ck_b2001
06-08 10:11 AM
I would appreciate some feedback on following situation;
1) My wife is on H4/EAD. She is beneficiary of my AOS application. She holds Master's Degree from US. What is the best option for her to work on?
2) She was on H1B from Oct 2001 to Mar 2003. She COS to H4 after her job terminated with-in weeks. Since then she's been in US (on H4) and never been out for more than couple of months. Can she apply for H1B and not limited to H1B quota and wait till Oct?
3) Would changing to H1B abondon her AOS?
4) Can she work on EAD now and switch to H1B around Oct time if she has to apply for fresh H1B for next yr quota.
4) If she can get H1B, can she still use AP for travel?
6) If i loose job or my 485 is denied, isn't it better she has H1B so i can get on H4 or on her GC application.
Thanks,
1) My wife is on H4/EAD. She is beneficiary of my AOS application. She holds Master's Degree from US. What is the best option for her to work on?
2) She was on H1B from Oct 2001 to Mar 2003. She COS to H4 after her job terminated with-in weeks. Since then she's been in US (on H4) and never been out for more than couple of months. Can she apply for H1B and not limited to H1B quota and wait till Oct?
3) Would changing to H1B abondon her AOS?
4) Can she work on EAD now and switch to H1B around Oct time if she has to apply for fresh H1B for next yr quota.
4) If she can get H1B, can she still use AP for travel?
6) If i loose job or my 485 is denied, isn't it better she has H1B so i can get on H4 or on her GC application.
Thanks,
wallpaper 1940s hairstyles for women.
Kitiara
09-26 10:12 AM
Does anyone have any URLs of sites that go into Photoshop 7? I haven't had much of a chance to get into playing with this yet, but I'd like to know how to do all these wonderful graphics you guys keep coming out with. :)
gsc999
04-30 09:22 PM
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/119913.html
Thanks for posting. Last 10 seconds of the Part III were shocking.
Warning: May be inappropriate for female members :o
Thanks for posting. Last 10 seconds of the Part III were shocking.
Warning: May be inappropriate for female members :o
2011 hot 1940s hairstyles vintage
getready4gc
09-09 06:49 PM
I have applied EAD for my wife... while applying I misspelt my wife's first name and I haven't selected any service center, seems it automatically choosen NSC... but my 485 applied under TSC and the dates here are best like May 20, 2008 and the NBC is Mar 31, 2008...
How can I correct the name, can I do it at the time of finger print?
How can I change the service center?
I already sent email to EAD Deptt... In the meanwhile, I wd like to find from many experienced people like you...
Thanks
How can I correct the name, can I do it at the time of finger print?
How can I change the service center?
I already sent email to EAD Deptt... In the meanwhile, I wd like to find from many experienced people like you...
Thanks
more...
nkhandelwal
01-06 05:52 AM
HI,
Following is my case details -
Visa and I94 expiration date: 12 Sep 2009
Filed H1 extension: 11 Sep 2009
Extension denied: 18 Nov 2009
Left US: 15 Dec 2009
Refiled H1 Visa: 15 Dec 2009
Visa apporoved: 22 Dec 2009
What should my answer for following question in DS-156 as I left US within 30 days of receiving the denial letter?
Have you ever violated the terms of a U.S. visa, or been unlawfully present in, or deported from, the United States?
Thanks,
Naveen
Following is my case details -
Visa and I94 expiration date: 12 Sep 2009
Filed H1 extension: 11 Sep 2009
Extension denied: 18 Nov 2009
Left US: 15 Dec 2009
Refiled H1 Visa: 15 Dec 2009
Visa apporoved: 22 Dec 2009
What should my answer for following question in DS-156 as I left US within 30 days of receiving the denial letter?
Have you ever violated the terms of a U.S. visa, or been unlawfully present in, or deported from, the United States?
