wwwwww
03-01 07:24 AM
I heard this ACT is voting on March 2 by senete members, (PHD students directly change to GC), even it pass tomorrow, how long it will become a law?Whether it needs to be passed by congress next?Is it possible to become a law before June?
wallpaper Birthday Wishes Tamil. irthday
Hinglish
03-06 04:44 PM
I am applying for new H1b in April. Also I have 485 applied under EB2 with I-140 approved.
1. Can anyone tell me what all information about my green card status I need to share with prospective employer attorney to make sure they provide it in H1b application...???
2. What's alien number and where can I find it...???
Thanks in advance...
1) Tell them you are an alien
2) give them your license plate number from the back of your UFO
1. Can anyone tell me what all information about my green card status I need to share with prospective employer attorney to make sure they provide it in H1b application...???
2. What's alien number and where can I find it...???
Thanks in advance...
1) Tell them you are an alien
2) give them your license plate number from the back of your UFO
centaur
08-13 06:40 PM
I have an old priority date with previous employer (jan 2006), however my I140 with the new employer has date of May 2007. I can also apply for 485 under NIW. My question is if I apply for 485 by both pathways(two different applications), can I recapture the same PD of the old employer TWICE?
gurus please advise.
gurus please advise.
2011 Birthday Wishes In Tamil Words
miguy
07-19 09:18 AM
anyone?
more...
abhisam
07-19 06:00 PM
My I-485 application was filed under EB3 category when I was working for my previous employer (PD - October 2006). I changed my job in August 2008, but never sent any documentation for AC21. I now have close to 8 years of experience and also a masters degree (MBA) from a reputed univeristy here in the US.
Now that EB2 dates are so close to October 2006, is there anyway I can port my application from EB3 to EB2? I can initiate this discussion with my current employer and may be able to convince them to help me. But I want to know exactly what needs to be done.
Thanks a lot in advance for your assistance in this matter!
- abhisam
Now that EB2 dates are so close to October 2006, is there anyway I can port my application from EB3 to EB2? I can initiate this discussion with my current employer and may be able to convince them to help me. But I want to know exactly what needs to be done.
Thanks a lot in advance for your assistance in this matter!
- abhisam
Blog Feeds
05-27 08:30 AM
Keep an eye on the military appropriations bill Congress is working on for a potential immigration piece. The AP reports that Republicans want some serious money and personnel commitments for the southern border. And my own sources are telling me that some Democrats are looking at trying to get the DREAM Act in that same piece of legislation. Remember, DREAM allows for some who join the military to pursue permanent residency so it would be a germane part of the bill. A down payment on comprehensive immigration reform? Or the end of that effort and the return to piecemeal legislating?...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/cirlite-deal-in-the-works.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/cirlite-deal-in-the-works.html)
more...
desi3933
01-25 09:32 AM
Form DS156.
Q. 36 Have anyone ever filled immigration visa petition on your behalf?
I applied visa petition myself under EB-2 National Interest waiver (NIW)?
What should be my answer?
Yes OR No?
Thanks.
should be Yes, since you have filed immigration visa petition on your behalf.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Q. 36 Have anyone ever filled immigration visa petition on your behalf?
I applied visa petition myself under EB-2 National Interest waiver (NIW)?
What should be my answer?
Yes OR No?
Thanks.
should be Yes, since you have filed immigration visa petition on your behalf.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
2010 Happy birthday to Trisha
jonty_11
07-18 10:53 AM
and would u provide a link to it?
more...
Macaca
08-01 08:03 PM
The Speaker In Charge (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/31/AR2007073101628.html?hpid=opinionsbox1) By Harold Meyerson (meyersonh@washpost.com), August 1, 2007
This is one of those odd weeks when Congress may actually work. Both houses are likely to pass Democratic bills to expand SCHIP, the children's health coverage program. Yesterday, the House enacted lobbying reform, and the Senate may follow suit tomorrow. Also yesterday, the House passed a bill restoring the right of victims of pay discrimination to sue their employers.
In short, it's one of those weeks when Nancy Pelosi has no doubts about the wisdom of her decision to become speaker of the House.
"What's it like?" she asked herself, beaming, at the conclusion of a breakfast meeting with roughly 20 liberal journalists yesterday morning.
"It's fabulous! Absolutely fabulous!"
It can't always be thus. Her biggest frustration, of course, is Congress's inability to end the war in Iraq, which she terms "a huge moral catastrophe for the country." It is the public's biggest frustration as well, she says, and the main reason that popular support for Congress has plummeted.
In September, Iraq will once again be Congress's chief item of business, when Gen. David Petraeus delivers his state-of-the-war report.
Pelosi (understandably, given the administration's mountain of misrepresentation on all war-related matters) is wary. "The plural of anecdote is not data," she said. "I'm very concerned they'll pass off anecdotal successes as progress in Iraq."
The question in September will be whether congressional Republicans continue to support President Bush's open-ended commitment to keeping U.S. forces in Iraq while a civil war rages around them. To date, the Republicans' strategy, and not just on the war, has been to thwart the Democrats at every turn and to use the Senate's 60-vote supermajority requirement both to create a "do-nothing" Congress against which they can run and to spare their president from having to veto popular legislation. (Why they care about sparing Bush -- he will never face voters again; they will -- plunges us into the murk of abnormal psychology.)
The GOP strategy is not without its pitfalls. Republicans have succeeded in tanking Congress's approval ratings, but polls consistently show the public, most importantly in swing districts, preferring Democrats to Republicans. With this week's vote on expanding SCHIP, though, Democrats are convinced that the price of blocking health care for uninsured children is more than many Republicans are willing to pay. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation; Pelosi, noting with an almost incredulous glee that the administration will stand athwart children's health care on the grounds of opposing a higher tobacco tax, says, simply, "Welcome to this discussion."
Not all discussions, even in a good week, are so pleasurable to anticipate. Asked about the resolution that her congressional colleague Jay Inslee of Washington has introduced to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Pelosi put her hands to her temples as if to ward off a headache. For the past year, Pelosi has made clear to her colleagues and the public alike that she has no interest in pursuing the impeachment option, though Gonzales is certainly doing his damnedest to change her mind. She remains unpersuaded, believing that impeachment would fail and in the process would make weeks such as this one -- a week in which the public's business is at last getting done -- far more uncommon than they already are.
Pelosi understands the gravity of the damage that the administration has done to the Constitution and why that has impelled some of her colleagues to advocate impeachment. "If I were not the speaker and I were not in Congress," she said, very quietly, as she concluded her answer, "I would probably be advocating for impeachment." But the consequences she foresees from stopping the nation's business for an unwinnable fight outweighs those considerations.
Pelosi deserves considerable credit for holding her party together on a range of divisive issues, but she plainly views the coming fight among House Democrats on fuel efficiency standards as irrepressible.
The energy bill the House will pass this week contains no provisions that would raise those standards; such provisions, if any, await the outcome of a battle between Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, the Democrat who has represented Detroit and the auto industry in Congress since 1955 (that is, before tailfins).
"I respect all our chairmen," Pelosi said. But the legislation, she continued, isn't about them. "It's about our children's ability to breathe clean air. Nothing less than the planet is at stake. I love him [Dingell] dearly, but we have to prevail. . . . The forces at work here [against stricter standards] are rich and entrenched," she concluded, "and it takes just a few [votes] to prevent us from unleashing the future."
Thus, the most elegant of happy warriors, in a week when it's fun to be speaker.
This is one of those odd weeks when Congress may actually work. Both houses are likely to pass Democratic bills to expand SCHIP, the children's health coverage program. Yesterday, the House enacted lobbying reform, and the Senate may follow suit tomorrow. Also yesterday, the House passed a bill restoring the right of victims of pay discrimination to sue their employers.
In short, it's one of those weeks when Nancy Pelosi has no doubts about the wisdom of her decision to become speaker of the House.
"What's it like?" she asked herself, beaming, at the conclusion of a breakfast meeting with roughly 20 liberal journalists yesterday morning.
"It's fabulous! Absolutely fabulous!"
It can't always be thus. Her biggest frustration, of course, is Congress's inability to end the war in Iraq, which she terms "a huge moral catastrophe for the country." It is the public's biggest frustration as well, she says, and the main reason that popular support for Congress has plummeted.
In September, Iraq will once again be Congress's chief item of business, when Gen. David Petraeus delivers his state-of-the-war report.
Pelosi (understandably, given the administration's mountain of misrepresentation on all war-related matters) is wary. "The plural of anecdote is not data," she said. "I'm very concerned they'll pass off anecdotal successes as progress in Iraq."
The question in September will be whether congressional Republicans continue to support President Bush's open-ended commitment to keeping U.S. forces in Iraq while a civil war rages around them. To date, the Republicans' strategy, and not just on the war, has been to thwart the Democrats at every turn and to use the Senate's 60-vote supermajority requirement both to create a "do-nothing" Congress against which they can run and to spare their president from having to veto popular legislation. (Why they care about sparing Bush -- he will never face voters again; they will -- plunges us into the murk of abnormal psychology.)
The GOP strategy is not without its pitfalls. Republicans have succeeded in tanking Congress's approval ratings, but polls consistently show the public, most importantly in swing districts, preferring Democrats to Republicans. With this week's vote on expanding SCHIP, though, Democrats are convinced that the price of blocking health care for uninsured children is more than many Republicans are willing to pay. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation; Pelosi, noting with an almost incredulous glee that the administration will stand athwart children's health care on the grounds of opposing a higher tobacco tax, says, simply, "Welcome to this discussion."
Not all discussions, even in a good week, are so pleasurable to anticipate. Asked about the resolution that her congressional colleague Jay Inslee of Washington has introduced to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Pelosi put her hands to her temples as if to ward off a headache. For the past year, Pelosi has made clear to her colleagues and the public alike that she has no interest in pursuing the impeachment option, though Gonzales is certainly doing his damnedest to change her mind. She remains unpersuaded, believing that impeachment would fail and in the process would make weeks such as this one -- a week in which the public's business is at last getting done -- far more uncommon than they already are.
Pelosi understands the gravity of the damage that the administration has done to the Constitution and why that has impelled some of her colleagues to advocate impeachment. "If I were not the speaker and I were not in Congress," she said, very quietly, as she concluded her answer, "I would probably be advocating for impeachment." But the consequences she foresees from stopping the nation's business for an unwinnable fight outweighs those considerations.
Pelosi deserves considerable credit for holding her party together on a range of divisive issues, but she plainly views the coming fight among House Democrats on fuel efficiency standards as irrepressible.
The energy bill the House will pass this week contains no provisions that would raise those standards; such provisions, if any, await the outcome of a battle between Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, the Democrat who has represented Detroit and the auto industry in Congress since 1955 (that is, before tailfins).
"I respect all our chairmen," Pelosi said. But the legislation, she continued, isn't about them. "It's about our children's ability to breathe clean air. Nothing less than the planet is at stake. I love him [Dingell] dearly, but we have to prevail. . . . The forces at work here [against stricter standards] are rich and entrenched," she concluded, "and it takes just a few [votes] to prevent us from unleashing the future."
Thus, the most elegant of happy warriors, in a week when it's fun to be speaker.
hair happy birthday wishes in tamil. Happy Birthday for Tamil
vedicman
04-26 12:09 PM
Employment First Preference - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Employment_First_Preference)
more...
drona
09-01 04:19 PM
IV Meet-up in San Diego Sept 2nd at 1 PM. Please join our yahoo group for more info:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
See you then!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
See you then!
hot Re: Wish U HappY BirthdaY Miss
roseball
03-24 01:05 AM
Since 6 months earlier he was on H1, he wont be counted in the quota....
more...
house Belated Happy Birthday Scrap
aguy
02-05 03:55 PM
Hi,
I am on the 8th year of my H1B. I have an approved I140. There is a chance that I may have to leave my current job, and there will be a gap before I obtain another job. Two questions:
1. Can I stay in the US just on an approved I140 and no H1B?
2. I know I can get my H1b transferred. Can I instead leave my current job, be on I140 for some time, and apply for a new H1B for the new job, still continuing the 8th year?
Thanks.
I am on the 8th year of my H1B. I have an approved I140. There is a chance that I may have to leave my current job, and there will be a gap before I obtain another job. Two questions:
1. Can I stay in the US just on an approved I140 and no H1B?
2. I know I can get my H1b transferred. Can I instead leave my current job, be on I140 for some time, and apply for a new H1B for the new job, still continuing the 8th year?
Thanks.
tattoo HAPPY BIRTHDAY TAMIL WISHES
trump_gc
02-05 11:39 AM
Current VISA availability date is 01AUG02. So u r looking at 5-9 yrs ,,may be worse, or may be even better with any law comin in
more...
pictures pictures Birthday Wishes In Tamil happy birthday wishes in tamil. irthday
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 Happy Birthday; irthday wishes
Stuettgueardt
11-02 10:38 AM
I thought I'd give it a shot...
http://temp.veritasmusic.nl/button/mactallica.jpg
http://temp.veritasmusic.nl/button/mactallica.jpg
more...
makeup girlfriend happy birthday wishes lover. happy birthday wishes in tamil.
freedom_fighter
12-15 12:36 PM
Hello,
I'd like to know can a dependent (not the prime applicant) on a pending 485 status, avail unemployment insurance, especially the extended benefits which are being given by Federal govt. to the states.
This is the latest from USCIS :
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/Press%20Releases/2009%20Press%20Releases/Oct%202009/public_charge_fact_sheet.pdf
it says, that unemployment compensation is not public charge.
Does it even apply to both standard unemployment insurance and the extended benefits.
thanks
I'd like to know can a dependent (not the prime applicant) on a pending 485 status, avail unemployment insurance, especially the extended benefits which are being given by Federal govt. to the states.
This is the latest from USCIS :
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/Press%20Releases/2009%20Press%20Releases/Oct%202009/public_charge_fact_sheet.pdf
it says, that unemployment compensation is not public charge.
Does it even apply to both standard unemployment insurance and the extended benefits.
thanks
girlfriend Free Birthday Greetings
desi chala usa
06-28 03:50 PM
Bump^^^^
hairstyles happy birthday wishes in tamil. Birthday Wishes For Friends In
number30
04-09 01:54 PM
I filed for EAD (new application) 30 days back along with my AOS applications. Finished my FP on the 25th day.
Normally How long it take to get EAD from Texas Service center. ??
Any idea. ??
Now a days EAD is coming pretty quick. Some one got within a week. So it depends any where between 30 to 90 days.
Normally How long it take to get EAD from Texas Service center. ??
Any idea. ??
Now a days EAD is coming pretty quick. Some one got within a week. So it depends any where between 30 to 90 days.
mna123
07-30 05:37 PM
I am stuck out side of US for my name check for last 9 months. I have approved I 140. is there any way I can file my I 1485 and Advance parole or any thing to get back into US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
sepoy321
05-20 05:59 AM
My case
EB-2
I-140 Approved 2008
I-485 pending [ concurrent filing]
Have valid EAD [me and wife] but never used it. Still on H1B and H4 respectively.
I am on second term H1B which expires on Oct-2010.
Project is ending and I have to find new job. Current company applied for EAD renewel last week. But didn't want to spend for H1B renewal since I might change jobs. I am planning to invoke AC21 and shift to similar job. I want to know what is the last date for me to renew/port my H1B ?
My wife used her Advance Parole for travel [but did not use EAD for job], does that mean she is not in H4 anymore ?
Thank you friends. Any advise would be appreciated.
EB-2
I-140 Approved 2008
I-485 pending [ concurrent filing]
Have valid EAD [me and wife] but never used it. Still on H1B and H4 respectively.
I am on second term H1B which expires on Oct-2010.
Project is ending and I have to find new job. Current company applied for EAD renewel last week. But didn't want to spend for H1B renewal since I might change jobs. I am planning to invoke AC21 and shift to similar job. I want to know what is the last date for me to renew/port my H1B ?
My wife used her Advance Parole for travel [but did not use EAD for job], does that mean she is not in H4 anymore ?
Thank you friends. Any advise would be appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment