sameet
09-15 12:20 PM
Lets get statistics on numbers on pending I-485 application for EB2-India by year of PD.
My PD is Aug 06 .. post yours :-)
Can we start one for EB3 - India too?
My PD is Aug 06 .. post yours :-)
Can we start one for EB3 - India too?
wallpaper greyson chance waiting outside
sidd_k2002
03-24 07:48 PM
If you are not sure if you will have a job till October 1st, 2009, you can ask your employer/lawyer to file your H1 under visa to be issued abroad category and NOT file a H1 Change of Status petition. In this case, your H1 status wont start until you go out of the country and re-enter after getting H1 visa stamped at a US consulate in your home country. This way, even if you get laid off, you can continue to stay and work here until you have a valid OPT and a job irrespective of whether your H1 is approved/revoked. But the drawback here is that, if you end up still being employed then you wont be able to start work on H1 till you re-enter with the H1 stamp. Hope this helps....
Roseball,
This is a very good alternative that you have suggested. Does this mean that i can have my full 12+17 months of my OPT, and my H1 will only start when i do the stamping in India. But in that case i would need to have the same employer at the time i enter correct? Also what if i want to change my employer after i have my H1 stamped while coming inside the country?
Thanks in advance.
Roseball,
This is a very good alternative that you have suggested. Does this mean that i can have my full 12+17 months of my OPT, and my H1 will only start when i do the stamping in India. But in that case i would need to have the same employer at the time i enter correct? Also what if i want to change my employer after i have my H1 stamped while coming inside the country?
Thanks in advance.
nixone
08-21 10:21 PM
Guys, thank you so much for your replies. Thanks for giving me the ideas on how to address the letter. My parents cannot read/write/speak English (not a single word), so I thought it would be nice for them to have a letter to show at the port of entry. They are traveling with a boy from back home who is a student in a nearby university.
One more question if you guys do not mind, my parents asked for visa to attend my graduation in Dec 07, but they could not come at that time. There were two reasons, 1. did not find somebody to travel with right away and 2. after a month or so, my grandma got sick and was in hospital for a long time. She passed away a month ago. Do you think my parents will have trouble at the port of entry as they did not come for graduation and coming after so many months? Thanks.
One more question if you guys do not mind, my parents asked for visa to attend my graduation in Dec 07, but they could not come at that time. There were two reasons, 1. did not find somebody to travel with right away and 2. after a month or so, my grandma got sick and was in hospital for a long time. She passed away a month ago. Do you think my parents will have trouble at the port of entry as they did not come for graduation and coming after so many months? Thanks.
2011 Greyson Chance - Waiting
senthil1
06-27 10:29 AM
It is difficult to get H1b without client letter. Also many consulting companies stopped H1b because of RFE and denials. It is a good idea to try job to 2 to 4 more weeks.
Sorry to know about your layoff. What I would suggest is try to get a Consulting company ( maybe desi ) to transfer your H1. That would give you some leeway to find a project again.
Sorry to know about your layoff. What I would suggest is try to get a Consulting company ( maybe desi ) to transfer your H1. That would give you some leeway to find a project again.
more...
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
kartikiran
01-14 10:41 AM
Paper filed AP in TSC on Oct 28th 2009 & received the document on Dec 24th 2009 by mail.
Hope that helps.
Hope that helps.
more...
karan2004m
07-29 01:38 AM
Did Anyone got 2 year EAD when I-140 pending? There is some stupid assumption posted on some immigration website that USCIS is issuing 2 yr EAD to approved 140 petitions only..
Just want to confirm that.
Just want to confirm that.
2010 greyson-chance-waiti.
jlt007us
09-14 02:42 PM
jlt007us,
Sorry for your situation & I would suggest you better contact an experienced lawyer...who can advice you closely and assist you in this situation.
Soni-
Thankyou! That's what I intend to do. We need to wait till we get the denial notice and then plan on MTR/Apeal. I am planning to consult more than one lawyer just to be safe. I just wanted to see if any of the forum members came across similar case.
Sorry for your situation & I would suggest you better contact an experienced lawyer...who can advice you closely and assist you in this situation.
Soni-
Thankyou! That's what I intend to do. We need to wait till we get the denial notice and then plan on MTR/Apeal. I am planning to consult more than one lawyer just to be safe. I just wanted to see if any of the forum members came across similar case.
more...
mps
08-03 10:39 AM
the more important part of my question is...
"using approved 140 from an EX-employer" and using that to a get 3 yr extension when doing a h1b transfer to a new employer (who has not in anyway started a new perm labor)
H1B is always portable to new employer and if the basis of extension is pending GC application at any stage with other employer - thats perfectly fine.
What you do is, get H1B transfer to new employer and start your PERM with them ASAP so that,
either your PERM may be pending for more than a year before your H1B expires,
OR
you get new I-140 (if date current you get EAD if not you get another 3 year on H1B)
- I have done it myself in H1 7th year with pending LC so my situation was worse than your
Rule of thumb is GC for future employement so it does not matter which employer has pending application.
"using approved 140 from an EX-employer" and using that to a get 3 yr extension when doing a h1b transfer to a new employer (who has not in anyway started a new perm labor)
H1B is always portable to new employer and if the basis of extension is pending GC application at any stage with other employer - thats perfectly fine.
What you do is, get H1B transfer to new employer and start your PERM with them ASAP so that,
either your PERM may be pending for more than a year before your H1B expires,
OR
you get new I-140 (if date current you get EAD if not you get another 3 year on H1B)
- I have done it myself in H1 7th year with pending LC so my situation was worse than your
Rule of thumb is GC for future employement so it does not matter which employer has pending application.
hair Greyson Chance: Waiting
unseenguy
06-24 08:29 AM
You are worrying about nothing. Have fun and enjoy life
more...
nfinity
03-14 10:41 AM
I just came back from bombay. I did not have an AP. I went to the consulate for stamping. If you are maintaining valid h1b status and have a stamp, there is no issue at all. Just carry your I-485 receipt with you and make sure you mention it at POE.
hot “Waiting Outside the Lines
InTheMoment
04-28 01:04 PM
....and that is precisely what happened when thousands of "pending demand" GC's were issued in June 2007 and the early hours of July 2nd, just before the fiasco.
Pre-adjudication as a policy started in early 2006 especially at the NSC resulting in tons of "pending demand" cases just before the fiasco.
Coming to the present time, with several receiving RFE's when their PD's are not current, I would suspect that many would en-masse get their GC when DoS moves the dates forward substantially compared to now.
Pre-adjudication as a policy started in early 2006 especially at the NSC resulting in tons of "pending demand" cases just before the fiasco.
Coming to the present time, with several receiving RFE's when their PD's are not current, I would suspect that many would en-masse get their GC when DoS moves the dates forward substantially compared to now.
more...
house Greyson Chance with PS22 Group
Yeldarb
02-05 11:26 AM
Thanks. I'll check it out.
The ball is just a circle with a gradient fill, where the fill is from black at 100% alpha to 0% alpha.
The ball is just a circle with a gradient fill, where the fill is from black at 100% alpha to 0% alpha.
tattoo Greyson Chance has released
BharatPremi
03-13 11:25 AM
Name check is not an issue, the IO told me that name check is started soon after receipt of application, and 180 days have passed. There is a new rule that name check cannot delay I485 by more than 180 days.
WOM - the 2 years may have changed, since WOM cases were usually fighting name check. I think that it is probably one for an attorney, so I'll likely consult attorney in May regarding WOM.
Any more comments welcome.
e.g. raising via Congressman's office.
Receipt date vs notice date of last transfer -- which sets the processing date.
Even though it may not bring the result what you want, trying Congressman's office would at least serve the purpose of creating the record which may help you in turn while fighting WOM. So I would definately do that first. Now in theory "Receipt Date" should set the processing date but when you call USCIS they always talk about ND, somehow it seems that they can see only ND.. Yes, that is definately a grey area.
WOM - the 2 years may have changed, since WOM cases were usually fighting name check. I think that it is probably one for an attorney, so I'll likely consult attorney in May regarding WOM.
Any more comments welcome.
e.g. raising via Congressman's office.
Receipt date vs notice date of last transfer -- which sets the processing date.
Even though it may not bring the result what you want, trying Congressman's office would at least serve the purpose of creating the record which may help you in turn while fighting WOM. So I would definately do that first. Now in theory "Receipt Date" should set the processing date but when you call USCIS they always talk about ND, somehow it seems that they can see only ND.. Yes, that is definately a grey area.
more...
pictures Greyson Chance Singing Waiting
n2b
08-02 09:35 AM
if you can convince the current employer not to revoke the 140 (at least for the next 180 days).
Is this true? If the employer agrees to not invoke I140 for next 180 days, I can start working for another company tomorrow without affecting my 485 application?
Wouldn't you need to show paystubs or something, for 180 days, for the company that filed your I485?
Thank you!!
Is this true? If the employer agrees to not invoke I140 for next 180 days, I can start working for another company tomorrow without affecting my 485 application?
Wouldn't you need to show paystubs or something, for 180 days, for the company that filed your I485?
Thank you!!
dresses makeup Greyson Chance performs greyson chance waiting outside the lines
watertown
03-11 11:50 AM
Guys, I've aske this in another board but does anyone know any good attorney in Boston area who can handle WOM/ AC21 like stuff?
My company lawyer doesn't even bother to reply my e-mail!!!! Thats Todd and Weld
My company lawyer doesn't even bother to reply my e-mail!!!! Thats Todd and Weld
more...
makeup Greyson Chance quot;Waiting
RajForGC
02-20 03:33 PM
My PERM and 140 under EB3 is already approved last year, (other Conuntry). I am in the process of filing EB2, MS +0, with same company: different postion and 30% job req changes, prevaling wage is different level. I did my MS before I joined this company. My lawyer is saying we should be fine: any suggestions.
girlfriend Greyson Chance: Waiting
bkn96
12-02 09:01 PM
very encouraging news.. hope USCIS learned leasson..
hairstyles Greyson Chance feat.
alterego
03-02 11:15 AM
The irony in the current schizophrenic EB immigration policy is that, it is ironically the more talented, qualified and marketable and entrepreneural talent that is more likely to look at US immigration policy and call it a day. It is conversely the mediocre talent that would be inclined to "stick it out" and deal with all the crap.
Hmm, something surely to ponder for this country.
Hmm, something surely to ponder for this country.
vallabhu
12-20 11:13 AM
Does she have valid visa stamped on passport for the day she is landing in US?
WaitingYaar
01-18 08:54 PM
which category?
I love all of them!!!! (: and Greyson Chance!!!! <3
ReplyDelete