hazishak
08-01 09:18 AM
Anything you will take for your H1 stamping + documents to prove that she is your wife. Her H4 status depends on your H1 status, your relationship and your ability to support her.
Thanks for your reply, but she will go alone for stamping and we have applied I-485, ap,ead on july 2nd. so is there any problem for visa stampling if our I-485 is pending.
Thanks for your reply, but she will go alone for stamping and we have applied I-485, ap,ead on july 2nd. so is there any problem for visa stampling if our I-485 is pending.
wallpaper hot poems funny. funny poems 1
vinzak
01-07 12:02 PM
Just wanted to bump this post in case people missed it. I'm surprised it didn't receive more attention.
We've been looking to a piecemeal bill that addresses EB concerns, and this one seems to be just what we asked for. The text of the bill is not out yet. But DV gives out 50k visas every year, and if those are redirected to EB, we'd be golden. And since they are already talking about EB, if we can somehow manage to inject recapture into this bill, I think it would bve a real chance to wipe out the EB backlog completely.
What u think guys?
We've been looking to a piecemeal bill that addresses EB concerns, and this one seems to be just what we asked for. The text of the bill is not out yet. But DV gives out 50k visas every year, and if those are redirected to EB, we'd be golden. And since they are already talking about EB, if we can somehow manage to inject recapture into this bill, I think it would bve a real chance to wipe out the EB backlog completely.
What u think guys?
eb3_nepa
08-14 02:47 PM
How did you come up with $745? I-485 application fees were $325 + $70 fee for biometrics. That makes it $395 per application or $790 for two applications. Maybe your lawyer gave you incorrect advice about the fees??
$745 is the CORRECT fee for 485+765+131 including the bio-metric fees. The USCIS must have screwed up. How else did one get received correctly and one get messed up!!??
$745 is the CORRECT fee for 485+765+131 including the bio-metric fees. The USCIS must have screwed up. How else did one get received correctly and one get messed up!!??
2011 Funny Simile Poems 01
guygeek007
07-23 09:25 AM
InspectorFox, Jayant and Tina - Your prompt replies and advice are much appreciated.
more...
ticktoe
09-06 02:06 PM
Doesn't matter. MS+0 works just fine. (My EB-2 was MS+0).
The biggest issue is that just with MS, IS NOT HARD TO REFUTE OTHER RESUMES. EVEN IF SOME ONE WITH A MS+6 MONTHS apply to the ad. Then it will be hard for me to justify. That's what makes me little uncomfortable here.
But how did you manage to justify that you have enough knowledge/experience for that job. Did you use any particular course material or project work or anything of that kind against some one who applied for your ad ?
Please do let me know your experience. It will greatly help me.
Thanks
The biggest issue is that just with MS, IS NOT HARD TO REFUTE OTHER RESUMES. EVEN IF SOME ONE WITH A MS+6 MONTHS apply to the ad. Then it will be hard for me to justify. That's what makes me little uncomfortable here.
But how did you manage to justify that you have enough knowledge/experience for that job. Did you use any particular course material or project work or anything of that kind against some one who applied for your ad ?
Please do let me know your experience. It will greatly help me.
Thanks
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
thepaew
09-24 10:45 AM
It is not possible to switch to F-1 if one has filed I-140. If you wish to pursue an MBA you basically have 3 choices:
1. US-based part-time program
2. If you are married, you can attend on H-4, with risks of being out of status if your spouse loses employment and the difficulty in obtaining US-based placements.
3. Look outside the US - INSEAD, IMD, MBA-HSG, LBS, ISB, etc. etc. There are very good options outside the US too.
Good Luck!
-N
1. US-based part-time program
2. If you are married, you can attend on H-4, with risks of being out of status if your spouse loses employment and the difficulty in obtaining US-based placements.
3. Look outside the US - INSEAD, IMD, MBA-HSG, LBS, ISB, etc. etc. There are very good options outside the US too.
Good Luck!
-N
2010 Funny Simile Poems 01
gc_in_30_yrs
11-12 12:52 PM
it depends on USCIS officer. i had a good lawer when I applied for h1b transfer. i got stuck for one 15 days paycheck. eventually it is cleared after submitting the paper work. having good lawer is not enough. depends on your luck or USCIS officer also
Thanks for your input. So, the pay stub that you submitted, was it from your previous employer, or the one you got your visa transferred to? Hey, if you don't mind, can I have your lawyer�s contact details?
sure. i will PM you.
Thanks for your input. So, the pay stub that you submitted, was it from your previous employer, or the one you got your visa transferred to? Hey, if you don't mind, can I have your lawyer�s contact details?
sure. i will PM you.
more...
sh2005
08-13 10:43 AM
Yes, i opened a new thread so that everybody can see that CIS does mostly work on cases according to 485 Receipt Date. Otherwise i can't justify my EAD approval. I filed 485 and AP on June 18th and got RNs 2 weeks later. But EAD was filed later on July 12th. I got the receipt number for EAD from the back of my cashed check but never got actual Receipt Notice. Today i got the email that card production has been ordered.
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
How about the processing date that was shown for your service center? I applied my I-485, EAD and AP in May (got my RN in may as well). The processing time for EAD and AP is shown to be March 26, 2007 for NSC. But, I recently got my EAD approved and an RFE for AP. So, is the website for processing time not updated as accurately as it made to be seen or somehow some applications (like mine and yours) bypass the FIFO?
On a separate note, I got an email that an RFE has been issued for my EAD, but I already got the EAD card in hand, before the RFE was issued!!!
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
How about the processing date that was shown for your service center? I applied my I-485, EAD and AP in May (got my RN in may as well). The processing time for EAD and AP is shown to be March 26, 2007 for NSC. But, I recently got my EAD approved and an RFE for AP. So, is the website for processing time not updated as accurately as it made to be seen or somehow some applications (like mine and yours) bypass the FIFO?
On a separate note, I got an email that an RFE has been issued for my EAD, but I already got the EAD card in hand, before the RFE was issued!!!
hair christmas poems, funny
Ramba
10-30 05:56 PM
your I-94 mess up will not affect your travel on AP. If you have a valid visa stamp (or intend to get one), you can still come back in H1B too. It may be advisable you maintain H1b by returing in H1B visa.
However, your I-94 mess up may affect 485 (very little chance), if they analyze the entry exit dates and last action rule with microscope. Technically, (as per LOR) you were out of status in 2006. Though you got further H1B approval from 2007 to 2008, you were out-of status as per LOR. But it can be overcome easily, if they issue a RFE in 485. This has to be explained properly. I do not think POE made a mistake. They issue I-94 based based only on the expiry of the visa stamp.
However, your I-94 mess up may affect 485 (very little chance), if they analyze the entry exit dates and last action rule with microscope. Technically, (as per LOR) you were out of status in 2006. Though you got further H1B approval from 2007 to 2008, you were out-of status as per LOR. But it can be overcome easily, if they issue a RFE in 485. This has to be explained properly. I do not think POE made a mistake. They issue I-94 based based only on the expiry of the visa stamp.
more...
ebizash
11-10 04:39 PM
Finished the survey
hot 20 Line Poems Funny
eb3_nepa
04-16 11:21 PM
Dont the bill have to be placed in federal register after the Prez signs it, for 90 days for it to be law? I remember so from the PERM regulation timeline.
Do you have any kind of documentation or a Link for this by any chance?
Do you have any kind of documentation or a Link for this by any chance?
more...
house funny best friend poems. funny
rajnag21
08-13 05:28 PM
Texas service center
nsc - nebraska service center
nsc - nebraska service center
tattoo valentine poems funny.
glus
03-19 11:31 AM
GC is for future employment but I-140 is not GC. I-485 is Adjustment of status to Permanent resident (GC).
If you leave the company prior I-140 approval. I-140, I-485, EAD & AP are canceled.
If your I-140 is approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days, then and only then, you can switch company using AC21 while still keeping your I-485 pending.
Mind you, I-140 is not your application, it is employers!
See my previous statement. There is nothing in the law that states one needs to 'work' for a company when I140 is being processed. Period.
If you leave the company prior I-140 approval. I-140, I-485, EAD & AP are canceled.
If your I-140 is approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days, then and only then, you can switch company using AC21 while still keeping your I-485 pending.
Mind you, I-140 is not your application, it is employers!
See my previous statement. There is nothing in the law that states one needs to 'work' for a company when I140 is being processed. Period.
more...
pictures poems funny. Poem 3: My Kids
amsgc
04-22 09:59 PM
Indian companies like wipro, infosys discourage GC processes.
If that is the case, then PDs should move forward once we are past FY2004.
The question is, how many are there in FY2004?!!
If that is the case, then PDs should move forward once we are past FY2004.
The question is, how many are there in FY2004?!!
dresses funny love poem. funny love
bsbawa10
08-21 10:23 AM
You must ask the badge number and note down the time of each call. Then file a complaint if you are not satisfied with the customer service experience.
Once we have a proof of hundreds of such written complaints, IV can also follow up. We need people to file 'written' complaints in order to help improve the service.
I do not have any ID (She spoke that too quickly) but I know the time (8 am cst) and I am prepared to give the written complaint.
Once we have a proof of hundreds of such written complaints, IV can also follow up. We need people to file 'written' complaints in order to help improve the service.
I do not have any ID (She spoke that too quickly) but I know the time (8 am cst) and I am prepared to give the written complaint.
more...
makeup funny Government poetry,
bfadlia
02-21 12:11 PM
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/ptimes.jsp
girlfriend Funny Valentine Poems. funny
sunray
10-07 03:57 PM
hi,
I am in a similar situation.
I have a valid visa stamped on my passport till the sept 2010. And I moved to company B after I was let go by company A. The I 797 approval for company B I got did not have the I 94.
I got the approval yesterday with a letter saying that my extension of stay has been rejected.
The letter also said that I was staying in the country after my H1B with company A has been revoked, which is against the law. It is also mentioned that my I 129 has been mailed to the consulate of my choice(which is in India).
Does he mean that I need to attend the consulate to get my I 129? If so, has the visa stamp been revoked?
Is it ok if I attend the consulate in neighbouring countries like mexico or bahamas instead of going to India?
If the Visa stamping has not been revoked, can I just cross the border for an I 94 card?
Any advice is valuable to me.
Thanks in advance.
I am in a similar situation.
I have a valid visa stamped on my passport till the sept 2010. And I moved to company B after I was let go by company A. The I 797 approval for company B I got did not have the I 94.
I got the approval yesterday with a letter saying that my extension of stay has been rejected.
The letter also said that I was staying in the country after my H1B with company A has been revoked, which is against the law. It is also mentioned that my I 129 has been mailed to the consulate of my choice(which is in India).
Does he mean that I need to attend the consulate to get my I 129? If so, has the visa stamp been revoked?
Is it ok if I attend the consulate in neighbouring countries like mexico or bahamas instead of going to India?
If the Visa stamping has not been revoked, can I just cross the border for an I 94 card?
Any advice is valuable to me.
Thanks in advance.
hairstyles poems funny. famous funny
valuablehurdle
05-06 08:26 PM
Dear IV Members,
I know this is an immigration forum but I thought if I can get some valuable advice.
A couple of days back, the police forced into our apartment saying that they have heard a complain about domestic violence. I was surprised because the only thing that happenned was that our child was crying during that time. They came inside and started searching our small apartment and started to interogate me. In our bedroom, there is space where we keep our deities and do Puja. My wife is a little bit more religious than me - so she requested them not to go to that space with shoes on. However, they did not listen and just went wherever they wanted. This I think is a disrespect to other culture. Later, when they did not find anything, they just left. We were dumb-founded. We were scared too.... In our building, we are the only Indian/foreigner. This might probably leave a permanant scar in the child's mind when he sees his father interrogated for nothing.
Can someone advice if we can take the matter to someone? Any advice or help will be greatly appreciated.
I know this is an immigration forum but I thought if I can get some valuable advice.
A couple of days back, the police forced into our apartment saying that they have heard a complain about domestic violence. I was surprised because the only thing that happenned was that our child was crying during that time. They came inside and started searching our small apartment and started to interogate me. In our bedroom, there is space where we keep our deities and do Puja. My wife is a little bit more religious than me - so she requested them not to go to that space with shoes on. However, they did not listen and just went wherever they wanted. This I think is a disrespect to other culture. Later, when they did not find anything, they just left. We were dumb-founded. We were scared too.... In our building, we are the only Indian/foreigner. This might probably leave a permanant scar in the child's mind when he sees his father interrogated for nothing.
Can someone advice if we can take the matter to someone? Any advice or help will be greatly appreciated.
ps57002
10-09 05:32 AM
How about H1B?
If one uses EAD, then files for H1b extension beyond 6 yrs (since originally that was not option, labor not pending 365 days), when extension approval comes, go out of country, come back on H1b stamp? is that do able?
If one uses EAD, then files for H1b extension beyond 6 yrs (since originally that was not option, labor not pending 365 days), when extension approval comes, go out of country, come back on H1b stamp? is that do able?
kumar1
08-05 06:43 PM
If every EB3 is ported to EB2 then EB2 will retrogress to 2001 and EB3 will become current.
I must tell you......I loved your response.
I must tell you......I loved your response.
No comments:
Post a Comment