kittu07in
08-20 06:54 PM
Thank you for your prompt response.
it gave me a lot of hope.
~Thanks.
it gave me a lot of hope.
~Thanks.
Templarian
07-20 10:04 PM
saxx it has no chance to beat flash. Its good in that it uses a very solid language backing. Its just not even remotely comparable to flash atm (its like flash 8 tbh if they were to be compared).
I have a good feeling once its further in development and MS has integrated all of DX10/DX11 support we will be seeing a lot more of it (probably because of a windows update).
Till then its just something to mess around with. Think of it more as a JAVA in your browser... everyone eventually will have it... but very few will use it.
I have a good feeling once its further in development and MS has integrated all of DX10/DX11 support we will be seeing a lot more of it (probably because of a windows update).
Till then its just something to mess around with. Think of it more as a JAVA in your browser... everyone eventually will have it... but very few will use it.
axp817
03-19 01:33 PM
Lifelock, ~$10 a month.
roseball
03-20 06:33 PM
Well, if you go according to the Lawyer of this forum with which guys had a conference call (you can hear the recording thats on the home page of this site)
Then its advisable to apply in EB3 category and her reasoning was that with her experience she has seen lots of EB2 application in the past few years and very less EB3 apps and hence chances of EB3 being processed earlier than EB2 are quiet high.
Also, consider the job satisfaction/career growth you will get by taking up this new job which you said is better than your current one.....Keeping in view the current trend, it will be atleast 5-6 yrs for Eb-2 to come to Oct 2007....Ask yourself if you want to be doing what you are doing right now for that long......I would move on.....
Then its advisable to apply in EB3 category and her reasoning was that with her experience she has seen lots of EB2 application in the past few years and very less EB3 apps and hence chances of EB3 being processed earlier than EB2 are quiet high.
Also, consider the job satisfaction/career growth you will get by taking up this new job which you said is better than your current one.....Keeping in view the current trend, it will be atleast 5-6 yrs for Eb-2 to come to Oct 2007....Ask yourself if you want to be doing what you are doing right now for that long......I would move on.....
more...
kumar1
07-18 01:39 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not use abusive language. - Administrator2
Please do not use abusive language. - Administrator2
rayen
07-14 02:20 PM
Can someone confirm the same for BA via London?
If you are travelling via London and there is no valid visa on your passport then you need DATV ( Direct airside transit visa ) , it will cost you 83 USD , you can get more info from the below URL.
Transit (INF 20) (http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/howtoapply/infs/inf20transit)
https://www.visainfoservices.com/Pages/Welcome.aspx
If you are travelling via London and there is no valid visa on your passport then you need DATV ( Direct airside transit visa ) , it will cost you 83 USD , you can get more info from the below URL.
Transit (INF 20) (http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/howtoapply/infs/inf20transit)
https://www.visainfoservices.com/Pages/Welcome.aspx
more...
lazycis
02-12 07:18 PM
Hi Wandmaker, Even If I need to work for the same employer do I need to use my EAD ?.
If you say 'Yes' to use EAD, later if I receive my H1B Extension in 1-2 monts, Can I use my H1B for the same employer where I got EAD thru them ?. If so wats the procedure ? . thank u sir.
Yes, use EAD (fill new I-9 from). After H1 extension is approved, leave and re-enter with new H1 stamp. Fill new I-9 form.
If you say 'Yes' to use EAD, later if I receive my H1B Extension in 1-2 monts, Can I use my H1B for the same employer where I got EAD thru them ?. If so wats the procedure ? . thank u sir.
Yes, use EAD (fill new I-9 from). After H1 extension is approved, leave and re-enter with new H1 stamp. Fill new I-9 form.
ganguteli
03-02 03:34 PM
Its pathetic that nobody is looking at this thread. IV should not be wasting its time and effort on people who are ungrateful and do not value it. They are more happy picking up fights with each other and spending time on threads that do not do any help
more...
sk2006
05-25 01:21 AM
My Employer is not paying me salary even I am on Project.
can any one please tell me that how to report to DOL about this company.
AGT
Would you please care to update your profile?
It appears you created and ID just to post this question.
can any one please tell me that how to report to DOL about this company.
AGT
Would you please care to update your profile?
It appears you created and ID just to post this question.
NeedMiracles
09-14 04:38 PM
Details in my signature..
more...
k94
11-17 09:31 AM
This isn't really answering any questions, but I've asked my company's lawyer to look into the benefits (and/or disadvantages) of making the switch frm TR (non-RIR) to RIR. Since this notice was only made recently by the DOL (in the Federal Register on October 6, 2006), I would imagine that it will take some time for lawyers, etc to figure out all the implications. As soon as I get any information, I will definitely post it.
desi3933
06-22 09:59 AM
This is from my attorney:
All your previous I-20s if you were student here, including all the notes made on the I-20s for any change (travel, course related paid work experience, OPT etc.);
EAD card copy for OPT if you had any;
All the visa stamps for reentering the States;
All H1b approvals;
I had some I-20s missing but I was able to contact my University International Student office - fortunately that they have everything on file.
"Proof that person is maintaining valid status in USA since last entry in USA" - not last entry but the first entry. All the documents are to prove your entry is legal and your stay is as legally approved.
It is the last entry not the first entry.
It is since first entry to for the Family based I-485, for Employment based I-485 section 245(k) applies and it requires status since last entry. In fact out of status < 180 days is forgiven under 245(k).
If your attorney does not understand 245(k), may be you should consider getting second opinion.
Section 245(k) applies for ALL employment based I-485s.
Not a legal advice
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
All your previous I-20s if you were student here, including all the notes made on the I-20s for any change (travel, course related paid work experience, OPT etc.);
EAD card copy for OPT if you had any;
All the visa stamps for reentering the States;
All H1b approvals;
I had some I-20s missing but I was able to contact my University International Student office - fortunately that they have everything on file.
"Proof that person is maintaining valid status in USA since last entry in USA" - not last entry but the first entry. All the documents are to prove your entry is legal and your stay is as legally approved.
It is the last entry not the first entry.
It is since first entry to for the Family based I-485, for Employment based I-485 section 245(k) applies and it requires status since last entry. In fact out of status < 180 days is forgiven under 245(k).
If your attorney does not understand 245(k), may be you should consider getting second opinion.
Section 245(k) applies for ALL employment based I-485s.
Not a legal advice
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
more...
Cataphract
05-25 08:53 AM
I just read this article in the paper today and wanted to share it with all of you.
It seems the general media has an impression that this CIR bill is a boon for the legal, skillled immigrant population, now we all know how true that is.
No one it seems has bothered to did deep enough to find out about the true perils of this bill, from the legal immigrants standpoint. That is where we need to also focus our resources.
I truly think that the conservative commentators who write on the op-ed pages of Washington Post, New York Times a and WSJ are our best bets in these tough times. Believe it or not, in the last few days I have read more than a few articles where they have addressed the new bill and have come out in support of legal, skilled immigrants rather than the liberals who are all gung-ho for the the low skilled population and care too much about still preserving family ties and encouraging chain migration. If we were to email something to say, George Will, Charles Krauthammer (I truly despise this right wing nut, but still) or even Robert Novak, there is a good chance they will address this issue.
I think we should develop a stinging rebuke (i know we already have, but this will be a very, very simpler version without all the clause quotations and targeted directly to the laymen), in the form of an Op-Ed piece that addresses in a point-by-point basis some of the most unfavorable provisions that this bill is littered with and also address the misinformation that is being spread suggesting that all of us legal skilled immigrants are going to come out way ahead once this bill passes.
I think we have a very good chance getting it published in one of these papers and it will have a huge impact.
This truly is make or break point for us and thanks everyone for doing their part. I just hope our lobbyists are aware of this predicament and that how damaging it will be to our interests if this bill passes.
Btw, just saw this poll/article on NYT about how most Americans are in favor of the guest worker program and legalizing illegals.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/25/us/25poll.html?hp
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052402605.html?hpid=topnews
For some reason my uploads of PDF's failed, so I am adding links.
It seems the general media has an impression that this CIR bill is a boon for the legal, skillled immigrant population, now we all know how true that is.
No one it seems has bothered to did deep enough to find out about the true perils of this bill, from the legal immigrants standpoint. That is where we need to also focus our resources.
I truly think that the conservative commentators who write on the op-ed pages of Washington Post, New York Times a and WSJ are our best bets in these tough times. Believe it or not, in the last few days I have read more than a few articles where they have addressed the new bill and have come out in support of legal, skilled immigrants rather than the liberals who are all gung-ho for the the low skilled population and care too much about still preserving family ties and encouraging chain migration. If we were to email something to say, George Will, Charles Krauthammer (I truly despise this right wing nut, but still) or even Robert Novak, there is a good chance they will address this issue.
I think we should develop a stinging rebuke (i know we already have, but this will be a very, very simpler version without all the clause quotations and targeted directly to the laymen), in the form of an Op-Ed piece that addresses in a point-by-point basis some of the most unfavorable provisions that this bill is littered with and also address the misinformation that is being spread suggesting that all of us legal skilled immigrants are going to come out way ahead once this bill passes.
I think we have a very good chance getting it published in one of these papers and it will have a huge impact.
This truly is make or break point for us and thanks everyone for doing their part. I just hope our lobbyists are aware of this predicament and that how damaging it will be to our interests if this bill passes.
Btw, just saw this poll/article on NYT about how most Americans are in favor of the guest worker program and legalizing illegals.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/25/us/25poll.html?hp
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052402605.html?hpid=topnews
For some reason my uploads of PDF's failed, so I am adding links.
FinalGC
03-30 10:44 AM
Yes, their AOS is applied......
more...
golucki
07-27 11:57 AM
Congrates!
butterchicken
04-28 02:10 PM
DOL Proposed Legislation for Labor Certification
In an attempt to clamp down on fraud in the labor certification application process, the Department of Labor (�DOL�) has proposed regulations, which would impact both pre-PERM and PERM filings. The proposal includes requiring employers to pay for all costs and fees associated with a labor certification application. The penalties for violating this proposal include denial of the labor certification, revocation, debarment, or any combination. Debarment means an employer can not file a labor certification application for up to three years.
A labor certification application would also have a limited validity period. Currently a labor certification application is valid without limitation unless it is revoked or withdrawn. Under the proposed regulations, an employer must file an immigrant petition with the CIS within 45 days of the labor certification application approval. For applications which have already been certified, an employer must file within 45 days of the enactment of final rule implementing the regulations. If the labor certification application is not filed within this timeframe, it will expire and can not be used to support an immigrant petition.
The proposed regulations also prohibit substitution. Substitution occurs when an employer has an approved labor certification application, but the individual that was originally listed in the labor certification application is no longer being sponsored. An employer could �substitute� a new employee into the labor certification application if the new employee met the minimum requirements listed in the labor certification application at the time the application was initially filed. Concerned that substitution encouraged fraud, DOL proposes to eliminate substitution.
Finally, the proposed rule prohibits a labor certification application to be sold, bartered or purchased. If an individual or entity is found to have engaged in this kind of transaction, the labor certification application can be denied, revoked, debarment, or any combination.
In an attempt to clamp down on fraud in the labor certification application process, the Department of Labor (�DOL�) has proposed regulations, which would impact both pre-PERM and PERM filings. The proposal includes requiring employers to pay for all costs and fees associated with a labor certification application. The penalties for violating this proposal include denial of the labor certification, revocation, debarment, or any combination. Debarment means an employer can not file a labor certification application for up to three years.
A labor certification application would also have a limited validity period. Currently a labor certification application is valid without limitation unless it is revoked or withdrawn. Under the proposed regulations, an employer must file an immigrant petition with the CIS within 45 days of the labor certification application approval. For applications which have already been certified, an employer must file within 45 days of the enactment of final rule implementing the regulations. If the labor certification application is not filed within this timeframe, it will expire and can not be used to support an immigrant petition.
The proposed regulations also prohibit substitution. Substitution occurs when an employer has an approved labor certification application, but the individual that was originally listed in the labor certification application is no longer being sponsored. An employer could �substitute� a new employee into the labor certification application if the new employee met the minimum requirements listed in the labor certification application at the time the application was initially filed. Concerned that substitution encouraged fraud, DOL proposes to eliminate substitution.
Finally, the proposed rule prohibits a labor certification application to be sold, bartered or purchased. If an individual or entity is found to have engaged in this kind of transaction, the labor certification application can be denied, revoked, debarment, or any combination.
more...
GCard_Dream
08-07 12:21 PM
If you can't decide, give him a blue dot. :confused:
initially I was mad, becasue I remembered the revised July 2007 visa bulletin that came out declaring a reversal. Since NSC is going slow, I thought that DOS has once again pulled back on the dates. Later on I realized that its a mistake by the thread owner and got pissed off, and finally all I can do is laugh on the entire brohaha. Can't decide if we should give red dots OR green dots to the thread owner
initially I was mad, becasue I remembered the revised July 2007 visa bulletin that came out declaring a reversal. Since NSC is going slow, I thought that DOS has once again pulled back on the dates. Later on I realized that its a mistake by the thread owner and got pissed off, and finally all I can do is laugh on the entire brohaha. Can't decide if we should give red dots OR green dots to the thread owner
rkrit07
07-17 05:42 PM
Yep We Nailed Them, Hatsoff To Iv, Aila, Whoever Ar Einvobed, Including Protesotrs, And My 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000 Cheers To The Great Gandhi, Whose Way Is Still The Best Way To Achieve Anything
jthomas
07-05 05:52 PM
Most of the active members would have done their calls to lawmakers and the list of provided. What's next. Can somebody keep it moving.
GCWhru
03-26 02:10 PM
Do you have any source on this....I also had to amend my H1B last month. Its done without any issues..
My lawyer informed this. They instructed me not to travel while extension is pending. In case you have to travel, they suggest to do the extension after return back. I don't have any source for this information.
But it makes sense isn't it. Your extension is the extension of your last I94, however if you travelled after application, your extension have different i94 number and your recent i94 has different number. Just my opinion.
My lawyer informed this. They instructed me not to travel while extension is pending. In case you have to travel, they suggest to do the extension after return back. I don't have any source for this information.
But it makes sense isn't it. Your extension is the extension of your last I94, however if you travelled after application, your extension have different i94 number and your recent i94 has different number. Just my opinion.
ossidon
08-21 09:17 AM
My Details
EB2 - I
My priority date Dec 2004
I140 approved in May 07
I485 filed at NSC-2nd July 2007, RD 2nd July 07, ND 8 Aug 07
I140 LUD on 7/13/2008
Background Check Cleared : Source Infopass. SR Filed and IO mentioned in the Infopass on 8/8/08 that my file was being touched as recently as 8/7/08 but hasnt reached the Adjudicator.
Still waiting.................Am lost on what to do and whom to contact?
EB2 - I
My priority date Dec 2004
I140 approved in May 07
I485 filed at NSC-2nd July 2007, RD 2nd July 07, ND 8 Aug 07
I140 LUD on 7/13/2008
Background Check Cleared : Source Infopass. SR Filed and IO mentioned in the Infopass on 8/8/08 that my file was being touched as recently as 8/7/08 but hasnt reached the Adjudicator.
Still waiting.................Am lost on what to do and whom to contact?
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق