GlobalCitizen
08-21 06:23 PM
I see. I thought it was your lawyer that sent all your documents. So do you actually have a lawyer?
My emloyer hired a law firm to do green card and the human resources does the H1B's. The firm just sent (before Agust 17th) my I-140 and I-485. I have pendind EAD. I really want to remain on H1B though.
I am so frustrated and do now what to do.
How long does this 'nunc-pro-tunk' take if it comes to that? Also Can I go back to school?
My emloyer hired a law firm to do green card and the human resources does the H1B's. The firm just sent (before Agust 17th) my I-140 and I-485. I have pendind EAD. I really want to remain on H1B though.
I am so frustrated and do now what to do.
How long does this 'nunc-pro-tunk' take if it comes to that? Also Can I go back to school?
wallpaper Charles Dickens quote tattoo
sniranjank
07-23 02:08 PM
Delivery date: Jul 19, 2007 9:29 AM
Sign for by: K.LAWSON
EB3- India - Jul03
Sign for by: K.LAWSON
EB3- India - Jul03
drirshad
03-13 04:31 PM
03/13/2009: Senate Bill, S. 577 to Punish Immigration Sharks Defrauding and Victimizing Immigrants and Related Parties
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
2011 wallpaper tattoo quotes ideas
somegchuh
08-21 04:02 PM
Hi Guys,
I just wanted to get some input from the veterans here who have started a business in partnership while they have been waiting for the coveted green card.
What kind of legal paperwork does it take to start a business? I would think as long as you don't work for the business it should be ok? If you can own part of a corporation (stocks), you can be a partner in a business?
Ideas?
I just wanted to get some input from the veterans here who have started a business in partnership while they have been waiting for the coveted green card.
What kind of legal paperwork does it take to start a business? I would think as long as you don't work for the business it should be ok? If you can own part of a corporation (stocks), you can be a partner in a business?
Ideas?
more...
Macaca
04-22 09:07 AM
Passing On H-1b Costs to the Employee? (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/FeesArticle07.18.2006.pdf) -- Smart Business Practice or DOL Violation?, by Michael F. Hammond and Damaris Del Valle
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
sdpkelkar
01-27 12:13 PM
They're all awesome IMO...but Perlin circles is primus inter pares for me :P
more...
santosh08872
12-02 10:06 PM
Thanks for sharing the great news, I am going to join on EAD for new job and at least one thing less to think about.
2010 Tattoo Ideas: Quotes on
Leo07
10-23 03:00 PM
It's mandatory to file AR11. best part is, it takes less than 2 min to file it online.
Here is the Link to do it online:
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa
1. For the A# in the form, Should I leave it blank?
I left it blank, as I do not have a A# I'm on H1-B. Read the FAQ here:
http://www.nriol.com/immigration/usa-immigration-faq.asp
2. I wrote down the address where I go to "Work" everyday.
3. One more thing that you'll need to know: On the Next screen where you click the "Update", You will be presented with:"Yes, I have a pending application with USCIS and "No, I do not have a pending application.
Here I selected : "No", Since my H1B and 140 are already approved and I did not file for AOS, yet. So, in that sense, I do not have a pending application with USCIS. if you've filed for AOS, then obviously you;d select "Yes".( Sorry, I don't know what happens, if you select "yes")
Hope this helps!
I came to US 10 years ago and moved three times. Never filed AR-11 or change of address with USCIS. Filed for 485 in 2007 July with the latest address.
Will the failure to file AR-11 have any adverse impact on my 485? Should I send in an AR-11 now for the last change of address even though it's late by 2 yrs? I'm very much confused.
If I file the AR-11 now. couple of questions.
1. For the A# in the form, Should I leave it blank?
2. For the section "I work for or attend school at : (Employer name or name of School)"
I will give the employer name. But in address do I give their address or the clients address where I work, My employer is in Texas whereas I'm at the client location in East coast.
Please help...Thank you in advance.
Here is the Link to do it online:
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa
1. For the A# in the form, Should I leave it blank?
I left it blank, as I do not have a A# I'm on H1-B. Read the FAQ here:
http://www.nriol.com/immigration/usa-immigration-faq.asp
2. I wrote down the address where I go to "Work" everyday.
3. One more thing that you'll need to know: On the Next screen where you click the "Update", You will be presented with:"Yes, I have a pending application with USCIS and "No, I do not have a pending application.
Here I selected : "No", Since my H1B and 140 are already approved and I did not file for AOS, yet. So, in that sense, I do not have a pending application with USCIS. if you've filed for AOS, then obviously you;d select "Yes".( Sorry, I don't know what happens, if you select "yes")
Hope this helps!
I came to US 10 years ago and moved three times. Never filed AR-11 or change of address with USCIS. Filed for 485 in 2007 July with the latest address.
Will the failure to file AR-11 have any adverse impact on my 485? Should I send in an AR-11 now for the last change of address even though it's late by 2 yrs? I'm very much confused.
If I file the AR-11 now. couple of questions.
1. For the A# in the form, Should I leave it blank?
2. For the section "I work for or attend school at : (Employer name or name of School)"
I will give the employer name. But in address do I give their address or the clients address where I work, My employer is in Texas whereas I'm at the client location in East coast.
Please help...Thank you in advance.
more...
skothuru
07-17 05:00 PM
I think we can still file till July 31st as per July Visa Bulletin (released on June 12)
This is AWESOME!!!!!
This is AWESOME!!!!!
hair Family Tattoo Quotes quote.
ken
04-08 04:29 PM
bump ^^^^
more...
freedom1
01-24 12:37 PM
I turned out to be my I-485 approval notice!
I just received it yesterday.
Thanks all.
Freedom1.
I just received it yesterday.
Thanks all.
Freedom1.
hot hairstyles 2011 quote tattoo pictures quote tattoo. quote tattoo by
gconmymind
10-04 05:43 PM
I live near Ahmedabad so I ask my parents to travel to Ahmedabad and submit it at Ahmedabad VFS office. VFS has offices in certain cities (lookup the website) and will accept your papers there. I hate the fact that you cannot directly mail your papers to the Mumbai consulate from USA. If your family is in Mumbai, they should be able to submit it in person to VFS.
VFS also has an email address on their website if you want to ask them questions. They are pretty good at responding.
So can I submit the docs through my family .. now and just go for the final interview?
This way I can go to the embassy the day I land in Mumbai.
VFS also has an email address on their website if you want to ask them questions. They are pretty good at responding.
So can I submit the docs through my family .. now and just go for the final interview?
This way I can go to the embassy the day I land in Mumbai.
more...
house tattoo quotes. quote
vin13
07-27 02:12 PM
I need your input.
My PD was Feb 2006-EB2.
I changed job on June 22nd to another company using EAD. Now the PD has become current for Aug.My old company and the new company are in different cities but it is the same state.
I was planning to apply for AC-21 but i have not gotten consistent pay checks yet. My first check was a partial check. I will have 2 consistent paychecks by Aug 15th.
1) Is it safe to just wait and see if i get a 485 approval without alerting USCIS about my job change?
I am thinking since the job change is very recent they might not know about this job change.
2) If they denied my 485 application for any reason ,can i continue to work while i apply for "reconsidering my 485 application" and file AC-21 with the new company?
Please advice what you think about this. Basically i am trying to "not rock the boat" and raise suspicion and more RFEs by notifying them about this very recent change.
Thank you very much for your advice and help in this matter.
You are not obligated to inform USCIS about job change. So do not worry about that part.
My PD was Feb 2006-EB2.
I changed job on June 22nd to another company using EAD. Now the PD has become current for Aug.My old company and the new company are in different cities but it is the same state.
I was planning to apply for AC-21 but i have not gotten consistent pay checks yet. My first check was a partial check. I will have 2 consistent paychecks by Aug 15th.
1) Is it safe to just wait and see if i get a 485 approval without alerting USCIS about my job change?
I am thinking since the job change is very recent they might not know about this job change.
2) If they denied my 485 application for any reason ,can i continue to work while i apply for "reconsidering my 485 application" and file AC-21 with the new company?
Please advice what you think about this. Basically i am trying to "not rock the boat" and raise suspicion and more RFEs by notifying them about this very recent change.
Thank you very much for your advice and help in this matter.
You are not obligated to inform USCIS about job change. So do not worry about that part.
tattoo Bob Marley quote Tattoo
ramus
06-15 09:14 AM
Great.. Thank you..
Very good thred.
contribution close to 500$ so far wiling to contribute another 500$ in next 5 months.
Very good thred.
contribution close to 500$ so far wiling to contribute another 500$ in next 5 months.
more...
pictures 2011 tattoos quotes. tattoo
little_willy
08-05 11:37 PM
Me and my wife along with our 1 year old will be there to show our support.
dresses quote-tattoo
lost_in_migration
05-04 12:23 PM
Unfortunately many of the IV members think Senior Member is a Core IV member, hence they tend to give importance to post submitted by Senior Members. Large audience over here may not be aware that ....
Junior Member ==> No of Posts<25
Member ==> No of Posts between 25 to 100
Senior Member ==> No of Posts>100
IV doest evaluate posts of members or give more or less importance to quantity or quality of posts.
The software we use for forums (Joomla) is preconfigured to make a person "Senior member" when he/she posts 100 messages.
IV core group or leadership doesnt have any interest in rating the quantity or quality of any posts from any members.
Junior Member ==> No of Posts<25
Member ==> No of Posts between 25 to 100
Senior Member ==> No of Posts>100
IV doest evaluate posts of members or give more or less importance to quantity or quality of posts.
The software we use for forums (Joomla) is preconfigured to make a person "Senior member" when he/she posts 100 messages.
IV core group or leadership doesnt have any interest in rating the quantity or quality of any posts from any members.
more...
makeup tattoo quotes on love. tattoo
SK2007
07-11 02:51 PM
Just keep waiting. My PD was current for months now, but my 140 is still pending. just keep waiting.
girlfriend eminem quote tattoo. eminem
grajesh2000
05-02 10:32 AM
Count me in
hairstyles rihanna quote tattoo. quote
shishya
04-30 12:57 PM
Why is the issue date matter?
When was the birth registered? If it says recently, then you should go thru the process.
If the birth was registered proerly at right time, you will not have problems.
Reissuance of birth certificates are very common. Expecting one to own 27 years old document is ridiculous.
The birth was registered just two months later -- but from what I've been reading the issue date (being so recent) does raise some eyebrows as well. The question posed is ... why haven't you tried to get a 'correct' birth certificate issued so far and only got it issued last month for US immigration purposes.
To be really safe, our lawyer is requesting we get affidavits sworn as well.
When was the birth registered? If it says recently, then you should go thru the process.
If the birth was registered proerly at right time, you will not have problems.
Reissuance of birth certificates are very common. Expecting one to own 27 years old document is ridiculous.
The birth was registered just two months later -- but from what I've been reading the issue date (being so recent) does raise some eyebrows as well. The question posed is ... why haven't you tried to get a 'correct' birth certificate issued so far and only got it issued last month for US immigration purposes.
To be really safe, our lawyer is requesting we get affidavits sworn as well.
anirudh74
05-03 12:27 AM
janakp, why do you have to post your stupid reply to every single post.You are acting like a policeman at stoplight, trying to direct everyone.
GCOP
12-08 02:03 PM
Friends, I already have expressed the views regarding Recapturing/ temporarily increasing Employment Based Visa Numbers for Greencard, on change.gov website . I have been getting E-mails from Transition Team. I have pasted this recent E-mail which is about Meeting with Transition Team. I think, IV Core Team members or/and people living around Chicago area should arrange meeting with Transition Team, and express and suggest our ideas regarding Recapture/Temporarily Increase EB greencard Numbers to clear the backlog.
Your seat at the table
From: John D. Podesta, Obama-Biden Transition Project (info@obamabidentransitionproject.org)
Sent: Sat 12/06/08 10:30 AM
Everyday, we meet with organizations that present ideas for the Transition and the incoming Obama-Biden Administration. In past transitions, meetings like this have been held behind closed doors.
Not anymore. Today, every Obama-Biden Transition staff member received a memo outlining the "Seat at the Table" Transparency Policy. I've included a copy of it below.
The policy is pretty simple: the people and groups we're meeting with, the subjects of the meetings, and any documents shared in the meetings will now be made available on Change.gov. Most importantly, the American public can weigh in with comments or their own materials.
Read the memo and watch our "Seat at the Table" video:
This is our latest step toward a more transparent and accessible Transition. We look forward to benefitting from the many more voices that will now be a part of the decision-making process.
Thank you,
John
John D. Podesta
Co-chair
The Obama-Biden Transition Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEMORANDUM
From: John Podesta
To: All Obama-Biden Transition Project Staff
Date: December 4, 2008
Re: "Seat at the Table" Transparency Policy -- EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
Overview:
As an extension of the unprecedented ethics guidelines already in place for the Obama-Biden Transition Project, we take another significant step towards transparency of our efforts for the American people. Every day, we meet with organizations who present ideas for the Transition and the Administration, both orally and in writing. We want to ensure that we give the American people a "seat at the table" and that we receive the benefit of their feedback.
Accordingly, any documents from official meetings with outside organizations will be posted on our website for people to review and comment on. In addition to presenting ideas as individuals at www.change.gov, the American people deserve a "seat at the table" as we receive input from organizations and make decisions. In the interest of protecting the personal privacy of individuals, this policy does not apply to personnel matters and hiring recommendations.
Scope:
The following information will be posted on our website:
1. Documents: All policy documents1 and written policy recommendations from official meetings2 with outside organizations.
2. Meetings: The date and organizations represented at official meetings in the Transition headquarters or agency offices, with any documents presented as noted above.
This scope is a floor, not a ceiling, and all staff are strongly encouraged to include additional materials. Such materials could include documents (recommendations, press releases, etc.) presented in smaller meetings or materials or made public by the outside organization without a connection to an official meeting.
If you have any questions as to whether documents should be included, please email [REDACTED].
Process:
Prior to an official meeting with an outside organization or organizations, Obama-Biden Transition Project staff members will inform attendees that any documents provided will be posted on our "Seat at the Table" website found at www.change.gov. Suggested language for email invitations is: "By presenting or submitting any document at a meeting with the Obama-Biden Transition Project, you agree to allow the document to be made public and posted on www.change.gov." At the completion of each meeting or upon receipt of such documents, Transition staff will provide the documents to [REDACTED] with the date of the meeting, a list of the organizations in attendance, and the topic of the meeting.
Notes:
1) This policy does not apply to non-public or classified information acquired from the Agency Review Process and internal memorandum.
2) An "official meeting" is defined as a meeting with outside organizations or representatives of those organizations to which three or more outside participants attend.
Your seat at the table
From: John D. Podesta, Obama-Biden Transition Project (info@obamabidentransitionproject.org)
Sent: Sat 12/06/08 10:30 AM
Everyday, we meet with organizations that present ideas for the Transition and the incoming Obama-Biden Administration. In past transitions, meetings like this have been held behind closed doors.
Not anymore. Today, every Obama-Biden Transition staff member received a memo outlining the "Seat at the Table" Transparency Policy. I've included a copy of it below.
The policy is pretty simple: the people and groups we're meeting with, the subjects of the meetings, and any documents shared in the meetings will now be made available on Change.gov. Most importantly, the American public can weigh in with comments or their own materials.
Read the memo and watch our "Seat at the Table" video:
This is our latest step toward a more transparent and accessible Transition. We look forward to benefitting from the many more voices that will now be a part of the decision-making process.
Thank you,
John
John D. Podesta
Co-chair
The Obama-Biden Transition Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEMORANDUM
From: John Podesta
To: All Obama-Biden Transition Project Staff
Date: December 4, 2008
Re: "Seat at the Table" Transparency Policy -- EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
Overview:
As an extension of the unprecedented ethics guidelines already in place for the Obama-Biden Transition Project, we take another significant step towards transparency of our efforts for the American people. Every day, we meet with organizations who present ideas for the Transition and the Administration, both orally and in writing. We want to ensure that we give the American people a "seat at the table" and that we receive the benefit of their feedback.
Accordingly, any documents from official meetings with outside organizations will be posted on our website for people to review and comment on. In addition to presenting ideas as individuals at www.change.gov, the American people deserve a "seat at the table" as we receive input from organizations and make decisions. In the interest of protecting the personal privacy of individuals, this policy does not apply to personnel matters and hiring recommendations.
Scope:
The following information will be posted on our website:
1. Documents: All policy documents1 and written policy recommendations from official meetings2 with outside organizations.
2. Meetings: The date and organizations represented at official meetings in the Transition headquarters or agency offices, with any documents presented as noted above.
This scope is a floor, not a ceiling, and all staff are strongly encouraged to include additional materials. Such materials could include documents (recommendations, press releases, etc.) presented in smaller meetings or materials or made public by the outside organization without a connection to an official meeting.
If you have any questions as to whether documents should be included, please email [REDACTED].
Process:
Prior to an official meeting with an outside organization or organizations, Obama-Biden Transition Project staff members will inform attendees that any documents provided will be posted on our "Seat at the Table" website found at www.change.gov. Suggested language for email invitations is: "By presenting or submitting any document at a meeting with the Obama-Biden Transition Project, you agree to allow the document to be made public and posted on www.change.gov." At the completion of each meeting or upon receipt of such documents, Transition staff will provide the documents to [REDACTED] with the date of the meeting, a list of the organizations in attendance, and the topic of the meeting.
Notes:
1) This policy does not apply to non-public or classified information acquired from the Agency Review Process and internal memorandum.
2) An "official meeting" is defined as a meeting with outside organizations or representatives of those organizations to which three or more outside participants attend.
No comments:
Post a Comment