thomachan72
11-08 03:03 PM
regarding carrying older LCAs;
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
wallpaper cute quotes about smiling.
ttdam
10-02 04:08 PM
Hi gchopeful
Sorry to hear about denial
Was your case @ NSC/TSC ? EB2 or EB3 ?
Mine is A2P RFE as well from TSC !
Thank you
Sorry to hear about denial
Was your case @ NSC/TSC ? EB2 or EB3 ?
Mine is A2P RFE as well from TSC !
Thank you
kishdam
02-07 02:22 PM
Such agreement is not against the law. GC is for your benefit, not employer's.
So technically employer may ask you to reimburse I-485 filing fees (including attorney fees). Permanent residency is I-485 approval. What is the exact language? May be you can avoid paying you can just switch to another employer?
Thanks for all the responses. Yes, I am planning to move before my I-485 is approved (with current retrogession my EB2 PD of 05 may need another 3-4 years to get current unless there is a change in the rules). Infact I am changing jobs next month. What I am worried about is when I give notice my current employer will sure bring up this agreement and might ask me to repay. I will try to convince/negotiate in my own way and try to settle amicably. But if does not happen I am worried about what the employer can do with this agreement - since the exact wording in the agreement says that I have to stay at the employer for 2 years after the approval of permanent residence application. I am trying to find the legal definitionof "approval of permanent residency application" - my interpretation is approval of I485. I will try to reason that my "permanent residency" application is not yet approved and will try to repay some reasonable amount. Hope it works.
For others wondering why I am worried so much - the agreement simply says that all expenses incurred including fees, lawyer charges, other administrative/misc expenses. It worded so vaguely (I know I shoud not have signed) they can throw any bill at me.
So technically employer may ask you to reimburse I-485 filing fees (including attorney fees). Permanent residency is I-485 approval. What is the exact language? May be you can avoid paying you can just switch to another employer?
Thanks for all the responses. Yes, I am planning to move before my I-485 is approved (with current retrogession my EB2 PD of 05 may need another 3-4 years to get current unless there is a change in the rules). Infact I am changing jobs next month. What I am worried about is when I give notice my current employer will sure bring up this agreement and might ask me to repay. I will try to convince/negotiate in my own way and try to settle amicably. But if does not happen I am worried about what the employer can do with this agreement - since the exact wording in the agreement says that I have to stay at the employer for 2 years after the approval of permanent residence application. I am trying to find the legal definitionof "approval of permanent residency application" - my interpretation is approval of I485. I will try to reason that my "permanent residency" application is not yet approved and will try to repay some reasonable amount. Hope it works.
For others wondering why I am worried so much - the agreement simply says that all expenses incurred including fees, lawyer charges, other administrative/misc expenses. It worded so vaguely (I know I shoud not have signed) they can throw any bill at me.
2011 cute quotes about smiles.
InTheMoment
07-17 08:45 PM
What ?? Why do you even have any such doubts :confused:! Once you have US GC all rules about maintaining it apply. Nothing changes if you visit Canada and return to US if you are well within those rules!!
more...
hebron
08-10 12:25 PM
Thank you my_gc_wait and amitkhare77 for your suggestions.
One last question to amitkhare77, how long did it take after you joined your new employer to file EB2.
One last question to amitkhare77, how long did it take after you joined your new employer to file EB2.
ilikekilo
06-02 05:26 PM
did you send web faxes and contribute to IV, if not please do
more...
newbie2020
06-11 06:08 AM
This would help people who have used the H1 to the sixth year, and cannot recapture days to apply extension before they can use the 365 days clause from Aiyates memo. I know few
2010 $3.49 gallon cute quotes about
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
pappu
09-14 06:20 PM
Thanks to all those who tuned in.
hair cute quotes about smiles.
Dhundhun
03-17 01:08 PM
According to IRS
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
If any member has ITIN, economic stimulus package benefit will not be given.
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
If any member has ITIN, economic stimulus package benefit will not be given.
more...
frostrated
04-09 04:49 PM
i would say efile. You will get the file number immediately as opposed to the mai taking a couple of days to travel and then getting processed into the system. Ultimately, there might be a difference of upto 7 days between case numbers. The earlier your case number, the more advanageous your position will be.
Just my 2 cents.
Just my 2 cents.
hot Jan 4, 10:18 AM cute quotes
glus
05-31 12:52 PM
Thank you to everyone who contributed. Guys, Junior members have contributed, you have to do it too......please do it.
J
J
more...
house tattoo cute quotes about
vinoddas
07-30 02:37 AM
I liked the joke.. the title originally was: "Difficult Spouse related GC question" ;)
I will definitely consider doing that. I am just afraid that I might get my GC even before I get a chance to do a court marriage.
Thanks for the input.
I will definitely consider doing that. I am just afraid that I might get my GC even before I get a chance to do a court marriage.
Thanks for the input.
tattoo cute quotes about smiles. cute
nhfirefighter13
June 4th, 2004, 02:16 PM
I hope you don't mind but with about 20 minutes in photoshop...
:D
:D
more...
pictures nice quotes about smile. cute
saro28
10-20 01:55 PM
Not True, We submitted the Birth Certificate obtained from Indian consulate here in US and One of the GC got approved recently. In my opinion the Birth Certificate from Indian Consulate is sufficient
dresses cute quotes about smiles; cute quotes about smiles. cute quotes about smiles
ksvreg
02-25 09:55 AM
I started talking to new employer about my joining and I requested for preparing PERM stuff before I join. This is the only this I want the new employer to do on behalf me before I join with him. The employer said Prevailing Wage determination takes 2 months. And the new employer mentioned that he can not do Prevailing Wage determination without joining. Is this right?
more...
makeup cute quotes about smiles. quotes about smiles and love. quotes about smiles
zigma
04-06 07:21 AM
With this bill, if the thought is that about half of the illegals (<5yrs) will have to leave the country and return, and that too without any guarantees, they are not going to do it unless the consequences are drastic. Some, even then may decide that staying illegally is a better option than going back.
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
girlfriend cute quotes about smiles. quotes about smiles and love. love quotes search
pkd666
02-14 02:05 PM
Courts in NJ are not all that friendly to the employees in the case of a non-compete issue. I did some research in this regard when i was having trouble with my desi employer. If you were in California, you can just show him the finger, but NJ is different. If you did sign a non-compete agreement then i would suggest you try switching vendors and join the client after a while. but if you did not sign anything, then there is not much the employer can do.
hairstyles cute quotes about smiling and
jliechty
May 18th, 2005, 09:39 PM
Sometimes it's hard to get the dust off the sensor with one cleaning. I've cleaned mine once so far, and it still has some dust. I need to get some compressed air so I can recharge my $3 "sensor brush" from walmart and clean the CCD again. ;)
Eb3_frustrated
07-31 11:09 AM
Your wife can work as along the date on EAD is valid, EAD is employee authorization, it not a visa status unlike H4. She can have a EAD and be on H4 at the same time. It does not matter if you filed an extension for H4 but she can work if the EAD is valid ie end date on EAD has not passed.
This is just my thought based on my experience, remember I am not an attorney, consult one if you need dependable answer.
This is just my thought based on my experience, remember I am not an attorney, consult one if you need dependable answer.
Edison99
03-07 03:07 PM
I doubt about that�
out of the country indefinitely and then come back lets say after 10 yrs?
out of the country indefinitely and then come back lets say after 10 yrs?