chil3
04-13 01:23 PM
it would be in minus.....
GC approvals are getting lesser & lesser...
GC approvals are getting lesser & lesser...
wallpaper Design with Energy Saving
gc_kaavaali
12-09 11:50 AM
Please contribute to IV...IV need funds to fix our immigration problems..Please contribute...please help IV to help you..
JunRN
05-10 06:39 PM
Yes, as long as the new job is same/similar to job B. The 180 days count is number of calendar days i-485 is pending, not number of days on the job. One may not even be working at all during that 180 days, or even while waiting for i-485 approval however, must have a very good excuse because IOs will be very suspicious. It is not violating any rules though as i-485 is for future employment.
2011 UK Energy Saving Launches New
Blog Feeds
06-24 01:10 AM
From Public Policy Polling: Our poll of the Texas Governor's race this week is another data point indicating possible backlash for Republican candidates this fall in the wake of the Arizona immigration law. When we polled the race in Februrary Rick Perry led Bill White by 6 points. The race is tied now, and the movement since the previous poll has come completely with Hispanic voters. With white voters Perry led 54-35 then and leads 55-35 now. With black voters White led 81-12 then and leads 70-7 now. But with Hispanics Perry has gone from leading 53-41 in February to...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/arizona-law-could-cost-gop-texas-governors-race.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/arizona-law-could-cost-gop-texas-governors-race.html)
more...
hyderabad123
06-22 06:01 PM
I applied GC labor in Mar 2005 and After 140 approval and 485 is pending morethan 2yrs, i changed my employer by using AC21. After that i recieved a letter from USCIS saying that I-485 denial on May 25th 2010, then after we applied on MTR on June 10th 2010. I recieved an reciept on June 20th 2010.
Can i work now by using an EAD or i need to wait until get the approval on MTR please do advice and when i could get the response from USCIS. My EAd is going to be expire within a couple of months, i applied renewal and i got a reciept on I-765. Please help me on this, really appreciate your help.
Can i work now by using an EAD or i need to wait until get the approval on MTR please do advice and when i could get the response from USCIS. My EAd is going to be expire within a couple of months, i applied renewal and i got a reciept on I-765. Please help me on this, really appreciate your help.
ups
06-15 10:53 AM
What happens if you lose your job in 6 months after filing 485?
more...
Lasantha
10-05 09:26 AM
This is the link. But the catch is only your employer or your attorney can create a login for this.
http://www.plc.doleta.gov/eta_start.cfm?actiontype=home&CFID=2143265&CFTOKEN=28003131
http://www.plc.doleta.gov/eta_start.cfm?actiontype=home&CFID=2143265&CFTOKEN=28003131
2010 Home Energy Saving
suave100
01-30 10:50 AM
I am currently on H1B and in the process of leaving my current employer XYZ Inc. I also have an EAD that I haven't used yet but plan to use going forward. I understand that XYZ will and is rather obligated to notify USCIS of termination of my H1B employment by virtue of which, USICS will take steps to revoke the H1B petition. That being said,
1. Will I (beneficiary) and / or XYZ (petitioner) will receive a notice saying my H1B petition has been revoked?
2. Will it help in any shape or form if I were to fill an (back dated) I-9 form with XYZ indicating that I was already on EAD with XYZ before my termination? In this case, is XYZ still obligated to notify USCIS of termination of my H1B employment?
3. What constitutes a "bona fide termination" and is this even applicable in my case? Should I have a formal resignation letter in place for audit / RFE purposes down the road, if any?
1. Will I (beneficiary) and / or XYZ (petitioner) will receive a notice saying my H1B petition has been revoked?
2. Will it help in any shape or form if I were to fill an (back dated) I-9 form with XYZ indicating that I was already on EAD with XYZ before my termination? In this case, is XYZ still obligated to notify USCIS of termination of my H1B employment?
3. What constitutes a "bona fide termination" and is this even applicable in my case? Should I have a formal resignation letter in place for audit / RFE purposes down the road, if any?
more...
Ann Ruben
06-30 07:50 PM
As long as you have a valid advance parole, an approved I-140 and a bona fide offer of employment in the same or similar occupation you are not likely to be at risk if you go to India. However, before making a decision to travel, you should consult with an immigration attorney fully familiar with your immigration and employment history.
hair Energy Savings with Cool Metal
Munshi75
11-09 05:57 PM
you should have your I-140 approved to claim your previous PD for future LC.
more...
poorslumdog
09-10 08:31 PM
Guys,
If anyone of you here in SAP, Oracle apps, JDE...this might be useful. I have APICS CSCP (Certified Supply Chain Professional) books all four volumes in very good condition. I have cleared the exam today and putting it for sale. If you need please send me private message. I will donate 10% to IV. I am listing it here as there are lot of guys in IT and working in ERP.
Thanks.
If anyone of you here in SAP, Oracle apps, JDE...this might be useful. I have APICS CSCP (Certified Supply Chain Professional) books all four volumes in very good condition. I have cleared the exam today and putting it for sale. If you need please send me private message. I will donate 10% to IV. I am listing it here as there are lot of guys in IT and working in ERP.
Thanks.
hot ENERGY HOUSE. ENERGY SAVING
anshika012
12-02 01:45 AM
hi I wanna learn c, but I am so confused that from where I can learn it?
more...
house Pictures of LED energy saving
nirajnp
08-06 05:09 PM
Hello everyone,
This question is for my wife. She is currently in her 5th year of H1 which expires in Oct-2011. i.e Her 5th year ends on Oct-2010. She is planning to quit her job now (Aug-2010) due to personal reasons and plans to switch to H4. Her employer (Company-A) has already filed for her GC and her LCA and I-140 is approved, but I believe they will be discontinued once she quits. So here are my questions -
1. Since she will have a little bit over 1 year remaining on her H1, can she file for H1 again if she get a new job offer?
2. Assuming that her next company (Company B), files for a GC within one year, Will there be a problem getting her H1B extended ? Since her new LCA (with Company-B) will be filed less than 365 days before her H1b expires.
3. OR Will USCIS look for the LCA filed by Company-A and grant her H1B extension?
Thanks in Advance...
This question is for my wife. She is currently in her 5th year of H1 which expires in Oct-2011. i.e Her 5th year ends on Oct-2010. She is planning to quit her job now (Aug-2010) due to personal reasons and plans to switch to H4. Her employer (Company-A) has already filed for her GC and her LCA and I-140 is approved, but I believe they will be discontinued once she quits. So here are my questions -
1. Since she will have a little bit over 1 year remaining on her H1, can she file for H1 again if she get a new job offer?
2. Assuming that her next company (Company B), files for a GC within one year, Will there be a problem getting her H1B extended ? Since her new LCA (with Company-B) will be filed less than 365 days before her H1b expires.
3. OR Will USCIS look for the LCA filed by Company-A and grant her H1B extension?
Thanks in Advance...
tattoo Energy saving home
Blog Feeds
01-03 07:10 AM
The President has started revealing his plans on immigration for the next year. It sounds like he's planning on trying a do-over with Congress and attempting again to get a comprehensive immigration bill passed. He'll make the case for this in his State of the Union Address. I'm happy the President is still interested in working for change, I sincerely hope he is not making passing a reform bill his SOLE strategy. I'm reminded of Presidents in the past who regularly spoke in favor of something, but you just knew they didn't really care and were just trying to appease...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/obama-to-address-immigration-plans-in-state-of-the-union-address.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/obama-to-address-immigration-plans-in-state-of-the-union-address.html)
more...
pictures Top 10 Energy Saving Tips
Kevin Sadler
May 14th, 2004, 04:35 PM
do rating guidelines exist somewhere?
actually i'd rather just give feedback and no rating. is that possible?
thx everyone. this is a great site and i hope to contribute.
actually i'd rather just give feedback and no rating. is that possible?
thx everyone. this is a great site and i hope to contribute.
dresses Energy-saving
Macaca
11-14 09:30 PM
Congress Needs Both Comity and Accomplishments (http://aei.org/publications/pubID.27104,filter.all/pub_detail.asp) By Norman J. Ornstein | Roll Call, November 14, 2007
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
more...
makeup The house features three
unseenguy
04-26 02:52 PM
Call me insanely confused idiot, but here is a thing:
I work for a major MNC (of course pays me 15% less than I should be making). My boss is also leaving the company. At the same time, I am getting an offer from another local (small) company, better position and pay. My GC is pending PD Jul-05/EB2 India from MNC. Should I leave at the 11th hour?
Just to clarify both are consulting companies.
I work for a major MNC (of course pays me 15% less than I should be making). My boss is also leaving the company. At the same time, I am getting an offer from another local (small) company, better position and pay. My GC is pending PD Jul-05/EB2 India from MNC. Should I leave at the 11th hour?
Just to clarify both are consulting companies.
girlfriend Home Design with Energy Saving
Dipika
03-01 11:16 AM
this article say if you your employer's state is different than your work location and you try to re-enter through work location airport then there is problem,
BBC Hindi - एच1बी वीज़ा को लेकर सख़्ती (http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/news/2010/02/100227_us_visa_problems_vv.shtml)
BBC Hindi - एच1बी वीज़ा को लेकर सख़्ती (http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/news/2010/02/100227_us_visa_problems_vv.shtml)
hairstyles The Energy Saving Trust says
go_guy123
03-07 08:07 PM
The Los Angeles Times reports that the President is pushing Senators Schumer and Graham to get their immigration proposal introduced. But many are skeptical the White House is serious.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/lip-service.html)
First try get healthcare done. If Obama cant even get the healthcare done, it even harder for him to do a CIR. His opponent gets the message that Obama and the democratic party is weak and insecure.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/lip-service.html)
First try get healthcare done. If Obama cant even get the healthcare done, it even harder for him to do a CIR. His opponent gets the message that Obama and the democratic party is weak and insecure.
thesparky007
04-26 07:58 PM
cant see anyone
not even you footer
not even you footer
Humhongekamyab
02-26 02:40 PM
My PD for the EB-2 application is December 2005 BUT I filed my 485 in August 2008 so I am wondering if the US CIS will work on my 485 once my PD is current or will they wait for the PD and the 485 filing date to be current?
Thanks!
Thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment