gcformeornot
08-16 02:35 PM
Thank you guys.
What is bothering me is that they told us the Wrong Information PLUS lawyer was just asking for filling fees(which is 745) during the time of signature but now Company is charging even for legal fees.
I believe they want to earn extra money from us. What should we do now about this wrong info?
You think we have no choice here but to pay?
I'm sorry and thanks for your help.
Most of the companies have clear cut HR policy on who is covered who is not.
No matter what HR member said they will follow HR policy.
What is bothering me is that they told us the Wrong Information PLUS lawyer was just asking for filling fees(which is 745) during the time of signature but now Company is charging even for legal fees.
I believe they want to earn extra money from us. What should we do now about this wrong info?
You think we have no choice here but to pay?
I'm sorry and thanks for your help.
Most of the companies have clear cut HR policy on who is covered who is not.
No matter what HR member said they will follow HR policy.
wallpaper Ruger Montado Pictures, Images
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
EB3June03
06-23 10:31 AM
Thanks for the reply arkanand,
I talked to multiple doctor's and they said that the reason why the test is NOT done again is that they know it is going to be positive (so why do it). Instead they go to the 2nd step (Chest X Ray).
They also mentioned that for documentation purpose if you have to get it done, just go for it. So, looks like i will be going for getting the test done 3rd time like arkanand. I too just want to finish this paper work and get done with.
I tried getting the documentation from a NY Hospital where I was working in 1998. They sent the doctor the Radiology report mentioning the X Ray was clear. I don't see any size indications of the PPD testing. I either have to get back to them to send me the PPD size after testing or forget it and go for a test. So, I think I am going to get the test done. Luckily, I don't have to get the X Rays done as I just got one done in Jan 2009 (and the civil surgeon wanted the copy of those reports).
Conclusion:- What I learnt from this experience is that try to keep as much paper work of tests that have been done, so that when needed you can show it to the doctor and NOT get un-needed testing done plus is saved us hazzles of time/money/insurance to get these tests done.
I talked to multiple doctor's and they said that the reason why the test is NOT done again is that they know it is going to be positive (so why do it). Instead they go to the 2nd step (Chest X Ray).
They also mentioned that for documentation purpose if you have to get it done, just go for it. So, looks like i will be going for getting the test done 3rd time like arkanand. I too just want to finish this paper work and get done with.
I tried getting the documentation from a NY Hospital where I was working in 1998. They sent the doctor the Radiology report mentioning the X Ray was clear. I don't see any size indications of the PPD testing. I either have to get back to them to send me the PPD size after testing or forget it and go for a test. So, I think I am going to get the test done. Luckily, I don't have to get the X Rays done as I just got one done in Jan 2009 (and the civil surgeon wanted the copy of those reports).
Conclusion:- What I learnt from this experience is that try to keep as much paper work of tests that have been done, so that when needed you can show it to the doctor and NOT get un-needed testing done plus is saved us hazzles of time/money/insurance to get these tests done.
2011 ruger 96 44 magnum carbine
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
more...
indianabacklog
10-24 06:16 PM
I would like to suggest that anyone in Indiana who can make it meet at the Starbucks coffee location in Westfield this Saturday.
This is at US31 and 146th Street north of Indianapolis.
I propose 11am.
Even if there are only half a dozen of us surely we can achieve more than as individuals.
This is at US31 and 146th Street north of Indianapolis.
I propose 11am.
Even if there are only half a dozen of us surely we can achieve more than as individuals.
newyorker123
09-02 01:43 PM
you can mention what all you need in your application. go to the link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-639.pdf) and www.uscis.gov/foia (http://www.uscis.gov/foia)
You can find all detail.
I recently made G-639 request, waiting for the documents, I asked for the complete set of documents tagged to my 485, will it get it me my ETA750 also?
because other guy mentioned other email, foiarequest@dol.gov. Shall I send email to this also?
You can find all detail.
I recently made G-639 request, waiting for the documents, I asked for the complete set of documents tagged to my 485, will it get it me my ETA750 also?
because other guy mentioned other email, foiarequest@dol.gov. Shall I send email to this also?
more...
vsuri
09-10 08:26 PM
I had no experience with a prior employer when my employer applied for PERM in January 2007.
Education: MS
PERM Category: EB2
Company Sector: Finance
Job Profile: Technology
PERM & I140 were approved by DoL & USCIS respectively without any RFEs. I485 pending since Aug 2007.
hello every1,
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience for EB2 category..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
Education: MS
PERM Category: EB2
Company Sector: Finance
Job Profile: Technology
PERM & I140 were approved by DoL & USCIS respectively without any RFEs. I485 pending since Aug 2007.
hello every1,
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience for EB2 category..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
2010 1962 AD~RUGER .44 MAGNUM
Nov2004
08-24 06:18 PM
can you please let us know some details. I am in the same situation.
Nov2004, EB3, I140 approved and I485 applied.
1. what happens to the present ead, after filing the new I140.
2.After I140 do we have to apply for new I485?
It took almost 3 months to get the approval. Key points:
1. USCIS does not accept I-140 PP as the original Labor approval is not included.
2. I am not sure if USCIS requests a duplicate copy of labor from DOL or they locate the orginal labor in the old file.
3. Make sure you ask your employer to download the labor approval from DOL website and complete it (employer's signature and your signature) and send it along with the I-140 application.
Hope it helps....Good luck
Nov2004, EB3, I140 approved and I485 applied.
1. what happens to the present ead, after filing the new I140.
2.After I140 do we have to apply for new I485?
It took almost 3 months to get the approval. Key points:
1. USCIS does not accept I-140 PP as the original Labor approval is not included.
2. I am not sure if USCIS requests a duplicate copy of labor from DOL or they locate the orginal labor in the old file.
3. Make sure you ask your employer to download the labor approval from DOL website and complete it (employer's signature and your signature) and send it along with the I-140 application.
Hope it helps....Good luck
more...
Sakthisagar
10-27 12:20 PM
shiv sena is an extreme outfit and their actions should be condemned, its not a right or left issue,
Great to know, this is a revelation so you need to get more info about Fox TV, how right they are here more than this senas..
So along with Fox TV what help you are planning for all of our immigration problems?
Great to know, this is a revelation so you need to get more info about Fox TV, how right they are here more than this senas..
So along with Fox TV what help you are planning for all of our immigration problems?
hair .44 magnum for sale
gman
07-08 08:08 PM
Where's this information posted?
more...
desi3933
06-19 10:07 AM
If there is sufficient time left on H1B, can one go for stamping at consulate although I485 is filed.
Yes. H1-B stamping has nothing to do with I-485 filing.
Please do some research before posting any question. Thanks!
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
Yes. H1-B stamping has nothing to do with I-485 filing.
Please do some research before posting any question. Thanks!
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
hot Ruger 44 Magnum Semi-Auto
eastindia
02-01 01:15 PM
Donate to the Haiti earthquake fund. They need your help.
more...
house Ruger 44 Carbine mfg in 1971
chanduv23
11-15 11:21 AM
I am having tough time in getting an appointment with my local Representative and let them know what out problems are. And now this DEC bulletin is making my head spin.
---may be this bulletin will push me more in getting just an appointment--
:cool:God bless America:cool:
One one side highly motivated people like you are working extremely hard to meet the local law maker and helping the community, on one side we have these highly skilled cowards who are not least motivated to do something for themselves.
Keep up the fantastic work. Please contact sammyb - he lives in our area and I just spoke to him, he is interested in meeting lawmakers.
sammyb - please contact sweet23guyin
---may be this bulletin will push me more in getting just an appointment--
:cool:God bless America:cool:
One one side highly motivated people like you are working extremely hard to meet the local law maker and helping the community, on one side we have these highly skilled cowards who are not least motivated to do something for themselves.
Keep up the fantastic work. Please contact sammyb - he lives in our area and I just spoke to him, he is interested in meeting lawmakers.
sammyb - please contact sweet23guyin
tattoo Ruger Redhawk 44 Magnum Double
vpa_2009
03-20 06:50 AM
I sold the house on H1 and there was nothing addition for H1 holder. It is just that if you have that property for less than 2 years then you pay tax.
Just thinking if the new law for GC approved like buy a house and get
GC then what will happen for those like us who have house since 2004 and sold one and bought another in that time period.
I am on EAD now. PD -Nov 2003
Just thinking if the new law for GC approved like buy a house and get
GC then what will happen for those like us who have house since 2004 and sold one and bought another in that time period.
I am on EAD now. PD -Nov 2003
more...
pictures Here is my 44 mag collection.
arpu31
11-17 12:59 PM
you have to options -
1. your employer files change of status H1 to H4 (form I-539)
2. you go out of country and come back on previously stamped H4. you need not to apply H4 again as long as previous H4 is valid. remember - if you decide to work in future, your employer has to file change of status application from H4 to H1 again.
please double check before you make any decision.
If I just re-enter US on my previous H4 stamp, will that change my status automatically back to H4 fom H1 in all govt database? or should I apply for any other docs?
1. your employer files change of status H1 to H4 (form I-539)
2. you go out of country and come back on previously stamped H4. you need not to apply H4 again as long as previous H4 is valid. remember - if you decide to work in future, your employer has to file change of status application from H4 to H1 again.
please double check before you make any decision.
If I just re-enter US on my previous H4 stamp, will that change my status automatically back to H4 fom H1 in all govt database? or should I apply for any other docs?
dresses My 44 magnum Ruger Deerfield
pd052009
09-08 12:32 PM
How far are we from hearing that H1/L1 is banned for Govt/Pvt projects?
Good atleast we can have jobs, fr..ing last couple of years tired of loosing jobs because of Outsourcing companies. Waiting for GC from 9 years and now struggling to keep the job because of Outsourcing. Big F for OS
Good atleast we can have jobs, fr..ing last couple of years tired of loosing jobs because of Outsourcing companies. Waiting for GC from 9 years and now struggling to keep the job because of Outsourcing. Big F for OS
more...
makeup Sturm Ruger 10/22 Rifle and 44 Magnum Carbine (9780873644495)
indio0617
12-31 07:52 AM
Guys ,
Is there anyone know whether H1 increasing issue will be introduced again in Congress or not ?
YES. I believe that will certainly be re-introduced as one of the measures in 2006
Is there anyone know whether H1 increasing issue will be introduced again in Congress or not ?
YES. I believe that will certainly be re-introduced as one of the measures in 2006
girlfriend Early Ruger SN225 .44 Magnum
vaishalikumar
08-05 09:33 PM
Who gets the AP (Advance parole) document from USCIS , candidate or lawyer who filed it ?
hairstyles My 44 magnum Ruger Deerfield
jcseeker
04-17 09:24 AM
it isnot dependent on how gradual your change is. If your LC process takes 10 years, you can gradually move to VP position. It does not mean it is legal. You should never change your job duties dramatically. You could move from Software engineer to Sr. Software engineer and not to Team lead or project manager. Again, it is not hard and fast rule. Legally, you could take up any job as long as you move back to the job described in the LC after the adjustment of status(I485).
Again the entire GC is for future job. I did not say "YOU HAVE TO" stay in that job. May be my wording is little bit wrong. It is always better to stay with the same company atleast for 6 months and min of one year after you get GC. If you do not, then if you intent to become citizen, there may be some questions regarding your intent for GC. I am not an attorney, but whatever, I have expressed above came directly from my company attorney.
Thanks
I am getting promoted to a manager's position. This postion requires the same technical knowledge and has the same job resposibilities. Apart from this, it has people management responsibilities. My lawyer said that since it is in the same devision and just added responsibilities it is fine. We just have to put the new position while applying for the next H1B.
It is not clear from the previous posts if this is a problem.
Being project lead and going to managing projects can be considerred as gradual change by someone or complete different job by another.
My question is since GC is for the future job why should it matter what the current job is so long it is in the similar technology area or part of the company.
Again the entire GC is for future job. I did not say "YOU HAVE TO" stay in that job. May be my wording is little bit wrong. It is always better to stay with the same company atleast for 6 months and min of one year after you get GC. If you do not, then if you intent to become citizen, there may be some questions regarding your intent for GC. I am not an attorney, but whatever, I have expressed above came directly from my company attorney.
Thanks
I am getting promoted to a manager's position. This postion requires the same technical knowledge and has the same job resposibilities. Apart from this, it has people management responsibilities. My lawyer said that since it is in the same devision and just added responsibilities it is fine. We just have to put the new position while applying for the next H1B.
It is not clear from the previous posts if this is a problem.
Being project lead and going to managing projects can be considerred as gradual change by someone or complete different job by another.
My question is since GC is for the future job why should it matter what the current job is so long it is in the similar technology area or part of the company.
HOPE_GC_SOON
08-04 02:36 PM
Gurus / Recent GC Awardees:
Can you clarify if the following Sequence of GC Issuance PRocess is correct, once Approval process is going on .
1) Online LUD on Cases "Card Production Ordered" and subsequent Email.
2) Online LUD Change as "Welcome Notices Sent" and Emails.
3) Receiving the Paper WelcomeNotices (Are these Notices are deemed to be I485 approval notices ?? I have not yet received them)
4) Receiving the Cards.
Then What is "ADIT Processing" ? they mentioned in the Welcome Notices sent email.
Any Info or guidance from Peers is highly appreciated . :)
Thanks,
My 485 approval process is going on. and above Two Steps were done. :) after a wait of 5 years.
Can you clarify if the following Sequence of GC Issuance PRocess is correct, once Approval process is going on .
1) Online LUD on Cases "Card Production Ordered" and subsequent Email.
2) Online LUD Change as "Welcome Notices Sent" and Emails.
3) Receiving the Paper WelcomeNotices (Are these Notices are deemed to be I485 approval notices ?? I have not yet received them)
4) Receiving the Cards.
Then What is "ADIT Processing" ? they mentioned in the Welcome Notices sent email.
Any Info or guidance from Peers is highly appreciated . :)
Thanks,
My 485 approval process is going on. and above Two Steps were done. :) after a wait of 5 years.
mrajatish
04-17 03:29 PM
I have heard of a couple of folks facing this unforseen delay- this happens when your case is audited.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق