Kitiara
10-25 04:42 AM
Ahhh, what a great game that was.
wallpaper ounce of weed in bag.
140jibjab
01-11 11:09 AM
Please be adviced If your wife is on H4 you cannot use your EAD.
The day you use ur EAD your wife will be out of Status.
If she becomes out of status, you will not be able to add her to your I485 application when the dates become current.
Thank You...
If my new wife arrives to US on H4 , can i start using EAD? Is this possible for me to be on EAD and my Wife on H4? Please advise.
The day you use ur EAD your wife will be out of Status.
If she becomes out of status, you will not be able to add her to your I485 application when the dates become current.
Thank You...
If my new wife arrives to US on H4 , can i start using EAD? Is this possible for me to be on EAD and my Wife on H4? Please advise.
sdudeja
11-20 12:56 PM
Hi
Teacher H1 is same as any other H1. There are consultancies hiring teachers. You can join based on your qualifications and experience. You get a 3 year certification based on your evaluation of credentials. I mentioned a company GTRR. You can contact them. Their site is gtrr.net. My cell number is 404-704-2455.
All the best
Teacher H1 is same as any other H1. There are consultancies hiring teachers. You can join based on your qualifications and experience. You get a 3 year certification based on your evaluation of credentials. I mentioned a company GTRR. You can contact them. Their site is gtrr.net. My cell number is 404-704-2455.
All the best
2011 ounce of weed.
hojo
09-05 09:32 PM
very nice footer lostinbeta, original and clean, looks great
more...
viswanadh73
01-04 03:21 PM
thanks
485_spouse
05-25 02:53 PM
Does anyone have recent experience with the Chicago office of Consulate of India for passport renewal. How long does it take? 2 weeks, 3 weeks, more than 3 weeks.
did it last month.
It will take atleast 6 weeks.
485_Spouse
did it last month.
It will take atleast 6 weeks.
485_Spouse
more...
purgan
10-14 05:13 PM
Canada attracting educated and highly skilled immigrants
12 October 2006
Canadian immigration policy is doing a good job of attracting skilled immigrants to this country, a Queen's University expert said. The U.S. Senate recently invited Economics professor Charles Beach to provide testimony as part of a major debate on U.S. immigration policy, driven by the large number of illegal immigrants in that country.
Beach told a U.S. Senate committee recently that the growing importance of education, business and work experience as admission standards to Canada has significantly raised the education levels of the 230,000 immigrants who come to Canada annually.
The result is a group of new immigrants who are better educated and experienced, younger and more fluent in either English or French than the whole immigrant population.
Only about 20% of U.S. legal immigrants - one-third the level of Canada - enter the country under independent or economic status based on rules which reward education and work skills. The study did not deal with another touchy issue: making sure that more of these well-educated newcomers get jobs to match their skills.
Some U.S. politicians are considering joining Canada and many other countries in adopting a similar point system tied to credentials.
Beach said "Ironically, our findings have attracted more interest south of the border than from government officials in Ottawa."
Beach said in a separate interview yesterday that Canada has to do a better job of recognizing the credentials of foreign-born professionals and easing the transition to the Canadian job market. "Some training, adjustment and wage subsidy programs were cut because of government deficits in the mid-1990s. I think that is a factor in the slower integration of some well-educated immigrants."
The study found that those with university and post-graduate degrees jumped to 34% of all immigrants in 2000 from only 8% in 1980, while the proportion with only a secondary school education dropped from 59% to 35%.
The proportion with college or related training was flat at 16%, while the balance has little formal education.
The reason for the big shift is that 59% of all immigrants in 2000 entered Canada under independent or economic status determined by a point system - up from 35% in 1980.
The proportion that entered under family unification status dropped from 36% to 27% and those who entered under humanitarian or refugee status dropped even more sharply, from 28% to 13%.
Beach, along with Professor Alan Green of Queen's and Professor Christopher Worswick of Carleton University in Ottawa, studied Canadian immigration after separating out the impact of business cycles and unemployment rates in Canada and the U.S. "It appears that changing Canada's immigration policy to the point system had the desired effect of improving the quality of skill attributes of incoming immigrants," Beach said.
The point system has gone through many changes over the years, giving greater weight to education levels, work experience, the age of entrants and their fluency in English or French. It will likely change again in the future to attract more skilled building and industrial trade people.
Opening the immigration door wider - always a touchy political issue - has a small but negative impact on education levels.
Increasing the total number of immigrants by 100,000 per year - about 35% - reduces the average education of economic immigrants by 2.6% and increases the average age by 1.7%. Canada has a current target of attracting and approving 200,000 immigrants annually.
Last year, approximately 240,000 immigrants were granted visas. There has been discussion during the past summer of increasing the official target to 300,000 annually, in part a response to slightly off-setting Canada's low birth rate.
But increasing the portion of economic immigrants by 10% raises the education and language levels, and reduces the age of all immigrants by about 2% each.
12 October 2006
Canadian immigration policy is doing a good job of attracting skilled immigrants to this country, a Queen's University expert said. The U.S. Senate recently invited Economics professor Charles Beach to provide testimony as part of a major debate on U.S. immigration policy, driven by the large number of illegal immigrants in that country.
Beach told a U.S. Senate committee recently that the growing importance of education, business and work experience as admission standards to Canada has significantly raised the education levels of the 230,000 immigrants who come to Canada annually.
The result is a group of new immigrants who are better educated and experienced, younger and more fluent in either English or French than the whole immigrant population.
Only about 20% of U.S. legal immigrants - one-third the level of Canada - enter the country under independent or economic status based on rules which reward education and work skills. The study did not deal with another touchy issue: making sure that more of these well-educated newcomers get jobs to match their skills.
Some U.S. politicians are considering joining Canada and many other countries in adopting a similar point system tied to credentials.
Beach said "Ironically, our findings have attracted more interest south of the border than from government officials in Ottawa."
Beach said in a separate interview yesterday that Canada has to do a better job of recognizing the credentials of foreign-born professionals and easing the transition to the Canadian job market. "Some training, adjustment and wage subsidy programs were cut because of government deficits in the mid-1990s. I think that is a factor in the slower integration of some well-educated immigrants."
The study found that those with university and post-graduate degrees jumped to 34% of all immigrants in 2000 from only 8% in 1980, while the proportion with only a secondary school education dropped from 59% to 35%.
The proportion with college or related training was flat at 16%, while the balance has little formal education.
The reason for the big shift is that 59% of all immigrants in 2000 entered Canada under independent or economic status determined by a point system - up from 35% in 1980.
The proportion that entered under family unification status dropped from 36% to 27% and those who entered under humanitarian or refugee status dropped even more sharply, from 28% to 13%.
Beach, along with Professor Alan Green of Queen's and Professor Christopher Worswick of Carleton University in Ottawa, studied Canadian immigration after separating out the impact of business cycles and unemployment rates in Canada and the U.S. "It appears that changing Canada's immigration policy to the point system had the desired effect of improving the quality of skill attributes of incoming immigrants," Beach said.
The point system has gone through many changes over the years, giving greater weight to education levels, work experience, the age of entrants and their fluency in English or French. It will likely change again in the future to attract more skilled building and industrial trade people.
Opening the immigration door wider - always a touchy political issue - has a small but negative impact on education levels.
Increasing the total number of immigrants by 100,000 per year - about 35% - reduces the average education of economic immigrants by 2.6% and increases the average age by 1.7%. Canada has a current target of attracting and approving 200,000 immigrants annually.
Last year, approximately 240,000 immigrants were granted visas. There has been discussion during the past summer of increasing the official target to 300,000 annually, in part a response to slightly off-setting Canada's low birth rate.
But increasing the portion of economic immigrants by 10% raises the education and language levels, and reduces the age of all immigrants by about 2% each.
2010 lots of weed. lots of weed.
canmt
11-16 08:46 AM
The term permanent does not mean forever; after you apply AC21 and inform USCIS regarding your intent to change employer you can stop worrying about working for the gc sponsored employer.
But if you stick with your gc sponsored employer till you get your green card; then you cannot use AC21. It is not clear as to how long you need to work for the gc sponsored employer. Most of the lawyers say 1 year is a good time to change employer after getting gc but there is no law binding on such things.
But if you stick with your gc sponsored employer till you get your green card; then you cannot use AC21. It is not clear as to how long you need to work for the gc sponsored employer. Most of the lawyers say 1 year is a good time to change employer after getting gc but there is no law binding on such things.
more...
eb3_nepa
08-14 04:16 PM
never though i could get so much experience with neurosis (mine and everyone else's) in a such a short time...guess i should thank USCIS- and apply for EB1 as a international expert :D:p
Paskal maybe you should call up USCIS NSC and ask them the names of all their Mail room clerks. Tell them ur calling on behalf of Homeland security!:p
Then call up UPS, USPS, DHL and Fedex to get the common times when the delivery trucks stopped by NSC to drop off applications and threaten to sue them if they dont give u exact details of number of applications dropped off with each delivery. Once again tell them its a matter of national security!!
