ItIsNotFunny
10-15 04:52 PM
I understand this is not a valid thread to be in this forum. In past I have seen similar post(ex: "Is it a good time to buy house in India"), I would not have posted this today.
There is no personal comment here. This is forum, people get together and talk. At least on this forum, we need to just keep in mind that the energy and concentration should be on immigration issues. The other post you mention is also equally wrong. Somehow most of the time this is voluntary action and its our responsibility to maintain this. By the way, investopedia is one the best sites.
There is no personal comment here. This is forum, people get together and talk. At least on this forum, we need to just keep in mind that the energy and concentration should be on immigration issues. The other post you mention is also equally wrong. Somehow most of the time this is voluntary action and its our responsibility to maintain this. By the way, investopedia is one the best sites.
wallpaper 2005 Toyota Highlander
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
EndlessWait
05-01 12:09 PM
If old I-140 has not been revoked, you are entitled to the old PD.
8 CFR 204.5
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1) , (2) , or (3) priority date. -- A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
it it was not fraudulent.. that's what my lawyer told me
8 CFR 204.5
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1) , (2) , or (3) priority date. -- A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
it it was not fraudulent.. that's what my lawyer told me
2011 2011 Toyota Highlander Details
skagitswimmer
June 6th, 2005, 08:35 AM
Would the 20D or D1MkII have greater tolerances i.e. wider range algorithms in the camera?
more...
veni001
02-03 11:05 AM
That is correct. Mixing and matching with certifications doesn't work. Although I don't know about CPA, if it goes towards professional degree.
That's correct, also if the job requirement is Bachelor + 5 year experience is entirely different from Bachelor or equivalent +5 year experience. Also if you are considering porting with the same employer please read by clicking here (http:///2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html), this is not to scare you but to shed some light on the process.
Good luck!
;)
That's correct, also if the job requirement is Bachelor + 5 year experience is entirely different from Bachelor or equivalent +5 year experience. Also if you are considering porting with the same employer please read by clicking here (http:///2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html), this is not to scare you but to shed some light on the process.
Good luck!
;)
Pagal
09-27 12:04 PM
Hello,
I think you are fine to do day trading on any visa type.
Just because you conduct multiple transactions per day does not legally imply that you are paying any less attention to your regular job.
If you are called for an AOS interview, a curious IO may ask how did you manage both, but you can always show that you did your job well by providing copies of your performance evaluations and/or letters from your supervisors/HR.
In summary, good luck w day trading! Do donate part of the profits to IV... :)
I think you are fine to do day trading on any visa type.
Just because you conduct multiple transactions per day does not legally imply that you are paying any less attention to your regular job.
If you are called for an AOS interview, a curious IO may ask how did you manage both, but you can always show that you did your job well by providing copies of your performance evaluations and/or letters from your supervisors/HR.
In summary, good luck w day trading! Do donate part of the profits to IV... :)
more...
pd_recapturing
08-22 04:16 PM
i sent u a PM. Please respond, if u can.
2010 The Toyota Highlander Hybrid
eager_immi
05-30 01:42 PM
GC is not for you to apply it is based on the employer. Many employers wait to file in the 5th year so you do not leave the company. Also every time your job changes within the company (which is also not in your hand) your employer will re-file labor. So you could have been here like me for 9 years with a priority date on May 2005 and bc of change in job position it will become Dec 2007 and never get your green card.
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
more...
ramus
06-28 04:42 PM
I am sorry.. I don't mean to hurt your feelings.. But this is rumer..
Can you give me link or any other offical source which is saying same thing..
You could have just put this in rumer thred.. Tell me is this helping one...
Everybody is so busy and workiing hard on getting paper work done.. Why do we want to put more burden on them? IF this is true then everybody will know it from different sources. And plus even if this is true what can you do? Can you fight against USCIS?
Hi ramus can you point to the others threads going on this subject?:o I did check other threads to put this info. In fact I don�t want create any new threads. After looking for one that is appropriate, which I did not find, I started this one. The closest one would be the �June 1st filers - receipt � which is a diffrent subject.
This is not a rumor, this a fact and I thought I should share with all so that every one will chill, take it easy and will not stressout in anticipation of 485 approval.
thx.
Can you give me link or any other offical source which is saying same thing..
