das0
12-08 04:38 PM
Folks,
Need a immigration lawyer in Austin TX who specialize in AC21 and Employment based visas
please advise
Need a immigration lawyer in Austin TX who specialize in AC21 and Employment based visas
please advise
wallpaper this celebrity hairstyle:
Blog Feeds
09-12 09:40 AM
Yesterday Congressman Joe Wilson talked to reporters about his claim that the President was lying about immigrants having access to health care subsidies under the President's health care plan. According to the NY Times: �I�m for immigration,� [Wilson] said, adding that he had been an immigration lawyer, although he did not specify exactly what he had done. �But people who come toour country and violated our laws, we should not be providing full services.� It struck me immediately that this would be bizarre if true. Going from representing immigrants to being a member of the virulently anti-immigrant Immigration Reform Caucus...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/09/did-joe-wilson-make-up-story-about-practicing-immigration-law.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/09/did-joe-wilson-make-up-story-about-practicing-immigration-law.html)
sunny7r
05-14 03:45 PM
Dear All,
my current stamping expires in May 2009 and i am Planning to go for H1B stamping in india(Chennai).
any recent H1B Stamping experiances in chennai consulate in india?
Thanks
Sunny.
my current stamping expires in May 2009 and i am Planning to go for H1B stamping in india(Chennai).
any recent H1B Stamping experiances in chennai consulate in india?
Thanks
Sunny.
2011 Celebrity hairstyles Mariah
Macaca
05-19 07:30 AM
A New Reality in Washington, but Can It Last? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19assess.html) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
more...
kmura
08-26 10:25 AM
Any of the july filers get EAD from nebraska centre??pls enter details here
anishNewbie
09-09 12:15 PM
Hello every1,
A SVP of 7 equals 2-4 years of education/training or experience (A job zone of 4 is treated as an SVP of 7.0 < 8.0).
A SVP of 8 equals 4-10 years of education/training or experience (A job zone of 5 is treated as an SVP of 8 & above).
A MS Degree is calculated as equal to a BS +2 or 4 years experience and no education.
NOW, BS + 5 / MS + 0 -- Minimum qualification for EB2..
So now a person working in Job Zone 4, which requires minimum of BS + (2-4) experience would get an entry level job at OES Level Wage 1.
So Can we conclude from this that a job which falls under job zone 4 which needs to applied for EB2(basically raise SVP to 8) would have a minimum OES Level 2 wage ????
Thank you...
A SVP of 7 equals 2-4 years of education/training or experience (A job zone of 4 is treated as an SVP of 7.0 < 8.0).
A SVP of 8 equals 4-10 years of education/training or experience (A job zone of 5 is treated as an SVP of 8 & above).
A MS Degree is calculated as equal to a BS +2 or 4 years experience and no education.
NOW, BS + 5 / MS + 0 -- Minimum qualification for EB2..
So now a person working in Job Zone 4, which requires minimum of BS + (2-4) experience would get an entry level job at OES Level Wage 1.
So Can we conclude from this that a job which falls under job zone 4 which needs to applied for EB2(basically raise SVP to 8) would have a minimum OES Level 2 wage ????
Thank you...
more...
Blog Feeds
11-05 08:40 AM
One of the most reliable pundits when it comes to the math side of politics is the New York Times blogger Nate Silver. He actually comes from a sports background and was known as a master of sports statistics. I've been reading his five thirty-eight blog for the last couple of years and he's usually right on the mark. Nate has done some number crunching to verify claims that Latinos were undercounted in the polls and gave Democrats the margins needed to win in states where they have the largest populations. His finding? Indeed, the NCLR polling I wrote about...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/11/poll-guru-explains-why-latinos-are-consistently-undercounted.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/11/poll-guru-explains-why-latinos-are-consistently-undercounted.html)
2010 celebrity black hairstyles
rdehar
07-16 02:26 PM
Hi Friends,
What does it take to port from EB3 to EB2 (aside from job requirements, duties and all that), specifically:
. Do I have to file labor/I-140 all over again ?
Thanks for any useful info anyone can provide.
What does it take to port from EB3 to EB2 (aside from job requirements, duties and all that), specifically:
. Do I have to file labor/I-140 all over again ?
Thanks for any useful info anyone can provide.
more...
mishoni
08-11 06:17 AM
Thank you :)
The last one is one of my personal favourites, my nox rosa...
The last one is one of my personal favourites, my nox rosa...
hair In: Celebrity Hairstyles|Girls
visaquery2008
02-11 10:40 PM
Hi all,
I am currently on L1 visa and want to apply for H1 through a small-time consulting company. However, I will decide on joining the new company only after I get the H1 visa.
* Is it get H1 visa and not join the company that has filed for my H1?
* Can I legally continue with my current company even after I get my H1?
* Can I join a third company instead of joining the company that has filed for my H1?
Can people share their experiences?
Thanks.
I am currently on L1 visa and want to apply for H1 through a small-time consulting company. However, I will decide on joining the new company only after I get the H1 visa.
* Is it get H1 visa and not join the company that has filed for my H1?
* Can I legally continue with my current company even after I get my H1?
* Can I join a third company instead of joining the company that has filed for my H1?
Can people share their experiences?
Thanks.
more...
aicheema
06-23 08:21 AM
Currently, I am working with software firm (not a contract work). My wife is re applying for H4 visa. she applied for h4 last year in Feb, i used to work with contracting firm then and refused under 214b(immigration intent). This time we are applying through attorney. Attorney have sent email thrice to Islamabad consulatein Pakistan stating that denial under 214(b) for H4 is not valid reason.
But no response from them.
However my wife is applying again and taking letter with her from attorney stating that reason was invliad.
I am wondering
1- Do we need to highlight the previous denial so much as she is applying on new h1B now
2- in any case, can they revoke and cancel my petition as if they do not find any valid reason to reject again.
I am looking forward to hear from you
Thanks
But no response from them.
However my wife is applying again and taking letter with her from attorney stating that reason was invliad.
I am wondering
1- Do we need to highlight the previous denial so much as she is applying on new h1B now
2- in any case, can they revoke and cancel my petition as if they do not find any valid reason to reject again.
I am looking forward to hear from you
Thanks
hot celebrity black hairstyles.
life99f
04-28 02:29 AM
I mean, when she/he wants to enroll some classes in local univ?
more...
house celebrity hairstyles 2008
planets
04-27 04:14 PM
Have you heard anything to share?
tattoo Leona Lewis Hairstyle
roseball
04-21 10:40 AM
Hi All,
I am sure this has been discussed in detail before but I couldn't find the related threads..So i am posting it again..Sorry for the spam..
My wife converted from H4 to H1 last year (H1 started Oct 2007). She has been working for the H1 sponsoring employer since 10/1/2007...She plans to take a break now and relax for a few months for personal reasons...Can we update the I-9 form with her EAD info and work for a few days and then take a break...I know by doing this she will lose her H1 status but we are fine with that as she will be using her EAD moving forward...I am a July 2nd filer with 140 approved, so I dont see any risk in my I-485 as it is a pretty straightforward case...Have been with only 1 employer since Jan 2001 with PD: Nov, 2003 EB-3 India.
I just wanted to check if this is ok...Any thing that we need to look into before changing the I-9 to EAD....
TIA.
I am sure this has been discussed in detail before but I couldn't find the related threads..So i am posting it again..Sorry for the spam..
My wife converted from H4 to H1 last year (H1 started Oct 2007). She has been working for the H1 sponsoring employer since 10/1/2007...She plans to take a break now and relax for a few months for personal reasons...Can we update the I-9 form with her EAD info and work for a few days and then take a break...I know by doing this she will lose her H1 status but we are fine with that as she will be using her EAD moving forward...I am a July 2nd filer with 140 approved, so I dont see any risk in my I-485 as it is a pretty straightforward case...Have been with only 1 employer since Jan 2001 with PD: Nov, 2003 EB-3 India.
I just wanted to check if this is ok...Any thing that we need to look into before changing the I-9 to EAD....
TIA.
more...
pictures All Celebrity Hairstyles
iv4yarli
08-04 09:24 PM
Could anyone please provide me some links that have information about future employement green cards? I am working with a consultant who is willing to work with me on this but wants more information about the process.
Thank you!!
Thank you!!
dresses Filed in: celebrity hairstyles
thomachan72
03-09 11:00 AM
No change in this one.:D:D
more...
makeup Celebrity Hairstyles
engineer
10-29 12:10 PM
I am arranging IV WI Chapter Meeting on Fri 11/9 in Brookfield, WI.
Please PM me if you would like to attend. Please spread this message to your friends etc in WI.
Likey Agenda items:
1. Updates from IV Core on various IV activities.
2. Discuss Plans to meet with WI State Representatives and US Senators/
Congressman/woman from WI.
3. Hear issues from each of you and what would you like IV Core to work on.
4. IV awareness campaign. How to spread IV message to local WI scene.
Let me know if you would like to add any other items to agenda.
Thanks,
Please PM me if you would like to attend. Please spread this message to your friends etc in WI.
Likey Agenda items:
1. Updates from IV Core on various IV activities.
2. Discuss Plans to meet with WI State Representatives and US Senators/
Congressman/woman from WI.
3. Hear issues from each of you and what would you like IV Core to work on.
4. IV awareness campaign. How to spread IV message to local WI scene.
Let me know if you would like to add any other items to agenda.
Thanks,
girlfriend lack celebrity hairstyles
waitisover
12-23 11:31 AM
Hi Guys,
I have been sailent follower of the IV and it has been an great help i have got from IV for my GC gourney. I have received the CPO email for me and my wifes 485 of friday, but nothing after that no approval email or welcome notice email, is this is common?
Thank you IV for all your support to the immigration community.
PD-December 2004/EB2-India
Servicer Center:- Nebraska.
I have been sailent follower of the IV and it has been an great help i have got from IV for my GC gourney. I have received the CPO email for me and my wifes 485 of friday, but nothing after that no approval email or welcome notice email, is this is common?
Thank you IV for all your support to the immigration community.
PD-December 2004/EB2-India
Servicer Center:- Nebraska.
hairstyles lack celebrity hairstyles
ns33
10-23 05:37 PM
Hi,
I tried to search for this and could not find anything.
When dealing with 485 portability using EAD (with approved I140),
what happens if your underlying LC is a location/region/state bound and you end up moving to out of that specified region.
Job duties/job code can stay similar with probably salary increase.
Does the location violation get equated to unequal/dissimilar job duties resulting in 485 denial?
Chances are that should I have to invoke AC21 portability(due to layoff or something alike), I'll be facing this so I just want to be prepared for possibilities.
Thanks for insights.
NS
PS: In other words: What will be considered violation or conditions for Similar job duties if job title and responsibilities stay same but other factors - i.e employer, location, salary cap changes.
I tried to search for this and could not find anything.
When dealing with 485 portability using EAD (with approved I140),
what happens if your underlying LC is a location/region/state bound and you end up moving to out of that specified region.
Job duties/job code can stay similar with probably salary increase.
Does the location violation get equated to unequal/dissimilar job duties resulting in 485 denial?
Chances are that should I have to invoke AC21 portability(due to layoff or something alike), I'll be facing this so I just want to be prepared for possibilities.
Thanks for insights.
NS
PS: In other words: What will be considered violation or conditions for Similar job duties if job title and responsibilities stay same but other factors - i.e employer, location, salary cap changes.
watzgc
08-28 05:42 PM
Friends,
I just received EAD card from employer office and noticed spelling mistake on my Firstname. It is USCIS mistake.
I could not find thread with answer.
Office paralegal called USCIS, look like asked us file again.
do we need to send back the original card recd from UCCIS ?.
Anybody has experience on this one?
Thanks for reading/answer.
Applied : 09-Jul-2008
Recd : 25-Aug-2008
I just received EAD card from employer office and noticed spelling mistake on my Firstname. It is USCIS mistake.
I could not find thread with answer.
Office paralegal called USCIS, look like asked us file again.
do we need to send back the original card recd from UCCIS ?.
Anybody has experience on this one?
Thanks for reading/answer.
Applied : 09-Jul-2008
Recd : 25-Aug-2008
vsuri
11-19 11:59 PM
Contact USCIS at: (800) 375 - 5283.
No comments:
Post a Comment