cinqsit
11-06 08:25 PM
It means nothing. The second 485 was denied since you already have a green card so
Adjustment of Status is not required.
BTW - why did you file two 485's ?
cinqsit
Adjustment of Status is not required.
BTW - why did you file two 485's ?
cinqsit
wallpaper Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt
rajesh_kamisetty
08-03 09:33 AM
Why should we join the cause and raise our collective voice?
"Squeaky wheel gets the grease."
"Crying baby gets milk first." (probably not from English..but heard from a friend)
Why should we _do anything more than writing on forums?
"Actions Speak Louder Than Words"
"All Bark And No Bite"
(hahaha.. that's what i am doing right now)
Why should we stop infighting?
"A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand."
"All In The Same Boat" (more or less)
What do you think?
"Squeaky wheel gets the grease."
"Crying baby gets milk first." (probably not from English..but heard from a friend)
Why should we _do anything more than writing on forums?
"Actions Speak Louder Than Words"
"All Bark And No Bite"
(hahaha.. that's what i am doing right now)
Why should we stop infighting?
"A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand."
"All In The Same Boat" (more or less)
What do you think?
h1vegas
09-03 04:55 PM
Today , an officer from Homeland Security visited my office.
The guy showed his Identity Card and was looking for me and the my boss (who signed the Visa Papers). He took me privately in a conference room and asked me questions like my pay, my duties, who paid for H-1 renewal etc.
Then he went to our HR dept and asked a few questions regarding my employment history. He asked me if you are treated well in this company. ( Note: Mine is not a consultant company) Anyways the guy was very polite and he told me its just a formality from homeland security
also he took picture of my desk
On searching more on this I came across this site
Visit from the Department of Labor to client’s office about H-1B visa | James Nolan Law Office Blog (http://jnusblog.takimedia.com/eng/?p=93)
thx
Visit from the Department of Labor to client’s office about H-1B visa | James Nolan Law Office Blog (http://jnusblog.takimedia.com/eng/?p=93)
The guy showed his Identity Card and was looking for me and the my boss (who signed the Visa Papers). He took me privately in a conference room and asked me questions like my pay, my duties, who paid for H-1 renewal etc.
Then he went to our HR dept and asked a few questions regarding my employment history. He asked me if you are treated well in this company. ( Note: Mine is not a consultant company) Anyways the guy was very polite and he told me its just a formality from homeland security
also he took picture of my desk
On searching more on this I came across this site
Visit from the Department of Labor to client’s office about H-1B visa | James Nolan Law Office Blog (http://jnusblog.takimedia.com/eng/?p=93)
thx
Visit from the Department of Labor to client’s office about H-1B visa | James Nolan Law Office Blog (http://jnusblog.takimedia.com/eng/?p=93)
2011 home in France. Brad
skilledWorker
09-30 02:33 AM
Rescheduling your FP can delay your background check etc., and can complicate your GC approval timeframe. Its better not to reschedule and stick to the appointment unless their is an emergency.
AFAIK, their is no limit on the number of times you can reschedule though, but its advisable not to reschedule for the reasons mentioned earlier..
AFAIK, their is no limit on the number of times you can reschedule though, but its advisable not to reschedule for the reasons mentioned earlier..
more...
Blog Feeds
10-18 10:00 AM
I'm glad to see Immigration Voice weighing in on this one. Under some of the versions of health care reform proposals being considered by Congress, legal immigrants could be excluded for five years before they can access the Medicaid and insurance subsidies despite the fact that they pay taxes, are abiding by all of our laws and are often making critical contributions to the success of this country.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
Sumedha_inCal
05-04 02:38 PM
Dear All,
I have a question regarding the H1b visa quotas.
The USCIS website stated on April 20th that they are still accepting applications as the H1 quota of 65000+ 20000(Masters) was not full.
Does anyone have any information about the latest news in this regard?
Has the cap been met or are they still accepting applications?
Thank you all.
I have a question regarding the H1b visa quotas.
The USCIS website stated on April 20th that they are still accepting applications as the H1 quota of 65000+ 20000(Masters) was not full.
Does anyone have any information about the latest news in this regard?
Has the cap been met or are they still accepting applications?
Thank you all.
more...
f1USvisaholder
06-20 04:55 PM
Hi,
I'm on F1 visa and married to a GC holder. Should i apply for a dependent GC (I-130) on my husband's GC OR be on my F1 status untill the time he becomes citizen and then apply for the dependent GC?...What are the exact wait times for I-130 now?
If i dont apply for I-130 and go out of the country, will there be any issues while coming back to this country. What do you thing is the best way to go..
I'm ready to take some legal advice, so please let me know.
Thanks
I'm on F1 visa and married to a GC holder. Should i apply for a dependent GC (I-130) on my husband's GC OR be on my F1 status untill the time he becomes citizen and then apply for the dependent GC?...What are the exact wait times for I-130 now?
If i dont apply for I-130 and go out of the country, will there be any issues while coming back to this country. What do you thing is the best way to go..
I'm ready to take some legal advice, so please let me know.
Thanks
2010 rad pitt house in france
askreddy
09-25 12:36 AM
Bump..
more...
pappu
09-16 05:57 PM
http://picasaweb.google.com/franklinminty/IVSituationRoom
hair French Riviera: It#39;s the Pitts
ysramu
03-05 07:42 PM
My wife's EAD expires 10/10/08, she is currently on H4 but we filed last july and got our EAD/AP. I am planning to send her to india in May and she'll be back in November around 4th (AP expires Nov 19th).
Please help me with info on these questions?
1. Does she have to be in USA to apply for EAD renewal?
2. Can she apply for EAD renewal in May (5 months in advance), I know AP cant be applied before 4 months but dont know about this EAD.
3. Or Can EAD be applied after it expires also, if yes till howlong after it expires?
4. Also she'll come back on 4th Nov and applies for AP immediately, is this OK if she applies before expiry date of Nov 19th but doesn't get the approval? (I know that she cant travel until she has a visa in passport or AP again)
Thank you guys in advance.
Please help me with info on these questions?
1. Does she have to be in USA to apply for EAD renewal?
2. Can she apply for EAD renewal in May (5 months in advance), I know AP cant be applied before 4 months but dont know about this EAD.
3. Or Can EAD be applied after it expires also, if yes till howlong after it expires?
4. Also she'll come back on 4th Nov and applies for AP immediately, is this OK if she applies before expiry date of Nov 19th but doesn't get the approval? (I know that she cant travel until she has a visa in passport or AP again)
Thank you guys in advance.
more...
Blog Feeds
12-11 10:00 PM
The Senate voted 59-40 this morning to table Senator Durbin's latest version of the DREAM Act and will instead take up the House version passed last night probably early next week. That's important for a couple of reasons (and probably good news overall). First, the bill will not need to be sent back to the House to reconcile differences between the two bills. Second, the tax bill that has given some on the fence Republicans the excuse to filibuster the DREAM Act may be dealt with by then. Finally, there is some additional time to round up a couple of...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/senate-to-consider-house-passed-dream-bill-next-week.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/senate-to-consider-house-passed-dream-bill-next-week.html)
hot Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie
seekerofpeace
04-14 10:36 PM
check this out:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975190063718725.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
SoP
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975190063718725.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
SoP
more...
house Brad Pitt#39;s At Home In South
Blog Feeds
06-18 03:50 PM
It seems like ages since the federal government transformed the rules on when and how foreign citizens apply for visas to enter the United States. Actually, the most dramatic changes occurred in the summers of 2003 and 2004. In 2003, the government dramatically restricted the authority of American consular officers to waive the appearance of visa applicants for an in-person interview. In 2004, the U.S. State Department stopped "revalidating"(renewing previously issued but expired) nonimmigrant visas from a central processing facility in the United States. More changes have followed. Now all applicants must submit the visa application on-line (all the better...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/06/my-entry-1.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/06/my-entry-1.html)
tattoo Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie
mattrock23
08-05 01:16 AM
That's got to be somewhere around Jackson and Montgomery. Am I right?
more...
pictures Brad Pitt amp; Angelina Jolie
Macaca
11-09 04:54 PM
A Failure to Lead (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010843) The Democratic Congress is more interested in acting out than in taking positive action BY KARL ROVE | Wall Street Journal, November 9, 2007
Mr. Rove is a former adviser to President George W. Bush.
This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.
The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.
Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.
Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.
After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.
After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.
Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.
Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.
The Democratic victory in 2006 was narrow. They won the House by 85,961 votes out of over 80 million cast and the Senate by a mere 3,562 out of over 62 million cast. A party that wins control by that narrow margin can quickly see its fortunes reversed when it fails to act responsibly, fails to fulfill its promises, and fails to lead.
Mr. Rove is a former adviser to President George W. Bush.
This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.
The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.
Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.
Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.
After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.
After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.
Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.
Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.
The Democratic victory in 2006 was narrow. They won the House by 85,961 votes out of over 80 million cast and the Senate by a mere 3,562 out of over 62 million cast. A party that wins control by that narrow margin can quickly see its fortunes reversed when it fails to act responsibly, fails to fulfill its promises, and fails to lead.
dresses Brad Pitt
4046
04-11 02:28 PM
Is it possible to group and ungroup those rectangles? I mean, it should be possible that since you did it (I believe) but how did you? And is there a way to undo it?
more...
makeup Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie
penguin80
08-14 09:42 AM
I worked for an employer on h1b from oct,2005 to jun, 2007 and then for another employer from jun, 2007 till now (Aug, 2009). My I797 says my H1b is valid only till 05/2010. Since i wud complete my 5years in US only in Oct, 2010, is it possible for me to get H1 extension for another year in 05/2010 even if my employer doesn't file for GC or he starts GC now but I don't get I140 by 05/2010. How and when do I need to apply for H1B extension.
Thanks
Thanks
girlfriend Brad Pitt has decided to sell
dirtyfellaw2
07-09 01:18 PM
Please advice when to file AC21
1) prior to joining new company
OR
2) Soon after joinng the new company?
Thanks in advance!
1) prior to joining new company
OR
2) Soon after joinng the new company?
Thanks in advance!
hairstyles Brad Pitt in Paris, France
Blog Feeds
05-15 02:00 AM
Back in 2002, the President signed a law designed to keep immigrant families intact, the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA). The law includes a provision that states that if a child turns 21 years of age before obtaining a green card together with his parents, his petition would "automatically be converted to the appropriate category" and he would be entitled to the "original priority date". What does this mean? Consider the case of Melvin Cuellar de Osorio. His grandmother, a U.S. citizen, submitted a petition to sponsor his family for permanent residence in 1998. Because of long backlogs, Melvin's parents...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/05/way-cleared-for-lawsuit-to-keep-families-together.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/05/way-cleared-for-lawsuit-to-keep-families-together.html)
CVine
01-07 10:05 AM
My girlfriend (from Russia) and I have been for about 3 years and living together for the last year and I've recently decided I want to propose this summer. She is currently here as an I-9 form (she's in grad school), but her student visa is expired. She recently got a job on campus and while she was going through the paperwork yesterday realized that her passport is going to expire next April (2012). So she is now planning to go back to Russia at the end of the year to renew her passport and apply for a new student visa. As I think we'd both like a longer engagement, and with a fiance visa you need to marry within 90 days of entering the country, we probably wouldn't want to apply for one at that time. However, I'm now wondering if being engaged will cause any complications for her when applying for her student visa. Any information or advise you could give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
checklaw
07-20 08:05 AM
My original birth certificate has all the details needed, except that my last name is an initial, and not spelt out completely. Would I require an affidavit with an expanded last name?
Appreciate your reply!
As Birth Certificate is part of Initial evidence, 2 secondary evidence affidavits for incomplete/incorrect entries is always good for peace of mind. Search for numerous threads on Birth Certificates last month for affidavit format, who can provide etc.
Appreciate your reply!
As Birth Certificate is part of Initial evidence, 2 secondary evidence affidavits for incomplete/incorrect entries is always good for peace of mind. Search for numerous threads on Birth Certificates last month for affidavit format, who can provide etc.