You could have just put this in rumer thred.. Tell me is this helping one...
Everybody is so busy and workiing hard on getting paper work done.. Why do we want to put more burden on them? IF this is true then everybody will know it from different sources. And plus even if this is true what can you do? Can you fight against USCIS?
Hi ramus can you point to the others threads going on this subject?:o I did check other threads to put this info. In fact I don�t want create any new threads. After looking for one that is appropriate, which I did not find, I started this one. The closest one would be the �June 1st filers - receipt � which is a diffrent subject.
This is not a rumor, this a fact and I thought I should share with all so that every one will chill, take it easy and will not stressout in anticipation of 485 approval.
thx.
hair 2004 Toyota Highlander
linuxra
07-23 03:10 PM
I heard from some other people if they are in vsg their GCs are not getting approved as it is not @ our fault why we need to bear this...I am coming to conclusion that vsg case is affecting employees...any solution u are trying....
more...
frostrated
08-05 04:01 PM
I think this is like saying.....My friends drove on I-101 at 80 MPH and they never get Ticket. Ahhha....Immigration is like game and we never know when you get trapped.
Take advise of your Attorney, still you need to work on your own to get exact information....and correct way of doing.
I think person shouldn't leave country after applying AP and come back with AP which got approved while abroad.
Yes they can if they have VALID H1/H4 Visa stamping.
Thanks.....No offense guys.
VK.
I had to leave the country on work and was outside for close to 4 months. When I left, I had an approved AP1 in hand, and had applied for AP2. AP2 was approved while I was outside the country. I returned on AP2 with no problems.
Take advise of your Attorney, still you need to work on your own to get exact information....and correct way of doing.
I think person shouldn't leave country after applying AP and come back with AP which got approved while abroad.
Yes they can if they have VALID H1/H4 Visa stamping.
Thanks.....No offense guys.
VK.
I had to leave the country on work and was outside for close to 4 months. When I left, I had an approved AP1 in hand, and had applied for AP2. AP2 was approved while I was outside the country. I returned on AP2 with no problems.
hot 2011 Toyota Highlander
pointlesswait
06-04 10:23 AM
looks like yours is a small bank..
call up their central customer service..or talk to the manager.... manager shoudl be of help...else..i guess u have to go in person!
call up their central customer service..or talk to the manager.... manager shoudl be of help...else..i guess u have to go in person!
more...
house LIMITED, AWD, 3RD ROW SEATING.
snathan
08-18 03:16 PM
Thanks for the replies guys....
TXH1B,
The RFE as per my employer is about Vendor/Client Details and a latest paystub from the current job. Since I started working already and was getting paid, my employer generated a paystub and supplied the same.
I think you are in trouble. The USCIS asked for your previous employer's pay stub but you supplied the pay stub from current employer. There is a strong possibility for denial. Then your employment became unauthorized. So hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
TXH1B,
The RFE as per my employer is about Vendor/Client Details and a latest paystub from the current job. Since I started working already and was getting paid, my employer generated a paystub and supplied the same.
I think you are in trouble. The USCIS asked for your previous employer's pay stub but you supplied the pay stub from current employer. There is a strong possibility for denial. Then your employment became unauthorized. So hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
tattoo 2005 Toyota Highlander Base,
ashkam
12-08 02:35 PM
Her H4 is not valid. She did travel to India without an approved AP.
Can we cancel her GC application and bring her back on H4?
Any other options?
According to my attorney, if you are in valid H1 status, your wife can get her H4 stamped, reenter on an H4 and still maintain her GC application. Once she comes back, she can go back to work on her EAD and transition into I-485 pending status.
Can we cancel her GC application and bring her back on H4?
Any other options?
According to my attorney, if you are in valid H1 status, your wife can get her H4 stamped, reenter on an H4 and still maintain her GC application. Once she comes back, she can go back to work on her EAD and transition into I-485 pending status.
more...
pictures 2011 toyota highlander Picture
watertown
03-04 11:02 AM
Gurus,
I'm in Boston area and would like to know your opinion if I should file WOM!!!!
My case was filed in Aug, 2006 and I-485 was transferred to local office for interview on May 22, 2007. The interview went well and the lady officer indicated that I should get my card in 1 month!! That day was so nice!!!
Anyway, the reason for interview was I guess the previous I-485 submitted by my ex-wife after our seperation to put me in trouble in 2001 but I never took any benefit for that and I hand-delivered a letter to the IO when they asked me to come for interview in 2002. I explained that it should have been abandoned coz I sent letter even at the time for finger-print notice! Long story short, my ex and I had fight and I called the cop who took both of us to the custody and in the morning let us go. I didn't see the judge and.
So on this last I-485 (EB-2 ROW) I answered the question NO of if I had ever filled any immigration petition and NO to if I had ever been arrested.
Last year I was getting anxious when the card didn't arrive and Infopass told me that I was stuck in FBI-name check! I asked the congressman Ed Markey and his office told that my name check was cleared in Dec, 2006!!! I took another Infopass and again IO told me about Namecheck but when I told him about the info provided by Congressman, he then told me that it was going thru additional review!!
Now , guys....hsall I file a WOM? Whats your take?
I'm in Boston area and would like to know your opinion if I should file WOM!!!!
My case was filed in Aug, 2006 and I-485 was transferred to local office for interview on May 22, 2007. The interview went well and the lady officer indicated that I should get my card in 1 month!! That day was so nice!!!
Anyway, the reason for interview was I guess the previous I-485 submitted by my ex-wife after our seperation to put me in trouble in 2001 but I never took any benefit for that and I hand-delivered a letter to the IO when they asked me to come for interview in 2002. I explained that it should have been abandoned coz I sent letter even at the time for finger-print notice! Long story short, my ex and I had fight and I called the cop who took both of us to the custody and in the morning let us go. I didn't see the judge and.
So on this last I-485 (EB-2 ROW) I answered the question NO of if I had ever filled any immigration petition and NO to if I had ever been arrested.
Last year I was getting anxious when the card didn't arrive and Infopass told me that I was stuck in FBI-name check! I asked the congressman Ed Markey and his office told that my name check was cleared in Dec, 2006!!! I took another Infopass and again IO told me about Namecheck but when I told him about the info provided by Congressman, he then told me that it was going thru additional review!!
Now , guys....hsall I file a WOM? Whats your take?
dresses A third-row seat now comes
cptbaseball
05-14 11:59 AM
Since your H-1B change of status is approved, you are in H-1B Status now. In order to continue working on H-1B status after overseas trip, you must enter USA using H-1B visa stamp. This may require you to apply and get new H-1B visa stamp.
Please consider getting professional advice from your attorney before making any travel plans and what visa to use for re-entering.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
Please consider getting professional advice from your attorney before making any travel plans and what visa to use for re-entering.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
more...
makeup Toyota Highlander Hybrid Base
nviren
04-13 07:58 PM
The following doc, 'How the senate bill becomes a law' does not mention any waiting period after President's sign the bill to become a law
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/legprocessflowchart.pdf
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/legprocessflowchart.pdf
girlfriend Toyota Highlander Hybrid 4WD
bluez25
07-15 01:09 PM
All,
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
hairstyles The second and third row flat
SlowRoasted
06-13 01:18 PM
i dunno, its probably some crazy formula it goes by. Any math wizes here?
perm2gc
02-09 11:40 AM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Breaking_news_Indian_docs_lose_case_against_Britis h_govt/articleshow/1586856.cms
Anybody thinking of trying a lawsuit in US should better think again. It's of NO USE. It will only aggravate the average Americans and you will lose whatever little support we have from moderates. Lawsuit will yeild nothing.
We must try Gandhian approach of appealing to their innate sense of justice.
Only President bush can do something if somehow he can be convinced.
People already sued USCIS couple of years back and lost the battle.Sad to hear about 15,000 people with their futures undecided.I also heard that many doctors are leaving US as they are unable to find a residency program.
Anybody thinking of trying a lawsuit in US should better think again. It's of NO USE. It will only aggravate the average Americans and you will lose whatever little support we have from moderates. Lawsuit will yeild nothing.
We must try Gandhian approach of appealing to their innate sense of justice.
Only President bush can do something if somehow he can be convinced.
People already sued USCIS couple of years back and lost the battle.Sad to hear about 15,000 people with their futures undecided.I also heard that many doctors are leaving US as they are unable to find a residency program.
yabadaba
11-06 02:13 PM
dude...ur i-140 is also not approved..sit tight
No comments:
Post a Comment