drona
09-28 07:21 PM
Southern California IV Meet-up on Saturday 6 October at 3pm in Los Angeles. We have several post-rally action items to work on. Join our yahoo group for further information.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
wallpaper Poems amp; Quotes Myspace
abhatti
10-09 10:33 PM
Just to share my experience in Minnesota regarding the subject. My liscense was due for status check. I took my I-485 reciept notice to DMV, they made a copy and faxed it to St-Paul DMV. St-paul office did not said or replied any thing untill I got my new driver's liscense with the same status check date and then I recieved a letter saying I have two more days before I could submit the status evidence before I will loose my driving previliges.
Well I went back to the local DMV office, they gave a number for an employee at St-pual office, to whome I spoke and tried to convince her that this reciept notcie is a legal document and makes my presence legal in th US untill the decision about this case is finalized. she did not buy that untill she mentioned that I need to submit EAD card copy. Which then I did and she extended my driver's liscense to the date till my EAD was valid.
They will print the status check date only to the date untill EAD is valid or H1-B is valid. Oh by the way as an evidence they only except either I-797 for H1-B approval or EAD.
This is a little extra work for us to do to be able to drive while waiting for Green Card, on top of the work we have already done during the whole application process starting from H1-B all the way through I-485 application and even after that to apply for AP, EAD and H1-Bs at ongoing bases.
Well I went back to the local DMV office, they gave a number for an employee at St-pual office, to whome I spoke and tried to convince her that this reciept notcie is a legal document and makes my presence legal in th US untill the decision about this case is finalized. she did not buy that untill she mentioned that I need to submit EAD card copy. Which then I did and she extended my driver's liscense to the date till my EAD was valid.
They will print the status check date only to the date untill EAD is valid or H1-B is valid. Oh by the way as an evidence they only except either I-797 for H1-B approval or EAD.
This is a little extra work for us to do to be able to drive while waiting for Green Card, on top of the work we have already done during the whole application process starting from H1-B all the way through I-485 application and even after that to apply for AP, EAD and H1-Bs at ongoing bases.
InTheMoment
09-10 03:38 PM
I sooo hear you ...especially the "shitty town in northern mass Lawrence"...and Infopass in that town. How did you bear this obnoxious combination man :p? If they can't give any more info why is the use of our taxes going to pay his (Infopass "IO") salary.
I guess there were no dates in the Boston office I guess... they are usually a bit more helpful.
I guess there were no dates in the Boston office I guess... they are usually a bit more helpful.
2011 Poems For Broken Hearts Love
jagan13
02-24 12:24 PM
Got response from the embassy stating that the passport has been processed but, not clear if they already dispatched it. Looks like they are still keeping up with the 40 day turnaround time.
more...
vfwlkr
04-14 08:13 PM
I am surprised you didnt get your GC around july,2007. are you stuck in namecheck?. Nope, I took an Infopass appointment in august 2007 and they informed me namecheck was clear and now I just need to wait for the case to be processed. Then the priority date retroregressed again until March. I've asked my employer's immigration lawyers to check on the status. Status due in 45 days !
santa123
07-30 11:43 PM
Hello,
I just received RFE for I-140.
I-140 Details:
I have applied I-140 under EB2 India.
I have BS(3 years) with computer science & MCA(MS 3 years) in computer science. So total 6 years of education in computer science(3 yrs BS + 3 yrs MS).
Also I have 1.5 years(18 months) of experience after completing my MS. I have submitted my experience letter at the time of filling labor But USCIS didn't ask anything regarding experience.
In labor(PERM) we mentioned Masters required
& Major field of study is Computers.
Do I qualify for EB2?? Plz let me know.
RFE details:
1) Degree evaluation(what's the procedure?)
&
2) They want most recent W2 for 2007.
In 2007(W2) I got paid $59K(gross) & in LCA(H1B) prevailing wage mentioned is $55k.
In labor(PERM) prevailing wage mentioned is $63K & offered wage mentioned is $65K.
Difference between W2 & Prevailing wage in labor(PERM) is $4000($63K - $59K).
Difference between W2 & Offered wage in labor(PERM) is $6000($65K - $59K).
Is this a serious problem???
My labor already got approved.
My company is financially very good.
Now which wage USCIS consider or match with W2??
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
Didn't you submit your education eval when you filed your 140?
Is this in addition to the one you sent?
Get proper eval done ASAP and send it out. Try one or two evals even. Course by course cld be waste of money.
Didnt you submit the W2 copies also?
Looks like this could be just a case of missing docs... Dont worry...
Good luck!
I just received RFE for I-140.
I-140 Details:
I have applied I-140 under EB2 India.
I have BS(3 years) with computer science & MCA(MS 3 years) in computer science. So total 6 years of education in computer science(3 yrs BS + 3 yrs MS).
Also I have 1.5 years(18 months) of experience after completing my MS. I have submitted my experience letter at the time of filling labor But USCIS didn't ask anything regarding experience.
In labor(PERM) we mentioned Masters required
& Major field of study is Computers.
Do I qualify for EB2?? Plz let me know.
RFE details:
1) Degree evaluation(what's the procedure?)
&
2) They want most recent W2 for 2007.
In 2007(W2) I got paid $59K(gross) & in LCA(H1B) prevailing wage mentioned is $55k.
In labor(PERM) prevailing wage mentioned is $63K & offered wage mentioned is $65K.
Difference between W2 & Prevailing wage in labor(PERM) is $4000($63K - $59K).
Difference between W2 & Offered wage in labor(PERM) is $6000($65K - $59K).
Is this a serious problem???
My labor already got approved.
My company is financially very good.
Now which wage USCIS consider or match with W2??
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
Didn't you submit your education eval when you filed your 140?
Is this in addition to the one you sent?
Get proper eval done ASAP and send it out. Try one or two evals even. Course by course cld be waste of money.
Didnt you submit the W2 copies also?
Looks like this could be just a case of missing docs... Dont worry...
Good luck!
more...
aniltatikonda
02-08 04:54 PM
Thats correct It was my misunderstanding.
2010 Love Poems Graphics - Page #44
mheggade
05-08 03:15 PM
My opinion:
Well, can the Java Programmer walk the ramp and pull it off like a professional model? Their work is a lot harder than it appears on the outside taking into account the success rate among models. Considering that even school kids can write excellent java programs, if we still want to consider the Java programmer as "highly skilled", then so are models.
Giselle Bundchen is worth half a billion dollars or somewhere in that range.
Btw, I am in the programming line myself in case someone thinks I have a problem with programmers. But I wouldn't mind swapping places with a successful model ;)
Well I agree that professional modeling work is lot harder than it appears.
<sarcasm> And I am also sure school kids can write excellent java programs , if the requirement is to write a Hello World programme.</sarcasm>
Btw , I work in Java technology and My view is Genuine Java programmer's are "highly skilled".
Well, can the Java Programmer walk the ramp and pull it off like a professional model? Their work is a lot harder than it appears on the outside taking into account the success rate among models. Considering that even school kids can write excellent java programs, if we still want to consider the Java programmer as "highly skilled", then so are models.
Giselle Bundchen is worth half a billion dollars or somewhere in that range.
Btw, I am in the programming line myself in case someone thinks I have a problem with programmers. But I wouldn't mind swapping places with a successful model ;)
Well I agree that professional modeling work is lot harder than it appears.
<sarcasm> And I am also sure school kids can write excellent java programs , if the requirement is to write a Hello World programme.</sarcasm>
Btw , I work in Java technology and My view is Genuine Java programmer's are "highly skilled".
more...
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
hair Love Poem image
greencardfever
07-19 11:49 PM
I'm in the same situation sundarpn and I've got the exact same 3 questions as you have. Could someone please answer them.
Thanks.
Thanks.
more...
REDS
07-20 08:28 AM
I am facing the same situation .My PD is Sep 2003 and my I 140 is pending, recently filed 485 and on top of that i am unmarried, I am scared that my 485might get approved before i get married.
hot love poems poem sad poems
gsiskind
05-12 04:04 PM
Greg,
The Original poster mentioned that he filed 485 on 08/06/2007 (and I believe he is employment based). Please note that all employment based categories were unavailable as per bulletin#109 (for august 07). So any EB 485 filer filed in August of 2007 was eligible for that only because of the bulletin 107 & further "July Fiasco events". Which means even if they filed 485 after July 31st, they in fact used the old fee structure.
So ANY EB 485 filers between 08/01/2007 to 08/15/2007, still has to keep on paying fees for EAD (even though the rules change happened for filings after 07/31/2007). This is a special category of filers created by "July Fiasco".
OK, I think the easiest way to deal with this is to look at the actual filing receipt for the I-485. If the receipt was for an amount reflecting the old fee schedule, then you need to pay for a new I-765 petition. If you paid the $1010 new filing fee, you would be okay with not paying.
The Original poster mentioned that he filed 485 on 08/06/2007 (and I believe he is employment based). Please note that all employment based categories were unavailable as per bulletin#109 (for august 07). So any EB 485 filer filed in August of 2007 was eligible for that only because of the bulletin 107 & further "July Fiasco events". Which means even if they filed 485 after July 31st, they in fact used the old fee structure.
So ANY EB 485 filers between 08/01/2007 to 08/15/2007, still has to keep on paying fees for EAD (even though the rules change happened for filings after 07/31/2007). This is a special category of filers created by "July Fiasco".
OK, I think the easiest way to deal with this is to look at the actual filing receipt for the I-485. If the receipt was for an amount reflecting the old fee schedule, then you need to pay for a new I-765 petition. If you paid the $1010 new filing fee, you would be okay with not paying.
more...
house love poems graphics
gc28262
03-11 09:28 AM
I had the same issue. Still awaiting my AP which was applied in Nov 2008.
When I called up TSC where my application was filed, they kept insisting that they have really mailed it and they cannot issue it again unless they receive the AP saying it is undelivered.
I am sure my address is correct as per their records. I got my EAD delivered at the same address without any issue.
Finally I called them again, this time I talked to a more knowledgeable accommodating IO.
Keep calling the service center till you get an instruction similar to the following.
This is the instruction provided
----------------------------------------------------------
Fill out I-131 Application or use the copy of your original application
attach two photos
Mention the receipt no on the top of the form
Also mention REPLACEMENT : no Fees included
Add a covering letter explaining the situation
Post it to the following address
USCIS Texas Service Center
ADDRESS ( This is a special address, This not the standard USCIS address)
On Lower Left corner of the envelope mention:
do Not open in the mail room, No fees are attached
------------------------------------------------------------------
I am still awaiting my AP after doing this. :confused:
When I called up TSC where my application was filed, they kept insisting that they have really mailed it and they cannot issue it again unless they receive the AP saying it is undelivered.
I am sure my address is correct as per their records. I got my EAD delivered at the same address without any issue.
Finally I called them again, this time I talked to a more knowledgeable accommodating IO.
Keep calling the service center till you get an instruction similar to the following.
This is the instruction provided
----------------------------------------------------------
Fill out I-131 Application or use the copy of your original application
attach two photos
Mention the receipt no on the top of the form
Also mention REPLACEMENT : no Fees included
Add a covering letter explaining the situation
Post it to the following address
USCIS Texas Service Center
ADDRESS ( This is a special address, This not the standard USCIS address)
On Lower Left corner of the envelope mention:
do Not open in the mail room, No fees are attached
------------------------------------------------------------------
I am still awaiting my AP after doing this. :confused:
tattoo SURENO LOVE POEMS Image
rajutata
08-25 09:23 AM
You can apply for visitor visa and visit canada. if you PR is approved before you need to go to Canada, You do not need any visa
more...
pictures HTML Code for graphic:
wellwishergc
08-02 02:36 PM
I agree with logiclife. Consulting a good lawyer like Rajeev Khanna or Murthy is the best approach to go forward.
Although perm2gc has many of the questions answered correctly, every case may be unique. There may be possibilities that your brother can still come to US. The lawyer may be able to help you with a legal way of going about it.