Finally create a POLL of Delivery Times v/s Mail room clerk and combine all threads. ;)
Paskal maybe you should call up USCIS NSC and ask them the names of all their Mail room clerks. Tell them ur calling on behalf of Homeland security!:p
Then call up UPS, USPS, DHL and Fedex to get the common times when the delivery trucks stopped by NSC to drop off applications and threaten to sue them if they dont give u exact details of number of applications dropped off with each delivery. Once again tell them its a matter of national security!!
Finally create a POLL of Delivery Times v/s Mail room clerk and combine all threads. ;)
hair alot of weed. alot of weed.
EB2_Jun03_dude
11-29 09:31 PM
thanks for the info .. i think i will schedule a medical appt for dec 10th.
Also my birth certificate(English version too) was send along with I-485 app. So I hope that does now show up.
My only concern is the time they will allow me to respond to the RFE. I hope it is the standard 6 weeks as stated in this faq http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/i-485_adjustment-status.php
Also my birth certificate(English version too) was send along with I-485 app. So I hope that does now show up.
My only concern is the time they will allow me to respond to the RFE. I hope it is the standard 6 weeks as stated in this faq http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/i-485_adjustment-status.php
more...
Jaime
09-12 03:03 PM
Come on guys! We can't let Ranga get sucked into the U.S. Reverse Brain Drain!!! Nor can we let any of the 500,000 of us get sucked in either!!! Let's go to Washington next week!!!!
hot alot of weed. alot of weed.
prasadn
07-14 07:30 PM
Can someone please confirm the renewal fee required for EAD application (I-765).
My I-485 receipt date is Aug 2, 2007., notice date Sep '07.
However, my AOS application was filed under the old fee structure ($395) pursuant to July 2007 bulletin.
My company's attorney has submitted the application without fee, and USCIS has issued a receipt notice...i.e., they have not rejected the application.
In 2008, I paid the renewal fee when I applied on my own.
My understanding is that fee is required as per I-765 form instructions (page 7). My EAD is expiring mid of August and have been waiting, but not sure what to do
1. Is there a chance that my EAD application will be approved without fee ?
2. Should I just send checks and write cover letter on why fee is required ?
3. Should I send another application, but this time with the fee ?
Should I
From my understanding, if you filed for AOS after August 17th, 2007, you fall under the new fee structure and you don't have to pay AP/EAD renewal fees. Otherwise, you will have to. If I were you I would re-submit the application with the proper fees rather than waiting for USCIS to sit on the application for a few weeks and reject it.
Thanks
Prasad
My I-485 receipt date is Aug 2, 2007., notice date Sep '07.
However, my AOS application was filed under the old fee structure ($395) pursuant to July 2007 bulletin.
My company's attorney has submitted the application without fee, and USCIS has issued a receipt notice...i.e., they have not rejected the application.
In 2008, I paid the renewal fee when I applied on my own.
My understanding is that fee is required as per I-765 form instructions (page 7). My EAD is expiring mid of August and have been waiting, but not sure what to do
1. Is there a chance that my EAD application will be approved without fee ?
2. Should I just send checks and write cover letter on why fee is required ?
3. Should I send another application, but this time with the fee ?
Should I
From my understanding, if you filed for AOS after August 17th, 2007, you fall under the new fee structure and you don't have to pay AP/EAD renewal fees. Otherwise, you will have to. If I were you I would re-submit the application with the proper fees rather than waiting for USCIS to sit on the application for a few weeks and reject it.
Thanks
Prasad
more...
house thats alot of weed
sinziana
01-19 04:25 PM
I am special education taecher and I AM LOOKING FOR A SPONSOR
thank yoy for help
thank yoy for help
tattoo hair 8th of weed. 8th of weed.
permfiling
10-27 01:27 PM
Congrats ! I guess the 3 green card is a magic number as mine was 10 yrs stay and 3 GC applications as well.
Did you receive the I-797 approval letter and at which service center was your case approved at.
Thanks
Hi All,
After 7 years of stay in the US and 3 green card applications later, I finally got the 485 approval e-mail.....aaahhha......I feel so relaxed now.
However I did not get any FP notice yet! Do you know if Biometrics is a requirement for issuing the physical green card and also any idea how long it takes to get the card from this point of time.
following is the current status in the online status of my 485:
Post Decision Activity
On October 26, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
For approved applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include USCIS sending notification of the approved application/petition to the National Visa Center or the Department of State. For denied applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include the processing of an appeal and/or motions to reopen or reconsider and revocations.
Did you receive the I-797 approval letter and at which service center was your case approved at.
Thanks
Hi All,
After 7 years of stay in the US and 3 green card applications later, I finally got the 485 approval e-mail.....aaahhha......I feel so relaxed now.
However I did not get any FP notice yet! Do you know if Biometrics is a requirement for issuing the physical green card and also any idea how long it takes to get the card from this point of time.
following is the current status in the online status of my 485:
Post Decision Activity
On October 26, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
For approved applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include USCIS sending notification of the approved application/petition to the National Visa Center or the Department of State. For denied applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include the processing of an appeal and/or motions to reopen or reconsider and revocations.
more...
pictures images grams of weed. grams of
jamesingham
06-22 04:20 PM
Mine is the same company that applied for EB2 in the first place
dresses 1208587254-pile-of-weed.jpg
logiclife
09-25 12:07 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
more...
makeup application of weed killer
anuh1
03-11 09:16 AM
My PWD was also requested in first week of Feb but still waiting to get.
girlfriend Fundamentals of Weed Science
javadeveloper
02-23 10:59 AM
Hi
We are in AOS pending status.iam on EAD.
After seeing the economy Iam planning to send my wife to india. She is pregnant ( 2 months).
Now I have job and in future if I get into any trouble with project Etc.. I need to pay the medical insurance and will have lot of financial issues.
How difficult is to bring new infant to US from India while our AOS is pending and apply 485.
( Visito visa Etc..)
Any suggestions.
Thanks
1.You need to be on h1(your wife&kid needs to be on H4)
2.My suggestion:use EAD if you need to use but don't send your wife to India.Use your savings for your Insurance & living(in the worst case).
3.Also keep in mind that you have to spend about $2000 to send her to india and bring back to US with which you can buy 3 months of insurance.
We are in AOS pending status.iam on EAD.
After seeing the economy Iam planning to send my wife to india. She is pregnant ( 2 months).
Now I have job and in future if I get into any trouble with project Etc.. I need to pay the medical insurance and will have lot of financial issues.
How difficult is to bring new infant to US from India while our AOS is pending and apply 485.
( Visito visa Etc..)
Any suggestions.
Thanks
1.You need to be on h1(your wife&kid needs to be on H4)
2.My suggestion:use EAD if you need to use but don't send your wife to India.Use your savings for your Insurance & living(in the worst case).
3.Also keep in mind that you have to spend about $2000 to send her to india and bring back to US with which you can buy 3 months of insurance.
hairstyles images ounce of weed in ag.
arnab221
05-22 05:01 PM
Yeah !! now they have a new argument to restore the multimillion dollar tax payer funded bonuses .These companies are not even ashamed that they are running on money from the American tax payers without which many would have had to sell their buildings now .
These super brains used their intellect for all the wrong reasons when they created the famous Collateral Debt Obligations ( CDO ) that even Alan Greenspan said he could not understand . These guys then loaned money all over the globe , without taking into account any risk factors . With little Government oversight in the US financial industry these people were ultimately responsible for the well being of world financial health .A little caution and responsible behavior from these people would have saved us from the catastrophical global recession that we are now . But nooo , they loaned money as if there was no tomorrow and got millions in bonuses for selling loans and securities to unsuspecting investors and the whole world is now bearing the brunt of their greed with more than half a million layoffs every month in US alone.
These people are ultimately responsible for the mess which the whole world is in and now their CEO's are saying that they need to retained with bonuses or we will see a Brain Drain .
If terror is the name of causing havoc and utter chaos which causes people to suffer in any area then the only name that I can think of calling these people is "Financial Terrorists" .
These super brains used their intellect for all the wrong reasons when they created the famous Collateral Debt Obligations ( CDO ) that even Alan Greenspan said he could not understand . These guys then loaned money all over the globe , without taking into account any risk factors . With little Government oversight in the US financial industry these people were ultimately responsible for the well being of world financial health .A little caution and responsible behavior from these people would have saved us from the catastrophical global recession that we are now . But nooo , they loaned money as if there was no tomorrow and got millions in bonuses for selling loans and securities to unsuspecting investors and the whole world is now bearing the brunt of their greed with more than half a million layoffs every month in US alone.
These people are ultimately responsible for the mess which the whole world is in and now their CEO's are saying that they need to retained with bonuses or we will see a Brain Drain .
If terror is the name of causing havoc and utter chaos which causes people to suffer in any area then the only name that I can think of calling these people is "Financial Terrorists" .
a1b2c3
05-21 11:54 AM
please reply in case you need more info
eb3retro
04-13 10:39 AM
Hi,
First let me thank you all for providing and maintaining such a forum where one can get all the answers related with immigration. This is truly amazing.
I am a july 2007 filer. My priority date in October 2006. My I 140 was approved in January 2007. I was laid off by my original GC sponsoring company in April 2009. Fortunately, I was able to get a new job under same responsibility description, before my last day with the GC sponsoring employer. I had invoked my AC21 on April 10,2009 and had switched job.
I have a AP, valid through January 2011 and a EAD valid through August 2010.
Mu H1B and I 94 has been expired alost an year now. I am working and staying in the country with EAD now with an AOS status.
I need to travel to India to address some urgent family now. Do you think my travel on AP (especially after invoking Ac21) in risky. I will be travelling through JFK. Has anyone travelled through JFK on AP after invoking AC21?
Any information will be highly appreciated.
Folowinga are the documents, that I would be carrying:
a) I 140 approval notice.
b) I 485 receipt notice.
c) valid EAD
d) valid AP
e) AC21 protability letter from my immegration layer.
f) I 140 support letter from my new employer.
g) Offer letter from my new employer.
h) termination letter from my earlier employer.
i) Address proof
j)W2
Can anyone let me know their expirence if faced similar situation please.
do not worry..its going to be perfectly alright. i travelled thru jfk using my AP after using ac21 twice. infact i only gave my passport, along with new i94 filled up , with a copy of the AP at the port of entry to the officer. no questions asked. just remain calm and answer any questions asked politely. AP is for this exact purpose which helps you to exit and enter country during this excruciating time of 485 approval waiting. so, you are good to go as long as you have a valid AP, infact I travelled once using AP, when I didnt have a job here. all it matters when you reenter is if you have a valid AP/VISA to enter the country.
On a different note, please update your profile. people value that a lot here..
First let me thank you all for providing and maintaining such a forum where one can get all the answers related with immigration. This is truly amazing.
I am a july 2007 filer. My priority date in October 2006. My I 140 was approved in January 2007. I was laid off by my original GC sponsoring company in April 2009. Fortunately, I was able to get a new job under same responsibility description, before my last day with the GC sponsoring employer. I had invoked my AC21 on April 10,2009 and had switched job.
I have a AP, valid through January 2011 and a EAD valid through August 2010.
Mu H1B and I 94 has been expired alost an year now. I am working and staying in the country with EAD now with an AOS status.
I need to travel to India to address some urgent family now. Do you think my travel on AP (especially after invoking Ac21) in risky. I will be travelling through JFK. Has anyone travelled through JFK on AP after invoking AC21?
Any information will be highly appreciated.
Folowinga are the documents, that I would be carrying:
a) I 140 approval notice.
b) I 485 receipt notice.
c) valid EAD
d) valid AP
e) AC21 protability letter from my immegration layer.
f) I 140 support letter from my new employer.
g) Offer letter from my new employer.
h) termination letter from my earlier employer.
i) Address proof
j)W2
Can anyone let me know their expirence if faced similar situation please.
do not worry..its going to be perfectly alright. i travelled thru jfk using my AP after using ac21 twice. infact i only gave my passport, along with new i94 filled up , with a copy of the AP at the port of entry to the officer. no questions asked. just remain calm and answer any questions asked politely. AP is for this exact purpose which helps you to exit and enter country during this excruciating time of 485 approval waiting. so, you are good to go as long as you have a valid AP, infact I travelled once using AP, when I didnt have a job here. all it matters when you reenter is if you have a valid AP/VISA to enter the country.
On a different note, please update your profile. people value that a lot here..
No comments:
Post a Comment