shirish
04-27 09:41 AM
I had received the same story in email about 7 years back.
This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?
This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?
kumarc123
01-15 12:17 PM
Hello All,
Out of curiosity, I called the congresswoman's office to ask if she would be re-sponsoring the visa recapture bill. The person on the phone asked me to call back next week, because at present she was considering about it.
Can we all try to call her office and request her to re sponsor this bill, as this will help the housing crisis.
I am posting a link, you all can call her office and even explain to the person about why this bill is so important. ( wait to be transferred to the specific person who handles immigration issues, don't talk to the phone operator as she would care less)
http://lofgren.house.gov/
Good Luck to all of us.
Out of curiosity, I called the congresswoman's office to ask if she would be re-sponsoring the visa recapture bill. The person on the phone asked me to call back next week, because at present she was considering about it.
Can we all try to call her office and request her to re sponsor this bill, as this will help the housing crisis.
I am posting a link, you all can call her office and even explain to the person about why this bill is so important. ( wait to be transferred to the specific person who handles immigration issues, don't talk to the phone operator as she would care less)
http://lofgren.house.gov/
Good Luck to all of us.
gc??
04-26 02:31 PM
I�m in EB2 and My I-140 was approved September 2008 through Employer A. My priority date is March 2008. I moved to Employer B. My old Employer A will not revoke my I-140. He is ready to hire me again, If I want to go back. I am completing 5 years in January 2011.
It would be great if I get answer the below my Question:
1. Do I need to go back to my old employer A to apply my I-485. If yes is there any specific time period to go back to my old employer A.
2. If I stay with my current Employer B. will I get 6th extension and will my old priority date will be considered with new processs.
3. which one is best choice, like staying with employer B or going back to Employer A.
Thanks for your help.
Ram
If your first company is willing to take you back and you will be able to file 485, why do you want to start the process with emp b?
It would be great if I get answer the below my Question:
1. Do I need to go back to my old employer A to apply my I-485. If yes is there any specific time period to go back to my old employer A.
2. If I stay with my current Employer B. will I get 6th extension and will my old priority date will be considered with new processs.
3. which one is best choice, like staying with employer B or going back to Employer A.
Thanks for your help.
Ram
If your first company is willing to take you back and you will be able to file 485, why do you want to start the process with emp b?
shivarajan
11-23 10:41 PM
ICICI is worst when it comes to exchange rates:
I have used many transfer services in past years so far and these are worth mentioning.
In Order of exchange rates:
-SBI Online (Now simple to register too and very nice one)
-Remit2India (has specials, but careful they don't fullfill it)
-HDFC (Internally uses same service of remit2India)
-CityBank
-ICICI
-Western Union
Remember all of them ask for SSN nowadays and having SSN on some unreliable site databases may be little risky.
:D
I have used many transfer services in past years so far and these are worth mentioning.
In Order of exchange rates:
-SBI Online (Now simple to register too and very nice one)
-Remit2India (has specials, but careful they don't fullfill it)
-HDFC (Internally uses same service of remit2India)
-CityBank
-ICICI
-Western Union
Remember all of them ask for SSN nowadays and having SSN on some unreliable site databases may be little risky.
:D
more...
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
pappu
04-27 09:38 AM
This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?
more...
aps
01-07 10:09 AM
can you please explain little more? what is meant by after invoking, is it AC21?
If one enters using AP,then works for his current employer , even then, he/she has to leave and reenter to get h1 status? or only in case of ac21?
thanks in advance.
If one enters using AP,then works for his current employer , even then, he/she has to leave and reenter to get h1 status? or only in case of ac21?
thanks in advance.
simple1
06-18 01:47 PM
Recently multiple threads have been created in IV forum about
* Illegal’s (now conveniently called undocumented immigrants) * their anchor babies * and CIR.
We should not support Illegal’s and their agenda.
Support CIR only after seeing something for EB non-ROW or atleast legal immigration in general.
We need to oppose CIR till we see such a provision.
* Illegal’s (now conveniently called undocumented immigrants) * their anchor babies * and CIR.
We should not support Illegal’s and their agenda.
Support CIR only after seeing something for EB non-ROW or atleast legal immigration in general.
We need to oppose CIR till we see such a provision.
more...
bluekayal
03-18 02:50 PM
I wonder if my child who only has ITIN will get the $300..probably not ...Waste of money to apply for EAD for a 10 yr old!
vali
10-23 11:38 AM
I apologize from the beginning if I�m asking some stupid questions but I�m really confused after I read all those I-140 issues posted on this forum.
I just received today my LC after a long wait in backlog from 04/2001.
1. My lawyer is asking me for $1000.00 premium processing fee and some documents from my employer for this PP for I-140. Is it still available?
2. How long will be until this I-140 gets approved? Anyone who did this lately?
3. I�m filling I-140 together with I-485. It matters, time PP wise?
4. Is there another�next step� towards the GC or just wait for those to be approved?
5. I�m so �squeezed� on my wallet, how much money will be still needed until the GC is in my hand?
I paid so far more then 35G. - The previous �steps� in processing fees and lawyer�s fees.
I would really appreciate some honest answers; I�m seriously thinking to go back to my country if the GC will be too far away.
Thank you guys for your attention and thanks IV for the good work done so far.
:)
I just received today my LC after a long wait in backlog from 04/2001.
1. My lawyer is asking me for $1000.00 premium processing fee and some documents from my employer for this PP for I-140. Is it still available?
2. How long will be until this I-140 gets approved? Anyone who did this lately?
3. I�m filling I-140 together with I-485. It matters, time PP wise?
4. Is there another�next step� towards the GC or just wait for those to be approved?
5. I�m so �squeezed� on my wallet, how much money will be still needed until the GC is in my hand?
I paid so far more then 35G. - The previous �steps� in processing fees and lawyer�s fees.
I would really appreciate some honest answers; I�m seriously thinking to go back to my country if the GC will be too far away.
Thank you guys for your attention and thanks IV for the good work done so far.
:)
more...
babu123
08-20 03:41 PM
Call 1-800-375-5283
options 1 2 2 6 2 2 1
At level 1, tell you didnt received receipt nbr and check not encashed.
You will be transfered to level 2. The officer at level 2 has access to check the name status.
Myself and my wife got the information. But some of my friends are not receiving the information. Good luck
options 1 2 2 6 2 2 1
At level 1, tell you didnt received receipt nbr and check not encashed.
You will be transfered to level 2. The officer at level 2 has access to check the name status.
Myself and my wife got the information. But some of my friends are not receiving the information. Good luck
yabadaba
04-17 02:58 PM
the perm user manual is pretty detailed.
What happens is whenever an application is created... a case number/application number is created with T as the prefix (T-123-4567)
as soon as the information is filled out, everything is updated, all boxes are checked and the lawyer submits the form/application... the case number/app number changes to (A-123-4567 or C-123-4567) for either Atlanta or Chicago (based on where u live).
What happens is whenever an application is created... a case number/application number is created with T as the prefix (T-123-4567)
as soon as the information is filled out, everything is updated, all boxes are checked and the lawyer submits the form/application... the case number/app number changes to (A-123-4567 or C-123-4567) for either Atlanta or Chicago (based on where u live).
more...
gbof
04-08 03:00 PM
Couple of related questions.
1. Which method to use (paper or e-file) if you are filing for your EAD & AP for the first time ?
2. Where to file, the Service center or Lock Box facility ?
1). I just mailed (paper filing) I-765 for renewal of EAD. Reason: Last year, because of a tiny/immaterial mistake (in e-filing) my EAD was delayed to close to 120 days..
2) As per filing instructions (feb,2010) I donot think you have any choice/option as to where to file.
Make your own choice, good luck.
1. Which method to use (paper or e-file) if you are filing for your EAD & AP for the first time ?
2. Where to file, the Service center or Lock Box facility ?
1). I just mailed (paper filing) I-765 for renewal of EAD. Reason: Last year, because of a tiny/immaterial mistake (in e-filing) my EAD was delayed to close to 120 days..
2) As per filing instructions (feb,2010) I donot think you have any choice/option as to where to file.
Make your own choice, good luck.
bingl
04-15 11:47 PM
My Driving license is expiring soon (the day my I94 expires ) ....I have been on H4 till now ....but my husband is on EAD now . When I went to renew my license they asked me to get EAD since my I94 will expire soon . Is that the only way to renew ? Can I file for AP and use that, since I will have to travel to India anyways ?
more...
chanduv23
11-15 10:19 AM
Still only 6 people have courage to speak out. What is running in your veins, water?
We may not be able make changes in the law now but we might be able to get some relief on restrictions, that does not allow law making.
Educate yourself or suffer...
I sent u a PM
We may not be able make changes in the law now but we might be able to get some relief on restrictions, that does not allow law making.
Educate yourself or suffer...
I sent u a PM
don840
04-08 02:30 PM
wandmaker,
need another clarification.
on DS 156, Q 38- "Have you ever violated the terms of a U.S. visa,----?", Do I answer yes or no. There is another question, about 'has your visa ever been revoked?"
An attorney that i consulted, said the answer is 'No' to both these questions. His explaination was, I might have violated terms of h1 status and my h1 status has been revoked. But I have not violated terms of visa, and my visa (thats stamped in the passport) has not been revoked.
Is his explaination correct?
need another clarification.
on DS 156, Q 38- "Have you ever violated the terms of a U.S. visa,----?", Do I answer yes or no. There is another question, about 'has your visa ever been revoked?"
An attorney that i consulted, said the answer is 'No' to both these questions. His explaination was, I might have violated terms of h1 status and my h1 status has been revoked. But I have not violated terms of visa, and my visa (thats stamped in the passport) has not been revoked.
Is his explaination correct?
more...
sanju
08-31 12:10 PM
I think we all should VOTE in this poll.
You will waste your time if you vote in Lou Dobbs polls. His pools are rigged. These polls start in the loo as they begin by giving 100,000 votes to his ideological point of view and 0 votes in support of the opposite view. Hence the disclaimer to the pools. I suggest that we simply ignore him and don't participate in his pool. It would be one less human being giving Lou Dobbs no value, making him inconsequential one person at a time.
You will waste your time if you vote in Lou Dobbs polls. His pools are rigged. These polls start in the loo as they begin by giving 100,000 votes to his ideological point of view and 0 votes in support of the opposite view. Hence the disclaimer to the pools. I suggest that we simply ignore him and don't participate in his pool. It would be one less human being giving Lou Dobbs no value, making him inconsequential one person at a time.
krishmunn
02-02 07:53 AM
If you are working in a arbitrary job in a location different from where TVU is (which indicates you never attended classes in TVU) , you are in serious trouble. Your best bet in that case is to quietly leave US ASAP or change your status to H1/H4 if possible.
In any case, stop working immediately and talk to an attorney.
In any case, stop working immediately and talk to an attorney.
looneytunezez
06-17 12:51 PM
But after thinking a bit more - i now understand your plan. Your list of questions may impress the infopass immigration officer, and the officer may recommend that you should be hired by USCIS as an IO, given that you are more familiar than him/her with the immigration process. Once you are hired, you plan to approve your own GC?
Great plan....i think i might recommend this to someone!
Great plan....i think i might recommend this to someone!
shahuja
02-07 01:29 PM
Try calling the DOS and explaining then what's going on and see who you can call to check the status next.
The lawyers email is text book response and may not help you much.
If the consulate didn't give you any slip during your interview then most likely it is PIMS related. Call up DOS!
i called DOS again and they say its in the final processing stage at the embassy..check with embassy..and embassy said waiting for information from DOS..i just hope VO doesnt send it back to DOS for more processing again...
how did your wife's PP go ?? any news from embassyy..
The lawyers email is text book response and may not help you much.
If the consulate didn't give you any slip during your interview then most likely it is PIMS related. Call up DOS!
i called DOS again and they say its in the final processing stage at the embassy..check with embassy..and embassy said waiting for information from DOS..i just hope VO doesnt send it back to DOS for more processing again...
how did your wife's PP go ?? any news from embassyy..
satishku_2000
10-05 06:53 PM
If your jobs requires masters in computers or equivalent experience in computer related field.. get ready to answers to questions such as "How a 3 year degree in zoology or botany is equivalent to masters in computer science" at I 140 stage. One has to be ready for possible denial at 140 stage too.. Given the way NSC is processing 140s now a days , you should probably have a plan B in place if you dont have enough time left on H1b