If I were you, I would spend a couple of hundred dollars and do a paid phone consultation with a lawyer, probably a good one at that. And send questions ahead of time so that the lawyer too does his research before talking to you on the phone.
When you decisions can have a lasting effect on your career, you may not want to rely on advice on forums. Members here are not lawyers.
If you do get advice here, then be aware of the chances that it could be not applicable to your situation.
Good Luck.
Although perm2gc has many of the questions answered correctly, every case may be unique. There may be possibilities that your brother can still come to US. The lawyer may be able to help you with a legal way of going about it.
If I were you, I would spend a couple of hundred dollars and do a paid phone consultation with a lawyer, probably a good one at that. And send questions ahead of time so that the lawyer too does his research before talking to you on the phone.
When you decisions can have a lasting effect on your career, you may not want to rely on advice on forums. Members here are not lawyers.
If you do get advice here, then be aware of the chances that it could be not applicable to your situation.
Good Luck.
dresses Best Friends Poems amp; Quotes
mayurcreation
04-18 08:11 AM
Date:
Dear Sir or Madam:
We are writing to confirm that Mr. XXXX was previously employed by our organization from date to date in the position of Programmer Analyst.
In the position of Programmer Analyst, Mr. XXX was responsible for extensive analyze, design, develop, programming and testing software application using C#, VB.NET, ASP.NET, ADO.NET, from resume etc....
During his tenure he had worked for Client Name1, Client Name2, Client Name3 and Client Name4 clients.
Mr. XXX was employed throughout on a full-time basis, 40 hours per week.
Very truly yours,
(Signature)
Name
Title
Dear Sir or Madam:
We are writing to confirm that Mr. XXXX was previously employed by our organization from date to date in the position of Programmer Analyst.
In the position of Programmer Analyst, Mr. XXX was responsible for extensive analyze, design, develop, programming and testing software application using C#, VB.NET, ASP.NET, ADO.NET, from resume etc....
During his tenure he had worked for Client Name1, Client Name2, Client Name3 and Client Name4 clients.
Mr. XXX was employed throughout on a full-time basis, 40 hours per week.
Very truly yours,
(Signature)
Name
Title
more...
makeup Peace RIP Graphics Poems
gchodhry
02-11 10:24 AM
Hi All,
I am in a situation that my L1B extension application is denied on 02/10/2009. My current L1B is valid till March 31st 2009. I am trying to find the options I have with me now... I have H1B approved from another employer but I have not joined them.
As per my understanding these are the options:
1) This denial is for L1B Blanket Petition, so I think I should be able to apply extension again with L1B individual petition as I believe Obama government is rejecting all L1 Blanket visa as they this people are misusing it...
2) I can join my H1 employer...
Can anyone of you please suggest if these options are correct OR is there any other better option available...
Eagerly waiting for responses...
Thanks,
Gagan Chodhry
I am in a situation that my L1B extension application is denied on 02/10/2009. My current L1B is valid till March 31st 2009. I am trying to find the options I have with me now... I have H1B approved from another employer but I have not joined them.
As per my understanding these are the options:
1) This denial is for L1B Blanket Petition, so I think I should be able to apply extension again with L1B individual petition as I believe Obama government is rejecting all L1 Blanket visa as they this people are misusing it...
2) I can join my H1 employer...
Can anyone of you please suggest if these options are correct OR is there any other better option available...
Eagerly waiting for responses...
Thanks,
Gagan Chodhry
girlfriend MySpace RIP Poem Graphics
WaitingForMyGC
02-28 03:45 PM
Guys, I have recurring contribution setup thru my bank account but since last 2-3 months my payments are being returned from IV. Any idea, what could be the issue?
I am sending my contributions to below address
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
Let me know.
I am sending my contributions to below address
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
Let me know.
hairstyles Poems Graphic – Sand Of Love
arunasri
09-19 03:42 PM
my PD is July 2004 EB3. I got 2 yrs EAD approved on 9/10.
smiledentist
10-25 03:40 PM
Thanks, I am not sure if it applies to only H1 or even to I 140.
gjoe
08-20 08:44 PM
:)
No comments:
Post a Comment