Thanks,
Naveen
Blog Feeds
05-26 05:00 PM
DOS published a notice of the determination that the Abu Nidal Organization Movement (ANO) and Palestinian Liberation Front--Abu Abbas Faction (PLF) and all designated aliases will maintain designations as foreign terrorist organizations.
Abu Nidal is a terrorist organization widely known for deadly attacks in the 1980s on Western, Palestinian, and Israeli targets. They were attempting to derail diplomatic relations between the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the West, while advocating for the destruction of Israel. The organization was named for a former member of the PLO who split off in a dispute over establishing diplomatic ties with Israel. Abu Nidal has been on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations for more than twenty years.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/05/5262009_dos_notice_of_continui.html)
Abu Nidal is a terrorist organization widely known for deadly attacks in the 1980s on Western, Palestinian, and Israeli targets. They were attempting to derail diplomatic relations between the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the West, while advocating for the destruction of Israel. The organization was named for a former member of the PLO who split off in a dispute over establishing diplomatic ties with Israel. Abu Nidal has been on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations for more than twenty years.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/05/5262009_dos_notice_of_continui.html)
more...
Macaca
06-01 07:26 PM
Pelosi�s Order in the House (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/01/us/politics/01web-hulse.html) By CARL HULSE (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/01/us/politics/01web-hulse.html), June 1, 2007
The differences between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her predecessor, J. Dennis Hastert, could not be more striking.
He is a burly former wrestling coach, a conservative Republican from small-town Illinois who usually ran from the microphones. She is the designer-clad member of a political family, a wealthy liberal from San Francisco who sees herself as a top party spokeswoman.
But what could turn out to be their defining contrast was exhibited on May 24, when Ms. Pelosi allowed the Iraq war spending bill to clear the House with predominantly Republican votes while most Democrats � including her � opposed it. It was a marked departure from the principle that guided Mr. Hastert during his years as speaker.
Mr. Hastert was an advocate of governing the House by a �majority of the majority� � a standard he thought best served the interests of his Republican members and, by extension, the nation. Just months into her tenure, Ms. Pelosi has shown she will deviate from that approach, balancing the potential of significant rewards against big risks.
The rewards could come from success in winning approval of major legislation that reaches beyond party label. Critics of Mr. Hastert said his self-imposed rule prevented the House from considering centrist social and economic measures that, in their view, could have benefited both parties. It is likely, for instance, that a coalition existed in the House last year to pass an immigration overhaul that Republicans and Democrats could have hailed going into the elections. But strong opposition from a majority of the majority derailed that idea.
The risks are related to party cohesion. If a leader such as Ms. Pelosi regularly cuts against the wishes of most of the people who put her in leadership, it stands to reason they would eventually wonder if new leadership was warranted. At a more subtle level, passing important bills with coalitions built outside party lines can expose and deepen fractures within them and sap the support of interest groups that can be essential to winning and holding onto power.
Republicans see internal problems for Democrats as they sort through how to govern. �The problem for Pelosi is that the majority of her majority still has a minority mindset,� said John Feehery, a lobbyist who was an adviser to Mr. Hastert. �They would rather protest than legislate. And that dynamic will weaken her control over the House in the long-run."
While some anti-war groups remain outraged at the war vote, many Democrats were not all that upset with the way she handled it. Through some procedural maneuvers, the speaker allowed Democrats to back a minimum wage increase and popular domestic spending and still vote against the war money. At the same time, Democrats got out of what the leadership saw as a political jam that could have left them being blamed for cutting off money to troops overseas.
The next test for Ms. Pelosi will come on looming votes over increased free trade. Many - perhaps most - House Democrats are leery of going along with the push by President Bush, free-trading Democrats and congressional Republicans for new trade deals that they believe ship jobs out of the country and lack labor and environmental safeguards.
To some veteran House Democrats, the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement is a particularly bitter memory. A majority of then-minority Republicans joined with a minority of then-majority Democrats to pass the deal sought by President Bill Clinton. Quite a few Democrats believe that approval of the trade deal over the objections of organized labor diluted union support in 1994 and contributed to the loss of Congress by the Democrats that year. Ms. Pelosi was among 102 Democrats who backed the 1993 trade deal; 156 Democrats, including the majority leader and whip, opposed it.
Anti-trade Democrats are worried the war vote foreshadowed Ms. Pelosi making a similar trade move this year, forgetting the hard lessons of NAFTA. They promise that such a decision will stir strong resentment. Ms. Pelosi has urged lawmakers not to jump to conclusions, but she is making no guarantees that legislation must have majority Democratic backing.
�I have to take into consideration something broader than the majority of the majority in the Democratic Caucus,� she told reporters.
The differences between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her predecessor, J. Dennis Hastert, could not be more striking.
He is a burly former wrestling coach, a conservative Republican from small-town Illinois who usually ran from the microphones. She is the designer-clad member of a political family, a wealthy liberal from San Francisco who sees herself as a top party spokeswoman.
But what could turn out to be their defining contrast was exhibited on May 24, when Ms. Pelosi allowed the Iraq war spending bill to clear the House with predominantly Republican votes while most Democrats � including her � opposed it. It was a marked departure from the principle that guided Mr. Hastert during his years as speaker.
Mr. Hastert was an advocate of governing the House by a �majority of the majority� � a standard he thought best served the interests of his Republican members and, by extension, the nation. Just months into her tenure, Ms. Pelosi has shown she will deviate from that approach, balancing the potential of significant rewards against big risks.
The rewards could come from success in winning approval of major legislation that reaches beyond party label. Critics of Mr. Hastert said his self-imposed rule prevented the House from considering centrist social and economic measures that, in their view, could have benefited both parties. It is likely, for instance, that a coalition existed in the House last year to pass an immigration overhaul that Republicans and Democrats could have hailed going into the elections. But strong opposition from a majority of the majority derailed that idea.
The risks are related to party cohesion. If a leader such as Ms. Pelosi regularly cuts against the wishes of most of the people who put her in leadership, it stands to reason they would eventually wonder if new leadership was warranted. At a more subtle level, passing important bills with coalitions built outside party lines can expose and deepen fractures within them and sap the support of interest groups that can be essential to winning and holding onto power.
Republicans see internal problems for Democrats as they sort through how to govern. �The problem for Pelosi is that the majority of her majority still has a minority mindset,� said John Feehery, a lobbyist who was an adviser to Mr. Hastert. �They would rather protest than legislate. And that dynamic will weaken her control over the House in the long-run."
While some anti-war groups remain outraged at the war vote, many Democrats were not all that upset with the way she handled it. Through some procedural maneuvers, the speaker allowed Democrats to back a minimum wage increase and popular domestic spending and still vote against the war money. At the same time, Democrats got out of what the leadership saw as a political jam that could have left them being blamed for cutting off money to troops overseas.
The next test for Ms. Pelosi will come on looming votes over increased free trade. Many - perhaps most - House Democrats are leery of going along with the push by President Bush, free-trading Democrats and congressional Republicans for new trade deals that they believe ship jobs out of the country and lack labor and environmental safeguards.
To some veteran House Democrats, the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement is a particularly bitter memory. A majority of then-minority Republicans joined with a minority of then-majority Democrats to pass the deal sought by President Bill Clinton. Quite a few Democrats believe that approval of the trade deal over the objections of organized labor diluted union support in 1994 and contributed to the loss of Congress by the Democrats that year. Ms. Pelosi was among 102 Democrats who backed the 1993 trade deal; 156 Democrats, including the majority leader and whip, opposed it.
Anti-trade Democrats are worried the war vote foreshadowed Ms. Pelosi making a similar trade move this year, forgetting the hard lessons of NAFTA. They promise that such a decision will stir strong resentment. Ms. Pelosi has urged lawmakers not to jump to conclusions, but she is making no guarantees that legislation must have majority Democratic backing.
�I have to take into consideration something broader than the majority of the majority in the Democratic Caucus,� she told reporters.
2010 1940s hairstyles. Authentic 1940s Hairstyles
perm
08-29 10:11 AM
Friends, if you have a case pending or approved from Nebraska with case number having LIN, please could you add some details about your case here (http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/187804239/)
Feel free to add more digit if you like.(LIN 07 222 58xxx) etc. If you are not EB2 india or china, please indicate (LIN 07273 xxxxx - approved on 26th August -EB1 ) , If your LIN # sequence is already list - please just list your lin # followed by a squence line..lime LIN 07 269 xxxxx - (2)
Feel free to add more digit if you like.(LIN 07 222 58xxx) etc. If you are not EB2 india or china, please indicate (LIN 07273 xxxxx - approved on 26th August -EB1 ) , If your LIN # sequence is already list - please just list your lin # followed by a squence line..lime LIN 07 269 xxxxx - (2)
more...
smartboy75
11-09 04:51 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ace7ec20cfbd4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
The I-131 Form update date shown by NSC is 10/18, whereas many of the folks are still awaiting their AP's...and even Texas says I-131 processing date current....So how come majority of them still waiting for AP ??
The I-131 Form update date shown by NSC is 10/18, whereas many of the folks are still awaiting their AP's...and even Texas says I-131 processing date current....So how come majority of them still waiting for AP ??
hair 1940s hairstyles for short
cheesy_x
08-20 07:45 PM
involving
-Graphic Design (photoshop)
-Web Development (Html, Javascript,Flash)
-will do flash headers/banners
-Simple sites incorporating any of the above (5 pages base)
*I do not charge by the hour, but charge a base fee (negotiable) for services rendered.
***Billing through paypal availiable
-Graphic Design (photoshop)
-Web Development (Html, Javascript,Flash)
-will do flash headers/banners
-Simple sites incorporating any of the above (5 pages base)
*I do not charge by the hour, but charge a base fee (negotiable) for services rendered.
***Billing through paypal availiable
more...
Blog Feeds
07-28 06:10 PM
From DHS Deputy Press Secretary Matt Chandler: �The court�s decision to enjoin most of SB1070 correctly affirms the federal government�s responsibilities in enforcing our nation's immigration laws. Over the past eighteen months, this Administration has dedicated unprecedented resources to secure the border, and we will continue to work to take decisive action to disrupt criminal organizations and the networks they exploit. DHS will enforce federal immigration laws in Arizona and around the country in smart, effective ways that focus our resources on criminal aliens who pose a public safety threat and employers who knowingly hire illegal labor, as well as...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/dhs-weighs-in-on-boltons-decision.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/dhs-weighs-in-on-boltons-decision.html)
hot dresses 1940s Hairstyles: Peaches 1940s hairstyles. to 1940s hairstyles for
pd2001_12
07-19 07:15 PM
Guys,
I need some advice and your own experiences.
Right now i am with company A(EB3-I, PD:12/2001) and 485 is in progress.
I have another approved I140 with Company B in EB2 category(PD:05/2006) and i did not try to recapture my PD at that time.
My question is, if i interfile company B 140 with Company A 140 would i be able to recapture the EB3 priority date. I do not want to loose the old priority date.
Any pointers or own experiences would be helpful.
thanks
I need some advice and your own experiences.
Right now i am with company A(EB3-I, PD:12/2001) and 485 is in progress.
I have another approved I140 with Company B in EB2 category(PD:05/2006) and i did not try to recapture my PD at that time.
My question is, if i interfile company B 140 with Company A 140 would i be able to recapture the EB3 priority date. I do not want to loose the old priority date.
Any pointers or own experiences would be helpful.
thanks
more...
house take on a 1940s hairstyle)
kirupa
07-15 11:54 PM
Added :)
tattoo 1940s hairstyle in July.
miguy
06-18 10:49 AM
Does the I-485 filing date matter? i.e. If one person files their application on July 1st and the other files on say July 25th (due to some reasons), will their I-485's get processed in FIFO?
more...
pictures wallpaper Reese#39;s 1940s Hairstyle 1940s hairstyles for women. quot;1940 s
Macaca
07-28 04:46 PM
Reid Eyes Rules Changes To Restrict Amendments (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_10/news/19488-1.html) By Emily Pierce, ROLL CALL STAFF, July 23, 2007
After nearly seven months of battling Republican filibusters and controversial amendments on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Friday he may seek to change Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor.
Reid said Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) would be tasked with exploring what rules changes should be made.
Noting that there has been a "growing breakdown between the majority and minority in terms of how to get things done," Howard Gantman, Feinstein's chief of staff for the Rules panel, said the committee would conduct a "comprehensive review" and look at the rules on the germaneness of amendments and how long Senators have to review proposals before voting on them.
"Sen. Feinstein is very serious about looking at the vast range of amendments that are brought in at the last minute that are not germane," said Gantman. He added that the panel's focus would be on "how to better get things done."
Reid spokesman Jim Manley cautioned that Reid "has no intention of unilaterally seeking a rules change."
However, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) scoffed at the notion of limiting or restricting Senators' ability to offer amendments, which he likened to freedom of speech.
"Look, nobody's going to shut anybody up in the Senate," he said at a press conference Friday. "There's going to be robust debate. You can just write that down. And I understand Sen. Reid's frustrations, but we're not going to establish any speech police in the Senate - not now, not ever."
Reid apparently reached his boiling point Thursday night when Republicans used Senate budget rules to offer a number of non-germane amendments to a student loan financing bill.
"What went on last night was ridiculous," Reid said on the Senate floor. "We should change those rules. ... We will have to take a look at that."
Reid said Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and ranking member Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) managed the student loan measure "very well until it ran into the rule that we have here that allows unending amendments on any subject forever, literally, before you get to final passage."
Because the higher education bill - by virtue of its status as a budget reconciliation measure - was immune to filibuster, Senate rules permitted unlimited amendments to be offered and voted on. On Thursday night, in particular, Senators were given only a few minutes to review the substance of some amendments before they were asked to vote on them.
As is customary with budget and reconciliation measures, Senators engaged in a long series of back-to-back votes, known as a "vote-a-rama," at the end of the debate. But Democrats said Republicans' insistence on having 14 non-germane votes - including six related to cutting taxes, three related to immigration and two related to terrorism - was excessive.
When Democrats pushed back with their own non-germane amendment expressing the Senate's opinion that President Bush should not pardon Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, Scooter Libby, Republicans tried to force a vote on former President Bill Clinton's controversial pardons.
But before the Senate could vote on that, Reid asked that both the Libby vote and the GOP pardons amendment be stricken from the Congressional Record, and the chamber voted on final passage of the bill.
Manley explained: "These so-called vote-a-ramas are bad for the system, and they may lead to bad policy. As have leaders in the past, all Sen. Reid was doing was expressing his frustration at the Republicans' desire to score cheap political points at the expense of a good-faith effort to pass a bill that will make college education more affordable for more Americans."
Even though Reid is seeking a Rules panel review, the rules governing Thursday night's debate actually fall under the Congressional Budget Act. If Reid were to seek a change in the Budget Act, the Senate would have to pass legislation and it would have to be signed into law by the president.
However, changes to Senate rules require 67 votes to pass.
After nearly seven months of battling Republican filibusters and controversial amendments on the Senate floor, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Friday he may seek to change Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor.
Reid said Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) would be tasked with exploring what rules changes should be made.
Noting that there has been a "growing breakdown between the majority and minority in terms of how to get things done," Howard Gantman, Feinstein's chief of staff for the Rules panel, said the committee would conduct a "comprehensive review" and look at the rules on the germaneness of amendments and how long Senators have to review proposals before voting on them.
"Sen. Feinstein is very serious about looking at the vast range of amendments that are brought in at the last minute that are not germane," said Gantman. He added that the panel's focus would be on "how to better get things done."
Reid spokesman Jim Manley cautioned that Reid "has no intention of unilaterally seeking a rules change."
However, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) scoffed at the notion of limiting or restricting Senators' ability to offer amendments, which he likened to freedom of speech.
"Look, nobody's going to shut anybody up in the Senate," he said at a press conference Friday. "There's going to be robust debate. You can just write that down. And I understand Sen. Reid's frustrations, but we're not going to establish any speech police in the Senate - not now, not ever."
Reid apparently reached his boiling point Thursday night when Republicans used Senate budget rules to offer a number of non-germane amendments to a student loan financing bill.
"What went on last night was ridiculous," Reid said on the Senate floor. "We should change those rules. ... We will have to take a look at that."
Reid said Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and ranking member Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) managed the student loan measure "very well until it ran into the rule that we have here that allows unending amendments on any subject forever, literally, before you get to final passage."
Because the higher education bill - by virtue of its status as a budget reconciliation measure - was immune to filibuster, Senate rules permitted unlimited amendments to be offered and voted on. On Thursday night, in particular, Senators were given only a few minutes to review the substance of some amendments before they were asked to vote on them.
As is customary with budget and reconciliation measures, Senators engaged in a long series of back-to-back votes, known as a "vote-a-rama," at the end of the debate. But Democrats said Republicans' insistence on having 14 non-germane votes - including six related to cutting taxes, three related to immigration and two related to terrorism - was excessive.
When Democrats pushed back with their own non-germane amendment expressing the Senate's opinion that President Bush should not pardon Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, Scooter Libby, Republicans tried to force a vote on former President Bill Clinton's controversial pardons.
But before the Senate could vote on that, Reid asked that both the Libby vote and the GOP pardons amendment be stricken from the Congressional Record, and the chamber voted on final passage of the bill.
Manley explained: "These so-called vote-a-ramas are bad for the system, and they may lead to bad policy. As have leaders in the past, all Sen. Reid was doing was expressing his frustration at the Republicans' desire to score cheap political points at the expense of a good-faith effort to pass a bill that will make college education more affordable for more Americans."
Even though Reid is seeking a Rules panel review, the rules governing Thursday night's debate actually fall under the Congressional Budget Act. If Reid were to seek a change in the Budget Act, the Senate would have to pass legislation and it would have to be signed into law by the president.
However, changes to Senate rules require 67 votes to pass.
dresses the 1930s-Hairstyles; 1930
moveahead123
11-05 02:43 AM
http://www.competeamerica.org/hill/letter_congress/index.html
more...
makeup 1940s hairstyles. This hairstyle is taken after
krish2005
12-08 01:36 PM
Some light coming up in the tunnel. Hope its not that of an oncoming train.
Unless some political goof up turns, economy seems to be getting brighter and brighter. This might help translate into more jobs and opportunities..
U.S. CEOs' economic view brightens; wary of hiring | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B73DY20091208)
Unless some political goof up turns, economy seems to be getting brighter and brighter. This might help translate into more jobs and opportunities..
U.S. CEOs' economic view brightens; wary of hiring | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B73DY20091208)
girlfriend to show you how to do it.
amsgc
05-15 11:59 PM
There is no biometric fee for AP. It is only if you are applying for a Re-entry permit or a Refugee travel document.
Here is the link fo the instructions:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-131instr.pdf
Here is the link fo the instructions:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-131instr.pdf
hairstyles girlfriend 1940s hairstyle
sumanitha
05-05 03:47 PM
Thanks for the quick response.
Appreciated..
Appreciated..
Rayyan
10-01 12:42 AM
I am on H1-B visa and applying for my wife's passport(in india),one of the document for making passport is an NOC from husband that has to get from indian embassy which i didn't find on their website(any application for spouse),has anyone come across this situation.Please let me know.
Thanks
Thanks
askreddy
08-07 10:53 AM
.....