently diverse, both demographically and ideologically, to mute the differences between them. There were enough liberals in the Republican Party, and enough conservatives among the Democrats, to require continual negotiation and compromise and to permit either party to help shape policy and to be competitive in most elections. Brownstein calls this “the Age of Bargaining,” and while he concedes that this era helped prevent bold decisions (like confronting racial discrimination), he clearly prefers it to the fractious world that followed.
The turbulent politics of the 1960s and ’70s introduced newly ideological perspectives to the two major parties and inaugurated what Brownstein calls “the great sorting out” — a movement of politicians and voters into two ideological camps, one dominated by an intensified conservatism and the other by an aggressive liberalism. By the end of the 1970s, he argues, the Republican Party was no longer a broad coalition but a party dominated by its most conservative voices; the Democratic Party had become a more consistently liberal force, and had similarly banished many of its dissenting voices. Some scholars and critics of American politics in the 1950s had called for exactly such a change, insisting that clear ideological differences would give voters a real choice and thus a greater role in the democratic process. But to Brownstein, the “sorting out” was a catastrophe that led directly to the meanspirited, take-no-prisoners partisanship of today.
There is considerable truth in this story. But the transformation of American politics that he describes was the product of more extensive forces than he allows and has been, at least so far, less profound than he claims. Brownstein correctly cites the Democrats’ embrace of the civil rights movement as a catalyst for partisan change — moving the white South solidly into the Republican Party and shifting it farther to the right, while pushing the Democrats farther to the left. But he offers few other explanations for “the great sorting out” beyond the preferences and behavior of party leaders. A more persuasive explanation would have to include other large social changes: the enormous shift of population into the Sun Belt over the last several decades; the new immigration and the dramatic increase it created in ethnic minorities within the electorate; the escalation of economic inequality, beginning in the 1970s, which raised the expectations of the wealthy and the anxiety of lower-middle-class and working-class people (an anxiety conservatives used to gain support for lowering taxes and attacking government); the end of the cold war and the emergence of a much less stable international system; and perhaps most of all, the movement of much of the political center out of the party system altogether and into the largest single category of voters — independents. Voters may not have changed their ideology very much. Most evidence suggests that a majority of Americans remain relatively moderate and pragmatic. But many have lost interest, and confidence, in the political system and the government, leaving the most fervent party loyalists with greatly increased influence on the choice of candidates and policies.
Brownstein skillfully and convincingly recounts the process by which the conservative movement gained control of the Republican Party and its Congressional delegation. He is especially deft at identifying the institutional and procedural tools that the most conservative wing of the party used after 2000 both to vanquish Republican moderates and to limit the ability of the Democratic minority to participate meaningfully in the legislative process. He is less successful (and somewhat halfhearted) in making the case for a comparable ideological homogeneity among the Democrats, as becomes clear in the book’s opening passage. Brownstein appropriately cites the former House Republican leader Tom DeLay’s farewell speech in 2006 as a sign of his party’s recent strategy. DeLay ridiculed those who complained about “bitter, divisive partisan rancor.” Partisanship, he stated, “is not a symptom of democracy’s weakness but of its health and its strength.”
But making the same argument about a similar dogmatism and zealotry among Democrats is a considerable stretch. To make this case, Brownstein cites not an elected official (let alone a Congressional leader), but the readers of the Daily Kos, a popular left-wing/libertarian Web site that promotes what Brownstein calls “a scorched-earth opposition to the G.O.P.” According to him, “DeLay and the Democratic Internet activists ... each sought to reconfigure their political party to the same specifications — as a warrior party that would commit to opposing the other side with every conceivable means at its disposal.” The Kos is a significant force, and some leading Democrats have attended its yearly conventions. But few party leaders share the most extreme views of Kos supporters, and even fewer embrace their “passionate partisanship.” Many Democrats might wish that their party leaders would emulate the aggressively partisan style of the Republican right. But it would be hard to argue that they have come even remotely close to the ideological purity of their conservative counterparts. More often, they have seemed cowed and timorous in the face of Republican discipline, and have over time themselves moved increasingly rightward; their recapture of Congress has so far appeared to have emboldened them only modestly.
There is no definitive answer to the question of whether the current level of polarization is the inevitable result of long-term systemic changes, or whether it is a transitory product of a particular political moment. But much of this so-called age of extreme partisanship has looked very much like Brownstein’s “Age of Bargaining.” Ronald Reagan, the great hero of the right and a much more effective spokesman for its views than President Bush, certainly oversaw a significant shift in the ideology and policy of the Republican Party. But through much of his presidency, both he and the Congressional Republicans displayed considerable pragmatism, engaged in negotiation with their opponents and accepted many compromises. Bill Clinton, bedeviled though he was by partisan fury, was a master of compromise and negotiation — and of co-opting and transforming the views of his adversaries. Only under George W. Bush — through a combination of his control of both houses of Congress, his own inflexibility and the post-9/11 climate — did extreme partisanship manage to dominate the agenda. Given the apparent failure of this project, it seems unlikely that a new president, whether Democrat or Republican, will be able to recreate the dispiriting political world of the last seven years.
Division of the U.S. Didn’t Occur Overnight (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/books/13kaku.html) By MICHIKO KAKUTANI | New York Times, November 13, 2007
THE SECOND CIVIL WAR How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America By Ronald Brownstein, The Penguin Press. $27.95
more...
makeup long side sweeping bangs.
GreenMe
06-15 04:09 PM
Hello All,
I am starting my employment based GC process. My employer is going to file for my labour certificate (LC) thru PERM soon.
However, I want to know what happens if you Labour Application is not approved by USCIS?
like - Can you then apply for Labour thru another employer? or start ur Green Card process thru another employer.
- Can you get H1 extension after 6 year period is complete?
Kindly advice.
Regards,
GreenMe
I am starting my employment based GC process. My employer is going to file for my labour certificate (LC) thru PERM soon.
However, I want to know what happens if you Labour Application is not approved by USCIS?
like - Can you then apply for Labour thru another employer? or start ur Green Card process thru another employer.
- Can you get H1 extension after 6 year period is complete?
Kindly advice.
Regards,
GreenMe
girlfriend Sweeping Bangs Hairstyle
rajsenthil
04-29 12:22 PM
I too got the lud for the same date as yours. From the earlier posting, I read that it could be a batch process, which might gave updated the record.
hairstyles and Loose Hairstyle at the
memyselfandus
09-25 11:15 AM
Salary doesn't matter..if it is greater than labor...
sunny1000
08-31 08:59 PM
no.
osprey
02-14 04:46 PM
HOW CAN ONE CHECK THE STATUS OF THE PENDING NAME CHECK OR SECURITY CLEARANCE BY THE DHS AND/OR FBI WHICH IS CAUSING A DELAY IN THE APPROVAL OF I-485s?
IS THERE ANY TIME LINE OR DEADLINE OR DATE BY WHICH SUCH NAME CHECK CAN BE ANTICIPATED TO BE COMPLETED ?
IS THERE ANY TIME LINE OR DEADLINE OR DATE BY WHICH SUCH NAME CHECK CAN BE ANTICIPATED TO BE COMPLETED ?
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий