ravi98
11-05 12:07 PM
So lets take up peice meal offer - will he sponsor/co-sponor a bill for us?
Our OH members - need to get active in meeting with his office. It would be good to know the position of Speaker Boehner on our issues.
Our OH members - need to get active in meeting with his office. It would be good to know the position of Speaker Boehner on our issues.
wallpaper Rihanna loves tattoos was
gc_samba
07-17 04:44 PM
Kaisersose thank you for your reply. Is their a time limit for how long I have to work for the GC filling employer? what worries me is if they fire me in lets say 1 month after hire during their probation period am I safe? Even though i was working part time some where else.
As you have a GC, you can work for any employer in the range {A, B, C...Z}, work for 2 or more of them simultaneously and handle any kind of job. There is no law that will create a problem out of this during naturalization.
Of course, one can do this with a 485 EAD too, but there is the one restriction of "same or similar".
As you have a GC, you can work for any employer in the range {A, B, C...Z}, work for 2 or more of them simultaneously and handle any kind of job. There is no law that will create a problem out of this during naturalization.
Of course, one can do this with a 485 EAD too, but there is the one restriction of "same or similar".
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
2011 2011 Rihanna Tattoos Meaning.
neerajkandhari
05-25 08:16 PM
Same here got RFE via email on 20 May
Will Know by this week (hopefully) what they are asking for
Will Know by this week (hopefully) what they are asking for
more...
amitjoey
03-26 11:56 AM
I've just got all the info for setting up conference call and meeting with the lawmakers "info" kit.
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Thanks Franklin, I got your PM. I am ready to get involved. Please PM me the documents.
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Thanks Franklin, I got your PM. I am ready to get involved. Please PM me the documents.
ujjwal_p
09-10 04:11 PM
Most of you know about rear view mirror fuzzy dice cubes
I believe they can be customized too. for eg:
http://www.mascotfactory.com/store/Fuzzy-Dice.php?gclid=COaS8Kbv0ZUCFQJNagod3Gl7hg
...
...
Sincerely
Your customers
Very neat. You know, I am not sure if this will translate into a real fuzzy dice campaign. At the very least, it provides good succinct talking points for us and IV Core to use when explaining what the issues are.
I believe they can be customized too. for eg:
http://www.mascotfactory.com/store/Fuzzy-Dice.php?gclid=COaS8Kbv0ZUCFQJNagod3Gl7hg
...
...
Sincerely
Your customers
Very neat. You know, I am not sure if this will translate into a real fuzzy dice campaign. At the very least, it provides good succinct talking points for us and IV Core to use when explaining what the issues are.
more...
hai_yeh_gc
04-26 09:41 AM
Guys, I made a silly mistake - I reversed first name and last name values - realized after submitting the form.
Should I put in a covering letter about the mistake with supporting docs.. or just let it pass through.. I'm worried that they might reject my application and I'll have to file again ( no refund !!! :( )
Any suggestions please ?
Should I put in a covering letter about the mistake with supporting docs.. or just let it pass through.. I'm worried that they might reject my application and I'll have to file again ( no refund !!! :( )
Any suggestions please ?
2010 Rihanna#39;s Hindu Sanskrit
immi_enthu
08-06 12:22 PM
12 calendar days. My I 140 was originally applied on 01/08/2007 upgraded to premium on 06/26/2007 there was a RFE ability to pay , reponse for RFE received on 07/26/2007. we called 18663155718 today, the IO officer said my case is approved today. online status still says it's pending.
Unfortunately the premium service on I 140 is not reinstated yet. Note I upgraded before (07/01/2007)it was suspended . Sorry for the confusion
Unfortunately the premium service on I 140 is not reinstated yet. Note I upgraded before (07/01/2007)it was suspended . Sorry for the confusion
more...
simon03
08-16 01:26 PM
I am not an expert but this is my understanding:
there is no requirement to work for the employer sponsoring your green card. Business requirements can change any day, and if your previous employer doesn't have a job for you...it shouldn't be a problem as long as
1. you have a current job that is similar in duties
2. your previous employer didn't withdraw I-140 and your I-140 was pending 180 days after filing I-485
3. At the time of filing I-140, the job offer was bona-fide (non-frivolous). At the time of filing I-485 with other employer, the job you were employed in was similar and employer had bona-file permanent offer
You can always send USCIS informing a change of employer (AC21), they wouldn't take back GC as long as you c
there is no requirement to work for the employer sponsoring your green card. Business requirements can change any day, and if your previous employer doesn't have a job for you...it shouldn't be a problem as long as
1. you have a current job that is similar in duties
2. your previous employer didn't withdraw I-140 and your I-140 was pending 180 days after filing I-485
3. At the time of filing I-140, the job offer was bona-fide (non-frivolous). At the time of filing I-485 with other employer, the job you were employed in was similar and employer had bona-file permanent offer
You can always send USCIS informing a change of employer (AC21), they wouldn't take back GC as long as you c
hair New Rihanna tattoo: she had
fromnaija
03-18 04:53 PM
This is the wrong forum for you to ask this question. However, I know that (c)(9) is not correct on line 16 for your wife's case. (c)(9) is only for Employment Based GC applicants.
That is not true! (c)(9) is the right code for all pending adjustment of status applicants. See the instruction to Form I-765 here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
That is not true! (c)(9) is the right code for all pending adjustment of status applicants. See the instruction to Form I-765 here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
more...
saps
11-06 03:53 PM
How about we send congratulation letter to President-Elect Obama. This should go as a combined effort from the whole IV community. Any thoughts???
Dear President-Elect Obama,
Legal Immigrant Community in USA would like to congratulate you on your impressive campaign and win. We wish you all the best for your presidency tenure and promise to provide you our support and in many manner we can.
We would also like to take this opportunity to bring your attention to some common problems which legal immigrants are currently facing.
1. Quota system for countries resulting in wait period for Greencard ranging from 5-15 years for both Employment based and Family based categories.
2. Extreme dependency on employer because of unclear 'Same or similar job change regulations'. We cannot accept promotions, salary increases or any job title or location changes in order to not lose the status on current pending Greendcard application.
3. In this current economy, many legal immigrants are losing their jobs resulting in changing employers for which they have to go to the end of the line again and start the GC process all over again if the job title or salary is much differnet from the original one.
We understand that USA is currently facing more pressing issues at this time which need your imminent attention but few simple reliefs from your administration will make the lives of immigrants much better here. As a result, they will contribute more towards the economy, buy houses, invest and establish new businesses.
Suggestions for relief to immigrant community:
1. Approve pending bill HR5882 which captures wasted Green card numbers from the past due to bureacracy delays.
2. Remove Same or Similar job requirements for Green card applicants waiting for more than 1 year in their I-485( Last stage of GreenCard). They should be allowed to join any employer with any title or salary changes.
3. Allow pending I-485 applicants to join schools full time without affecting their Greencard applications.
4. Allow pending I-485 applicants waiting for more than 2 years on their last stage of greencard to establish businesses.
5. Allow temp visas for family members who are stuck in lines for Family based immigration.
Few simple changes as stated above will bring imminent relief to legal immigrant community. Many of us want to buy homes, start businesses, go to school full time but cannot do so till we become permanent residents. Wait periods are so long that we are stuck with the same employers with stalled career growth.
We expect that you will consider the above ideas and bring the change that all the people are hoping from years who are stuck in legal limbo.
Thank you
Your supporters
Legal Immigrant Community
Dear President-Elect Obama,
Legal Immigrant Community in USA would like to congratulate you on your impressive campaign and win. We wish you all the best for your presidency tenure and promise to provide you our support and in many manner we can.
We would also like to take this opportunity to bring your attention to some common problems which legal immigrants are currently facing.
1. Quota system for countries resulting in wait period for Greencard ranging from 5-15 years for both Employment based and Family based categories.
2. Extreme dependency on employer because of unclear 'Same or similar job change regulations'. We cannot accept promotions, salary increases or any job title or location changes in order to not lose the status on current pending Greendcard application.
3. In this current economy, many legal immigrants are losing their jobs resulting in changing employers for which they have to go to the end of the line again and start the GC process all over again if the job title or salary is much differnet from the original one.
We understand that USA is currently facing more pressing issues at this time which need your imminent attention but few simple reliefs from your administration will make the lives of immigrants much better here. As a result, they will contribute more towards the economy, buy houses, invest and establish new businesses.
Suggestions for relief to immigrant community:
1. Approve pending bill HR5882 which captures wasted Green card numbers from the past due to bureacracy delays.
2. Remove Same or Similar job requirements for Green card applicants waiting for more than 1 year in their I-485( Last stage of GreenCard). They should be allowed to join any employer with any title or salary changes.
3. Allow pending I-485 applicants to join schools full time without affecting their Greencard applications.
4. Allow pending I-485 applicants waiting for more than 2 years on their last stage of greencard to establish businesses.
5. Allow temp visas for family members who are stuck in lines for Family based immigration.
Few simple changes as stated above will bring imminent relief to legal immigrant community. Many of us want to buy homes, start businesses, go to school full time but cannot do so till we become permanent residents. Wait periods are so long that we are stuck with the same employers with stalled career growth.
We expect that you will consider the above ideas and bring the change that all the people are hoping from years who are stuck in legal limbo.
Thank you
Your supporters
Legal Immigrant Community
hot Rihanna Tattoos
tpcool
05-31 06:50 PM
vxb2004, thanks for the response and the wishes.
Ok, I got your point that since my I-140 is not approved yet, it is not safer to move at this point, but what would be your opinion, if my I-140 is approved. If it is Ok to move, once my I-140 is approved, then I can probably start preparing my ground work for this transition and hopefully the I-140 comes through in the coming 3 to 6 months.
One another question along the same lines - I haven't used my EAD yet and still on H1. Does the AC21 portability rules apply even in with the EAD? what is the use of the EAD then. EAD is supposed to be generic right?
Ok, I got your point that since my I-140 is not approved yet, it is not safer to move at this point, but what would be your opinion, if my I-140 is approved. If it is Ok to move, once my I-140 is approved, then I can probably start preparing my ground work for this transition and hopefully the I-140 comes through in the coming 3 to 6 months.
One another question along the same lines - I haven't used my EAD yet and still on H1. Does the AC21 portability rules apply even in with the EAD? what is the use of the EAD then. EAD is supposed to be generic right?
more...
house Rihanna Tattoos Rehab
snhn
10-23 05:09 PM
Hello all,
is it normal for someone to get their EAD approved before the AP. I just got my EAD approved yesterday and my wife got hers approved today. However, out AP applications are not approved yet.
I have some co workers who got their EAD and AP approved on the same day.
so just wondering if there could be something wrong or is this normal.
Our cases are in Texas.
Thanks!
is it normal for someone to get their EAD approved before the AP. I just got my EAD approved yesterday and my wife got hers approved today. However, out AP applications are not approved yet.
I have some co workers who got their EAD and AP approved on the same day.
so just wondering if there could be something wrong or is this normal.
Our cases are in Texas.
Thanks!
tattoo Rihanna debuted her latest
nikamd
05-13 08:31 AM
I am in the same boat. Current from March.........but nothing yet....:(:(:(:(:(:(
more...
pictures about Rihanna#39;s Tattoos.
sk.aggarwal
05-23 11:09 AM
Yes, but if I were you, I would definately check with my attorney.
dresses rihanna tattoo pictures
greenmonster
11-30 08:05 AM
Hi,
I am on EAD with my GC sponsor, 485 pending - PD Dec2006. I was a Sr.QA Analyst while my Labor was filed. Those job responsibilities were submitted in labor along with generic titles like programmer analyst etc.
Now that I have planned a technology change, I am moving into SAP BI. As it is getting tough to get contract positions and lot of FTE opportunities. I am wondering what my options are. Having said that I am also anticipating my PD to be current in july/aug/sep 2011.
I was told by my employer that I could temporarily resign , take a FT with another company and join back within 6 months.
During this time they would continue with my green process.
In this situation while I am very close ( 6-9 months) for my PD to be current, what are my best options?
1. AC21 - get it all done with new company ? Job title from Sr.Qa to SAP BI would it be a problem?
2. Temporary resignation and rejoining - is it really feasible?
3. Stay with current company - try for contract positions even if it means that I have to stay long on bench. I have been already out since Aug.
Please pour in your thoughts.
Thanks for your help.
Hello Guru's
Please help on this. Need your suggestions/ thoughts.
Thanks
I am on EAD with my GC sponsor, 485 pending - PD Dec2006. I was a Sr.QA Analyst while my Labor was filed. Those job responsibilities were submitted in labor along with generic titles like programmer analyst etc.
Now that I have planned a technology change, I am moving into SAP BI. As it is getting tough to get contract positions and lot of FTE opportunities. I am wondering what my options are. Having said that I am also anticipating my PD to be current in july/aug/sep 2011.
I was told by my employer that I could temporarily resign , take a FT with another company and join back within 6 months.
During this time they would continue with my green process.
In this situation while I am very close ( 6-9 months) for my PD to be current, what are my best options?
1. AC21 - get it all done with new company ? Job title from Sr.Qa to SAP BI would it be a problem?
2. Temporary resignation and rejoining - is it really feasible?
3. Stay with current company - try for contract positions even if it means that I have to stay long on bench. I have been already out since Aug.
Please pour in your thoughts.
Thanks for your help.
Hello Guru's
Please help on this. Need your suggestions/ thoughts.
Thanks
more...
makeup Rihanna for Gucci#39;s Tattoo
ashrock11
02-04 04:03 PM
Can somebody suggest a good immigration lawyer in the Boston Area. Need to consult for AC21, transfer employer, transfer existing case from present employer etc.
Thanks
Thanks
girlfriend Rihanna tattoo
singhsa3
03-15 07:50 AM
Yeah, now I got it...
We should all resort to farming now !!!!
Hey check this prediction out.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4541
I think it is like a orchard of mangoes miles long. The riped mangoes are plucked and the farmer moves on to the next tree. He has to walk up and down the whole stretch every month in the second week to determine what's ripe and what's not. He then comes back with his helpers with baskets . There might be some accidental drops of ripe mangoes which get lost for a while :) Just my analogy of EB immigration .
Correct me if I am wrong...
We should all resort to farming now !!!!
Hey check this prediction out.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4541
I think it is like a orchard of mangoes miles long. The riped mangoes are plucked and the farmer moves on to the next tree. He has to walk up and down the whole stretch every month in the second week to determine what's ripe and what's not. He then comes back with his helpers with baskets . There might be some accidental drops of ripe mangoes which get lost for a while :) Just my analogy of EB immigration .
Correct me if I am wrong...
hairstyles rihanna tattoos 2011 .
saravanaraj.sathya
08-13 08:52 AM
I also have LUD on my I-140 which is pending in Texas. My I-485 was sent to NSC on July 25th. I am hoping that this is something to do with the receipting of I-485.
My case EB3 PD Jan 2004
I40 approved TSC July 2007
485 filed at NSC July 2nd
LUD is 8/12/2007
Does this mean anything ?
My case EB3 PD Jan 2004
I40 approved TSC July 2007
485 filed at NSC July 2nd
LUD is 8/12/2007
Does this mean anything ?
kiru_99
10-30 03:22 PM
I don't know what amt was enclosed with the application. All I know it is rejected b'couse of Incorrect/No Fee. My concern is it was rejected on Sep 22nd & lawyer might have got the notice of rejection & he missed it or don't know what happened. It is already more than a month now. How much time is there to resend the application.
Thanks
-Kiru
Thanks
-Kiru
casinoroyale
07-10 09:29 AM
When I sent express recently, the USPS person at the counter said it is not certified. I was under the asumption that whatever gives tracking number is certified. Can someone enlighten me plz?
No comments:
Post a Comment