Blog Feeds
04-01 10:40 AM
Our friendly anti Jack has provided in the comments a couple of links to an intriguing story regarding Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele (currently embroiled in another scandal - this time involving strippers and GOP money - oy!). Steele has been one of the moderate voices in the GOP when it comes to immigration reform in the past and apparently he met with a pro-reform group called the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM). Accounts differ regarding whether Steele promised to work for immigration reform and, more specifically, help round up a second GOP Senator to sponsor the reform bill...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/gop-head-sort-of-promises-to-support-cir.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/gop-head-sort-of-promises-to-support-cir.html)
wallpaper Green Bay Packers
quizzer
09-12 02:32 PM
Hi,
I have applied for I-140 in Oct 2006 and hvn't recd I-140 yet (Nebraska)
My 485/EAD checks got encashed today. My questions is do I need I-140 before FP or EAD card.
thanx
RJ
EB2 or EB3??? Did you see any LUD on ur I140 lately?
I have applied for I-140 in Oct 2006 and hvn't recd I-140 yet (Nebraska)
My 485/EAD checks got encashed today. My questions is do I need I-140 before FP or EAD card.
thanx
RJ
EB2 or EB3??? Did you see any LUD on ur I140 lately?
clif
06-28 12:57 PM
My wife filed I-539 for changing status from H-4 to F-1 at end of May. We have the receipt and the case is now pending. Is it possible for her to request cancellation of this change of status and continue in H-4 status? If so, does anyone know how to ask USCIS for this?
2011 the Green Bay Packers are
roadtogreen
08-28 01:48 PM
1. I got laid off from company A last year. I was on H1B. Company A notified me about 1 month in advance so I had some time to find another job. I also had a valid EAD which I wasn't using at that time. They also did not cancel I-140.
2. I joined Company B using my EAD within the 30 day period, so I never went out of status. Also, I didn't file AC21
3. My GC application was approved in the first week of Aug.
I have a couple of really interesting opportunities that I would like to pursue. My job profile has been similar at both A and B and will likely be similar even in C should I join there. Am I required to work at B for any specific period of time before I can pursue these opportunities?
2. I joined Company B using my EAD within the 30 day period, so I never went out of status. Also, I didn't file AC21
3. My GC application was approved in the first week of Aug.
I have a couple of really interesting opportunities that I would like to pursue. My job profile has been similar at both A and B and will likely be similar even in C should I join there. Am I required to work at B for any specific period of time before I can pursue these opportunities?
more...
arnab221
06-26 01:02 PM
bumping up
ashwinkumara
05-20 01:29 AM
Regional Passport Office, Chennai (http://passport.tn.nic.in/)
Try going in person to the regional passport office. ( If the Police Verification step is complete)
Try going in person to the regional passport office. ( If the Police Verification step is complete)
more...
Blog Feeds
11-22 03:21 AM
[Blogger's Note: With the surrender by Lou Dobbs last Wednesday of his role at CNN as an anti-immigrant advocacy journalist, and his refusal to rule out a run for political office, It's time to reprise my reasons for blogging about our nation's dysfunctional immigration policies, first published on October 24, 2004. Despite the passing years, the message has muscular legs.] This is the first posting to a new public-policy blog with a name that must be a typo: www.nationofimmigrators.com. Surely this blogger means to write �Nation of Immigrants,� not �Immigrators�. No; there�s no mistake. We are all Immigrators. We, the...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/11/this-is-the-first-posting-to-a-new-public-policy-blog-with-a-name-that-must-be-a-typo-wwwnationofimmigratorscom----surely.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/11/this-is-the-first-posting-to-a-new-public-policy-blog-with-a-name-that-must-be-a-typo-wwwnationofimmigratorscom----surely.html)
2010 the Green Bay Packers
fatjoe
10-10 03:41 PM
Is there anyone whose I485 is pending for more than 90 days. My I-485 was sent on July 18th. I called USCIS twice and they are asking me to call them on Oct 17th (when 90 days is completed). They are saying that my appl.n should be in by then. Is there any one whose checks got cleared after 90 days. If not, what did you do about it.
more...
la6470
01-12 03:51 PM
Hi Fellow forum users
I and my spouse both have primary/derivative through each other. However I only have EAD (dependent) through my spouse's principal AOS. Can I use that to change my job? I dont have time to apply for a principal EAD. Once I start the new job in dependent EAD can I apply for an EAD based on my primary AOS so that my new employer can drop a AC21 mail to USCIS? The reason I want to do this is to maintain my principal AOS as well.
Thanks in advance for all your comments/insights.
Regards
I and my spouse both have primary/derivative through each other. However I only have EAD (dependent) through my spouse's principal AOS. Can I use that to change my job? I dont have time to apply for a principal EAD. Once I start the new job in dependent EAD can I apply for an EAD based on my primary AOS so that my new employer can drop a AC21 mail to USCIS? The reason I want to do this is to maintain my principal AOS as well.
Thanks in advance for all your comments/insights.
Regards
hair NFL Rug - Green Bay Packers
chanduv23
11-19 03:49 PM
Hi there!!!
Hello, welcome to IV - lets mobilize the Upstate New Yorkers
Hello, welcome to IV - lets mobilize the Upstate New Yorkers
more...
thamarai
09-25 06:52 PM
I am in L2 visa right now and I have an EAD to work. I got a job that I need to start on oct 01.
My spouse status will change from L1 to H1B from oct 01, as his employer filled for H1B.
Our L1 & L2 are valid until Aug 2011.
I don't have H4 yet.
What are the various options available for me to work?
1. Can I use my EAD to work which is valid until aug 2011?
2. Can I apply for H1B for me? If yes when I can start working with my H1B.
3. Is there is any way to maintain my husband L1 status until it's validity(Aug 2011) and then switching to H1B after L1 expires?
My spouse status will change from L1 to H1B from oct 01, as his employer filled for H1B.
Our L1 & L2 are valid until Aug 2011.
I don't have H4 yet.
What are the various options available for me to work?
1. Can I use my EAD to work which is valid until aug 2011?
2. Can I apply for H1B for me? If yes when I can start working with my H1B.
3. Is there is any way to maintain my husband L1 status until it's validity(Aug 2011) and then switching to H1B after L1 expires?
hot Miller Lite Green Bay Packers
downloadzombie
07-03 01:22 AM
ALL,
As expected this happened, but it happened sooner than expected.
This expected sooner because CIR was voted out in Senate and this was not thought about by this goverment.
Basically this was a close door arrangement between govt agencies which temporarily wanted to lower the friction by IV AND SIMILAR GROUPS.
BUT finally I believe this will come to a rest once we have new government next year.
Till that we are a tennis ball which can be tossed to any court.
PS: I dont even have I-140 and not even applied for one.
So best of luck to all and me.
regards
sandeep
As expected this happened, but it happened sooner than expected.
This expected sooner because CIR was voted out in Senate and this was not thought about by this goverment.
Basically this was a close door arrangement between govt agencies which temporarily wanted to lower the friction by IV AND SIMILAR GROUPS.
BUT finally I believe this will come to a rest once we have new government next year.
Till that we are a tennis ball which can be tossed to any court.
PS: I dont even have I-140 and not even applied for one.
So best of luck to all and me.
regards
sandeep
more...
house Green Bay Packers Die Cut
vikramark
10-18 09:38 AM
Thanks Parag
tattoo Green Bay Packers v St. Louis
prashantkh
06-20 10:38 AM
Several of my friends have gone to Canadian embassies for visa stamping and even got it done with considerably less hassle compared to stamping in US consulates in India. :)
pk
pk
more...
pictures Green Bay Packers amp;
Blog Feeds
07-02 04:30 PM
On June 25, President Obama met with a bipartisan group of 30 key legislators beginning a dialogue that he hopes will lead to comprehensive immigration reform in 2009 or early in 2010. Among the topics discussed were border security, family reunification and reform of the outdated quota system. Following the meeting, the President stated, �but what I�m encouraged by is that after all the overheated rhetoric and the occasional demagoguery on all sides around this issue, we�ve got a responsible set of leaders sitting around the table who want to actively get something done and not put it off until...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/president-obama-and-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/president-obama-and-immigration-reform.html)
dresses Green Bay Packers
chidurala
07-28 08:13 AM
hi
my husband's GC has been approved.
so how long will it take me to get the green card ??
thank u in advance
my husband's GC has been approved.
so how long will it take me to get the green card ??
thank u in advance
more...
makeup green-ay-packers-pre-season-
viva
01-25 09:27 PM
why do u want to move to europe? states is fairly good country.
girlfriend Green Bay Packers screenshot 3
Macaca
10-01 08:04 AM
Taxes, Health Lead Hill Agenda (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/30/AR2007093001617.html?hpid=topnews) After Iraq Fight, Both Parties Welcome Shift By Jonathan Weisman | Washington Post Staff Writer, October 1, 2007
Out of a political stalemate over Iraq, domestic policy is surging to prominence on Capitol Hill, with Republicans and Democrats preparing for a time-honored clash over health care, tax policy, the scope of government and its role in America's problems at home.
The brewing veto fight this week over an expanded children's health insurance program is only the most visible sign of the new emphasis on domestic issues. Democratic White House hopefuls are resurrecting a push for universal health care while talking up tax policy, poverty and criminal justice. Democratic congressional leaders are revisiting Clinton-era battles over hate crimes and federal funding for local police forces.
The White House, at the urging of congressional Republican leaders, is spoiling for a fight on Democratic spending. And GOP leaders are looking for any opportunity for confrontations on illegal immigration and taxation.
At the heart of it all is a central question: Thirteen years after the 1994 Republican Revolution, has the country turned to the left in search of government solutions to intractable domestic problems?
Democrats think that the answer is yes. "As conditions deteriorate, Americans are asking, 'Who can make it better? Where can we look for help?' And not surprisingly, government is increasingly the answer," said Peter Hart, a Democratic pollster.
Even Republicans see a growing unease as the driving force in the domestic policy resurgence.
"There's no question the economy is good, but it's not a good for everybody," said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio.). "When you look at family incomes, there hasn't been much rise. But there has been increased health-care costs, increased energy costs. They're nibbling up more than the family budget. It just drives more concerns."
For both parties, domestic policy fights are a welcome break after three election cycles dominated by terrorism and war. Republican and Democratic political leaders say they cannot shy away from the Iraq war. But for much of the year, the fight over the war has only shown Democrats to be ineffectual and Republicans to be intransigent.
For Democrats, a break in that fight could allow them to focus on issues that voters say demand attention. Last year's election victories by Democratic Sens. James Webb in Virginia and Jon Tester in Montana, and by Democratic governors in Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa and Ohio, show that a populist message can prevail even in swing states.
For Republicans, changing the subject is simply a relief.
"I think it is territory that tends to unite us more," said Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.). "Republicans tend to squabble, but when it's fiscal issues, when it's economic issues, we tend to come together. That's what makes us Republicans."
If so, the GOP may be having an identity crisis. Boehner, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and President Bush have met regularly on what Boehner calls his "rebranding" initiative: winning back for the GOP the mantle of fiscal discipline and limited government.
But in the first big domestic battle on Capitol Hill, 18 Republicans in the Senate and 45 in the House abandoned their leaders to side with the Democrats on a five-year, $35 billion expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
House Republicans are expected to muster enough votes to sustain Bush's anticipated veto of the SCHIP bill, but Boehner conceded that Congress is liable to override the promised veto on a $21 billion water-project bill so crammed with home-district projects that it has been denounced by taxpayer and environmental groups alike.
"There's deadlock on Iraq. Bush is intransigent. It's clear we're not going to get the 60 votes to change course on the war. But Republicans are hurting too, so they're breaking with him on all these domestic issues," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Indeed, on the domestic front Republicans may be in the same bind that they face on foreign policy: Their conservative base is not where the rest of the country is.
For more than a decade, the Democratic polling firm Hart Research and the Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies have read two propositions to Americans: "Government should do more to solve problems and help meet the needs of people" and "Government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals."
In December 1995, at the height of the Republican Revolution, a less-intrusive government won out, 62 percent to 32 percent. This month, a more activist government won out, 55 percent to 38 percent. Independent voters sided with government activism, 52 percent to 39 percent.
But Republican voters, by a margin of 62 to 32 percent, still say government is doing too much.
"The big tectonic plates of American politics are shifting, and the old Republican policies of limited government aren't working like they used to," Schumer said. "Their problem is, the Republican primary vote is still the old George Bush coalition -- strong foreign policy, cut taxes, cut government, family values. But Americans aren't there anymore."
But the same poll did find some hope for the GOP, said Neil Newhouse, a partner at Public Opinion Strategies. Americans said they do not see a role for the federal government in the current mortgage crisis.
"Americans seem to be saying that the problems the country is facing demand a more activist government, but that this does not extend to all issues or every problem," Newhouse said.
That's a difficult needle to thread, but it can be done, said former senator Jim Talent (R-Mo.), a top domestic policy adviser to Republican White House hopeful Mitt Romney. Then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush showed in 2000, with his stand on education and his general slogan of "compassionate conservatism," that Republicans can win on traditional Democratic turf. They can do that again, especially on health care, Talent said.
"Part of what is at the core of the party is smaller government, fiscal restraint," said Sen. Mel Martinez (Fla.), general chairman of the Republican National Committee. "But like in this debate on SCHIP, it's very important that we as Republicans make it clear we are for insuring children."
"It's no longer permissible for us to think 47 million Americans being uninsured is okay," Martinez said.
Out of a political stalemate over Iraq, domestic policy is surging to prominence on Capitol Hill, with Republicans and Democrats preparing for a time-honored clash over health care, tax policy, the scope of government and its role in America's problems at home.
The brewing veto fight this week over an expanded children's health insurance program is only the most visible sign of the new emphasis on domestic issues. Democratic White House hopefuls are resurrecting a push for universal health care while talking up tax policy, poverty and criminal justice. Democratic congressional leaders are revisiting Clinton-era battles over hate crimes and federal funding for local police forces.
The White House, at the urging of congressional Republican leaders, is spoiling for a fight on Democratic spending. And GOP leaders are looking for any opportunity for confrontations on illegal immigration and taxation.
At the heart of it all is a central question: Thirteen years after the 1994 Republican Revolution, has the country turned to the left in search of government solutions to intractable domestic problems?
Democrats think that the answer is yes. "As conditions deteriorate, Americans are asking, 'Who can make it better? Where can we look for help?' And not surprisingly, government is increasingly the answer," said Peter Hart, a Democratic pollster.
Even Republicans see a growing unease as the driving force in the domestic policy resurgence.
"There's no question the economy is good, but it's not a good for everybody," said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio.). "When you look at family incomes, there hasn't been much rise. But there has been increased health-care costs, increased energy costs. They're nibbling up more than the family budget. It just drives more concerns."
For both parties, domestic policy fights are a welcome break after three election cycles dominated by terrorism and war. Republican and Democratic political leaders say they cannot shy away from the Iraq war. But for much of the year, the fight over the war has only shown Democrats to be ineffectual and Republicans to be intransigent.
For Democrats, a break in that fight could allow them to focus on issues that voters say demand attention. Last year's election victories by Democratic Sens. James Webb in Virginia and Jon Tester in Montana, and by Democratic governors in Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa and Ohio, show that a populist message can prevail even in swing states.
For Republicans, changing the subject is simply a relief.
"I think it is territory that tends to unite us more," said Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.). "Republicans tend to squabble, but when it's fiscal issues, when it's economic issues, we tend to come together. That's what makes us Republicans."
If so, the GOP may be having an identity crisis. Boehner, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and President Bush have met regularly on what Boehner calls his "rebranding" initiative: winning back for the GOP the mantle of fiscal discipline and limited government.
But in the first big domestic battle on Capitol Hill, 18 Republicans in the Senate and 45 in the House abandoned their leaders to side with the Democrats on a five-year, $35 billion expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
House Republicans are expected to muster enough votes to sustain Bush's anticipated veto of the SCHIP bill, but Boehner conceded that Congress is liable to override the promised veto on a $21 billion water-project bill so crammed with home-district projects that it has been denounced by taxpayer and environmental groups alike.
"There's deadlock on Iraq. Bush is intransigent. It's clear we're not going to get the 60 votes to change course on the war. But Republicans are hurting too, so they're breaking with him on all these domestic issues," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Indeed, on the domestic front Republicans may be in the same bind that they face on foreign policy: Their conservative base is not where the rest of the country is.
For more than a decade, the Democratic polling firm Hart Research and the Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies have read two propositions to Americans: "Government should do more to solve problems and help meet the needs of people" and "Government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals."
In December 1995, at the height of the Republican Revolution, a less-intrusive government won out, 62 percent to 32 percent. This month, a more activist government won out, 55 percent to 38 percent. Independent voters sided with government activism, 52 percent to 39 percent.
But Republican voters, by a margin of 62 to 32 percent, still say government is doing too much.
"The big tectonic plates of American politics are shifting, and the old Republican policies of limited government aren't working like they used to," Schumer said. "Their problem is, the Republican primary vote is still the old George Bush coalition -- strong foreign policy, cut taxes, cut government, family values. But Americans aren't there anymore."
But the same poll did find some hope for the GOP, said Neil Newhouse, a partner at Public Opinion Strategies. Americans said they do not see a role for the federal government in the current mortgage crisis.
"Americans seem to be saying that the problems the country is facing demand a more activist government, but that this does not extend to all issues or every problem," Newhouse said.
That's a difficult needle to thread, but it can be done, said former senator Jim Talent (R-Mo.), a top domestic policy adviser to Republican White House hopeful Mitt Romney. Then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush showed in 2000, with his stand on education and his general slogan of "compassionate conservatism," that Republicans can win on traditional Democratic turf. They can do that again, especially on health care, Talent said.
"Part of what is at the core of the party is smaller government, fiscal restraint," said Sen. Mel Martinez (Fla.), general chairman of the Republican National Committee. "But like in this debate on SCHIP, it's very important that we as Republicans make it clear we are for insuring children."
"It's no longer permissible for us to think 47 million Americans being uninsured is okay," Martinez said.
hairstyles Green Bay Packers wide
go_guy123
03-08 09:38 AM
Angelo Paparelli on Dysfunctional Government: Granular and Possibly Grand Immigration Reform (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2011/03/granular-and-possibly-grand-immigration-reform.html)
Grand, Comprehensive , Dream or whatever name they give to the Mass Amnesty for undocumented, they are all non started and destint to doom.
It is the Democratic party's hostage taking of H1B/EB for these grand amnesty plans, that is the real problem.
Grand, Comprehensive , Dream or whatever name they give to the Mass Amnesty for undocumented, they are all non started and destint to doom.
It is the Democratic party's hostage taking of H1B/EB for these grand amnesty plans, that is the real problem.
bodhi_tree
02-26 10:17 AM
Hello,
I have read in the popular immigration forums that one can request a one time 3 year extension to H1b beyond the standard 6 year limit if one has an approved I140 and could not file I485 due to retrogression. I am confused on how does one go about requesting this..meaning is it sufficient to just put three years under the 'date of intended employment' in I129 form and have a labor condition approval with similar dates or do you have to include a copy of approved I140 and point to the 2005 Aytes memo that grants such a provision while you file for I129. By the way the situation is also a bit more complicated due to the fact that I am changing jobs (5th year H1) and trying to get a 3 year transfer based on approval from the company I am leaving.
Appreciate your inputs
I have read in the popular immigration forums that one can request a one time 3 year extension to H1b beyond the standard 6 year limit if one has an approved I140 and could not file I485 due to retrogression. I am confused on how does one go about requesting this..meaning is it sufficient to just put three years under the 'date of intended employment' in I129 form and have a labor condition approval with similar dates or do you have to include a copy of approved I140 and point to the 2005 Aytes memo that grants such a provision while you file for I129. By the way the situation is also a bit more complicated due to the fact that I am changing jobs (5th year H1) and trying to get a 3 year transfer based on approval from the company I am leaving.
Appreciate your inputs
iad2ead
10-27 04:38 AM
Does Lawyer receives AP and sends it to us OR does applicants receive it?
I haven't received AP yet. got EAD/FP/notices.
cheers
Iad
I haven't received AP yet. got EAD/FP/notices.
cheers
Iad
No comments:
Post a Comment