franklin
07-17 05:43 PM
Thanks To You All It Would Not Have Been Possible Without Your Support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Actually, it wouldn't have been possible without donations from members on the board as well.
There is MUCH more to do and fight for.
Please donate!
Actually, it wouldn't have been possible without donations from members on the board as well.
There is MUCH more to do and fight for.
Please donate!
wallpaper But you guys chose the 3G
english_august
07-18 09:27 AM
And that is the reason why I am saying that this is but a small step in the right direction. It is nowhere near the long term solution that we need to work for. In your euphoria, please don't forget that we have a long struggle in front of us and Immigration Voice needs all the support that you can give.
Remember that IV is the only organization that gives voice to skilled, legal immigrants - please help make it stronger.
See below:
Taken from www.immigration-law.com (http://www.immigration-law.com)
07/18/2007: Reinstatement of Original July Visa Bulletin and Uncertain Impact on Pre-July "Tagged" EB-485 Applications and Processing Time of I-485 Applications in the Future
The other EB-485 waiters will turn out to be a big victim to the DOS/USCIS decision yesterday. Since there will be no visa numbers available until October 1, 2007, the people whose EB-485 applications were "not tagged" before July 1 will experience a tremendous delay in obtaining the green card. When it comes to the delays in obtaining the green card approvals, the new filers in July and those filers before August 17 will also witness a tremendous delays and will have to endure a long and long journey to leave the pipeline of the green card process. Why? As we reported quite earlier in this visa fiasco, we even estimated that approximately 750,000 individual EB-485 applications can be poured into the system during this unusual period of visa number availability as affected by the upcoming filing fee increases and more importantantly the anticipated potential huge visa number retrogression ahead during when they may not be able to file their 485 applications because of the retrogression. After all, the system has only 140,000 numbers for the entire EB categories for each year. Go figure! What would look like the waiting time for the current EB-485 filers and the current EB-485 filers before July 1, 2007!
Remember that IV is the only organization that gives voice to skilled, legal immigrants - please help make it stronger.
See below:
Taken from www.immigration-law.com (http://www.immigration-law.com)
07/18/2007: Reinstatement of Original July Visa Bulletin and Uncertain Impact on Pre-July "Tagged" EB-485 Applications and Processing Time of I-485 Applications in the Future
The other EB-485 waiters will turn out to be a big victim to the DOS/USCIS decision yesterday. Since there will be no visa numbers available until October 1, 2007, the people whose EB-485 applications were "not tagged" before July 1 will experience a tremendous delay in obtaining the green card. When it comes to the delays in obtaining the green card approvals, the new filers in July and those filers before August 17 will also witness a tremendous delays and will have to endure a long and long journey to leave the pipeline of the green card process. Why? As we reported quite earlier in this visa fiasco, we even estimated that approximately 750,000 individual EB-485 applications can be poured into the system during this unusual period of visa number availability as affected by the upcoming filing fee increases and more importantantly the anticipated potential huge visa number retrogression ahead during when they may not be able to file their 485 applications because of the retrogression. After all, the system has only 140,000 numbers for the entire EB categories for each year. Go figure! What would look like the waiting time for the current EB-485 filers and the current EB-485 filers before July 1, 2007!
REEF�
06-06 11:44 AM
The girl looks too blurry but nice :).
And I thought RED means EVIL and BLUE means GOOD :puzzle:?
And I thought RED means EVIL and BLUE means GOOD :puzzle:?
2011 for ipod touch classic
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
more...
Queen Josephine
July 15th, 2004, 01:35 PM
These are great shots. Between you and Janet, you could produce a nice book (if either of you hasn't already).
maverick_iv
11-27 02:03 PM
There were two ways to substitute a labor. One by applying for an I-140 with an approved labor certification. Another way was to substitute the beneficiary name in a pending labor certification application. Maybe thats what the company lawyer did.
For the latter, I am not sure if one needs the beneficiary's signature to do so. One way to check is to ask the company's lawyer for the case number and you could check the status. If the labor is pending with one of the BECs you could request for a screenshot of the case status and that would have the beneficiary's name. But since the BECs are being phased out, I am not sure if they still honor status requests.
My friend is in India during the July 15 period. He is being told by the consulting firm that they have applied for Labor Substitution. All I know about labor substitution is that you have to apply for I 140 along with the approved labor sheet that company gets from DOL. The company Lawyer kept saying that they have sent it to DOL for substitution. I just want to clarify that there is no other way of substitution other than applying I 140.
Thank you
For the latter, I am not sure if one needs the beneficiary's signature to do so. One way to check is to ask the company's lawyer for the case number and you could check the status. If the labor is pending with one of the BECs you could request for a screenshot of the case status and that would have the beneficiary's name. But since the BECs are being phased out, I am not sure if they still honor status requests.
My friend is in India during the July 15 period. He is being told by the consulting firm that they have applied for Labor Substitution. All I know about labor substitution is that you have to apply for I 140 along with the approved labor sheet that company gets from DOL. The company Lawyer kept saying that they have sent it to DOL for substitution. I just want to clarify that there is no other way of substitution other than applying I 140.
Thank you
more...
Karthikthiru
08-31 11:56 AM
This poll results is from his viewers who are already biased against any sought of immigration. And to add this is not a scientific poll. Plus no one cares about his polls
Karthik
Karthik
2010 iPod touch applications are
immi_seeker
08-08 01:43 PM
Anybody had any experience at phoenix center with infopass appointment ?
more...
nk2006
10-16 03:56 PM
Hi
Therefore how much would be the time
from after the application will I be able to change my status from H1B
to permanent resident and recieve my greencard? Does the premium
processing shorten the time?
Kambi
Kambi,
First of all let me congratulate you for planning ahead and preparing for getting green card. It�s always better to know the details ahead. The whole process as it stands now can take several years even for people from Rest-Of-World (for people born in India, China and Mexico its much, much, much worse). In general LC/PERM and I140 can be done in about six months time (give or take a few months which should not bother you much as you will be in early days of H1b). I485 is the step that takes longest and the processing times depend on the job classification. With current laws it can take several years before even you can submit application. But if SKIL bill or something similar is passed in US congress; your whole application process time can come down drastically (well there might still some issues because of load, but at least you can change jobs and still continue the process). Now the question is will that SKIL bill will be passed or not? � it�s beyond anyone�s guess but it is possible if we as a group try harder and do everything that we can. This is once in a long while chance to change our plight. Many analysts/experts feel that contentious issues like immigration will not be taken up near presidential elections which are in �08 so our best chance is next few months. Please spread the word about IV among your friends/peers.
I am directly appealing to you because I have talked to many young friends like you who are in school. Their general attitude is it�s not their problem and that they are far too away from the point to worry about GC. Guess what, I used to think same a few years back and am here stuck in this retrogession. One good thing is now we have an organized effort (thanks to IV core team) and IV team showed us that they know what they are doing and are putting serious effort. Please spread the word about IV and make them members.
IV core/pappu,
You might have already done this but still thought of suggesting: most of universities in US have lots of foreign students in masters and bachelors programs and they have associations like Chinese students association, Indian students association. Can we send them info about IV; specifically explaining them how Greencard/H1B delays can cause issues with their career and explaining how IV is trying to get the SKIL bill passed. That bill is a lot advantageous for people getting degrees in USA and they should be excited to become members. Since these guys/gals are young and energetic their involvement would be really good for us. A group of people can volunteer and collect email addresses of these associations and we can send a general format letter to them. I volunteer to do some work in this effort. Let us know. Thanks.
Therefore how much would be the time
from after the application will I be able to change my status from H1B
to permanent resident and recieve my greencard? Does the premium
processing shorten the time?
Kambi
Kambi,
First of all let me congratulate you for planning ahead and preparing for getting green card. It�s always better to know the details ahead. The whole process as it stands now can take several years even for people from Rest-Of-World (for people born in India, China and Mexico its much, much, much worse). In general LC/PERM and I140 can be done in about six months time (give or take a few months which should not bother you much as you will be in early days of H1b). I485 is the step that takes longest and the processing times depend on the job classification. With current laws it can take several years before even you can submit application. But if SKIL bill or something similar is passed in US congress; your whole application process time can come down drastically (well there might still some issues because of load, but at least you can change jobs and still continue the process). Now the question is will that SKIL bill will be passed or not? � it�s beyond anyone�s guess but it is possible if we as a group try harder and do everything that we can. This is once in a long while chance to change our plight. Many analysts/experts feel that contentious issues like immigration will not be taken up near presidential elections which are in �08 so our best chance is next few months. Please spread the word about IV among your friends/peers.
I am directly appealing to you because I have talked to many young friends like you who are in school. Their general attitude is it�s not their problem and that they are far too away from the point to worry about GC. Guess what, I used to think same a few years back and am here stuck in this retrogession. One good thing is now we have an organized effort (thanks to IV core team) and IV team showed us that they know what they are doing and are putting serious effort. Please spread the word about IV and make them members.
IV core/pappu,
You might have already done this but still thought of suggesting: most of universities in US have lots of foreign students in masters and bachelors programs and they have associations like Chinese students association, Indian students association. Can we send them info about IV; specifically explaining them how Greencard/H1B delays can cause issues with their career and explaining how IV is trying to get the SKIL bill passed. That bill is a lot advantageous for people getting degrees in USA and they should be excited to become members. Since these guys/gals are young and energetic their involvement would be really good for us. A group of people can volunteer and collect email addresses of these associations and we can send a general format letter to them. I volunteer to do some work in this effort. Let us know. Thanks.
hair 3G Speeds for iPod Touch Using
Euclid
02-12 10:07 AM
Hi Ann,
Thanks so much!
Hi Euclid,
In my opinion, your situation clearly falls within the "receipt rule". The rec't for replacement of the lost EAD is good for up to 90 days. Below is an excerpt from the the most recent I-9 Handbook for Employers published by USCIS. This pretty clearly differentiates between a rec't for an initial or renewal application and a rec't for an application to replace a lost document.
Ann
Q When can employees present receipts for documents in lieu of actual documents establishing employment authorization?
A The �receipt rule� is designed to cover situations in which an employee is employment autho- rized at the time of initial hire or reverification, but he or she is not in possession of a document listed on page 5 of Form I-9. Receipts showing that a person has applied for an initial grant of employment authorization or for renewal of employment authorization are not acceptable.
An individual may present a receipt in lieu of a document listed on Form I-9 to complete Section 2 of Form I-9.The receipt is valid for a temporary period.There are three different documents that qualify as receipts under the rule:
32
1.
A receipt for a replacement document when the document has been lost, stolen, or damaged.The receipt is valid for 90 days, after which the individual must present the
replacement document to complete Form I-9.
Note: This rule does not apply to individuals who pres- ent receipts for new documents following the expiration of their previously held document.
Thanks so much!
Hi Euclid,
In my opinion, your situation clearly falls within the "receipt rule". The rec't for replacement of the lost EAD is good for up to 90 days. Below is an excerpt from the the most recent I-9 Handbook for Employers published by USCIS. This pretty clearly differentiates between a rec't for an initial or renewal application and a rec't for an application to replace a lost document.
Ann
Q When can employees present receipts for documents in lieu of actual documents establishing employment authorization?
A The �receipt rule� is designed to cover situations in which an employee is employment autho- rized at the time of initial hire or reverification, but he or she is not in possession of a document listed on page 5 of Form I-9. Receipts showing that a person has applied for an initial grant of employment authorization or for renewal of employment authorization are not acceptable.
An individual may present a receipt in lieu of a document listed on Form I-9 to complete Section 2 of Form I-9.The receipt is valid for a temporary period.There are three different documents that qualify as receipts under the rule:
32
1.
A receipt for a replacement document when the document has been lost, stolen, or damaged.The receipt is valid for 90 days, after which the individual must present the
replacement document to complete Form I-9.
Note: This rule does not apply to individuals who pres- ent receipts for new documents following the expiration of their previously held document.
more...
sravani
05-24 10:28 AM
Honestly how many points we score really does not matter if the visa country cap is too low. Most of us, coming from India, China etc. score almost the same points and getting TOEFL is a piece of cake if you need to improve your points.
It's pointless to break our heads calculating these points, everything is in limbo right now and the only best advise for new GC aspirants especially those coming from retrogressed countries is "Get your priority date locked by applying LC under the old system".
It's pointless to break our heads calculating these points, everything is in limbo right now and the only best advise for new GC aspirants especially those coming from retrogressed countries is "Get your priority date locked by applying LC under the old system".
hot Pictures of Ipod Touch 3g
bang
01-09 06:41 AM
Because this is the case where it is not clear if the H-1B was applied for before or after oct 2006 and if the H-4 was in H-1 status ever before.
We had applied in July 2006, last few days before the Quota got closed, she completed her Masters in July as well. For some reason it took all this while to get an approval even when converted to Premium in October, they sent a RFE for my H1 & paystubs later took for ever to acknowledge th erecieval and then fianlly approval, as i mentioned we are still waiting to see the approval document to make sure there is a I94 attached.
We had applied in July 2006, last few days before the Quota got closed, she completed her Masters in July as well. For some reason it took all this while to get an approval even when converted to Premium in October, they sent a RFE for my H1 & paystubs later took for ever to acknowledge th erecieval and then fianlly approval, as i mentioned we are still waiting to see the approval document to make sure there is a I94 attached.
more...
house (en haut: touch 3G,
savitri.bhave
07-05 08:52 PM
This is a very basic question and I need answer on this as early as possible and guidance from you.
I came to this country in Dec 2001 on H1B Visa.
I never applied for green card since then.
Now on Dec1,2007 my H1B expires so I will have to go back to China.
If I file for green card at this point, will I be able to get the yearly extension for next few years till my GC comes?
Am I even eligible to do so?
Can I go to Canada and still work in USA (Since I live close to canadian border)?
I came to this country in Dec 2001 on H1B Visa.
I never applied for green card since then.
Now on Dec1,2007 my H1B expires so I will have to go back to China.
If I file for green card at this point, will I be able to get the yearly extension for next few years till my GC comes?
Am I even eligible to do so?
Can I go to Canada and still work in USA (Since I live close to canadian border)?
tattoo obudowa do iPod touch 3G
asiandude2
05-17 10:12 PM
Ammendment 4005 to CIR by Cornyn under the SKIL ACT states that:
(b) LABOR CERTIFICATIONS.--Section 212(a)(5)(A)(ii) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (I);
(2) by striking the period at the end of sub- clause (II) and inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
(III) is a member of the professions and has a master's degree or higher from an accredited United States university or has been awarded medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States.''.
We already know that following people are exempt from obtaining Labor Certifications for Green Card Processing:
(I) is a member of the teaching profession, or
(II) has exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts.
If this Cornyn amendment passes does it mean that people with "a master's degree or higher from an accredited United States university or has been awarded medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States.'' will also be exempt from obtaining LC for Green card processing.
(b) LABOR CERTIFICATIONS.--Section 212(a)(5)(A)(ii) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (I);
(2) by striking the period at the end of sub- clause (II) and inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
(III) is a member of the professions and has a master's degree or higher from an accredited United States university or has been awarded medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States.''.
We already know that following people are exempt from obtaining Labor Certifications for Green Card Processing:
(I) is a member of the teaching profession, or
(II) has exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts.
If this Cornyn amendment passes does it mean that people with "a master's degree or higher from an accredited United States university or has been awarded medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States.'' will also be exempt from obtaining LC for Green card processing.
more...
pictures dresses or iPod Touch 2G/3G to
GCEB2
09-20 11:06 PM
Thanks for the info. how about areas like simivalley, santa clarita, do you get houses for 300 to 350 and
And also around bay area- san roman, liver moore are they good neighbourhood. Also which has more jobs in datawarehousing is it LA or bayarea.
And also around bay area- san roman, liver moore are they good neighbourhood. Also which has more jobs in datawarehousing is it LA or bayarea.
dresses ipod-touch-3g-2
dish
09-26 06:00 PM
Instead of asking for "filing for I-485 even when Priority date is not current" ,
why not we ask for "filing for EAD and Advance Parole based on an approved I-140.".
The net effect is the same. By the present law EAD and Advance parole is issued based on a pending I-485. Instead , EAD and Parole could be issued based on on an Approved Immigrant petition - ie I-140.
Even if we are allowed to file for I-485 when priority dates are not current, the application for adjustment of status will not be considered without being a visa date available.
why not we ask for "filing for EAD and Advance Parole based on an approved I-140.".
The net effect is the same. By the present law EAD and Advance parole is issued based on a pending I-485. Instead , EAD and Parole could be issued based on on an Approved Immigrant petition - ie I-140.
Even if we are allowed to file for I-485 when priority dates are not current, the application for adjustment of status will not be considered without being a visa date available.
more...
makeup ipod touch 3g review full
dealsnet
11-12 01:18 PM
Usually I didn't recomond any one. But for cheaper option this is the man.
If your case is complicated, go with Murthy, Rajiv Khanna, Ron Gotcher etc...
He is the cheapest and good attorney known.
H1B charge is $650 (renew) $750 for new, no charge for filing H4. GC process PERM , I-140, I-485 all for only $2000. Citizenship application $250.
No charge for any RFE. He will respond in detail. I don't know about AC21. May be $250.
HIGHLY RECOMENDED. New York based. Young man in his 30's. Respond emails with an hour.
He is a British guy like one of us came here in the USA as a student F1, H1 and greencard and pass the Bar license to become a lawyer.
So he have first hand knowledge of all the process. So this make him diffrent from any Immigration lawyers.
Andrew Dutton, Esq., P.C., lawyers in Franklin Square, NY, New York (http://www.immigrationcounselorlaw.com/)
Telephone: 516-308-3670
Fax: 516-308-3669
http://www.immigration-counselor.builderspot.com
immigrationcounselorlaw.com
email.
immigration_counselor@yahoo.com
If your case is complicated, go with Murthy, Rajiv Khanna, Ron Gotcher etc...
He is the cheapest and good attorney known.
H1B charge is $650 (renew) $750 for new, no charge for filing H4. GC process PERM , I-140, I-485 all for only $2000. Citizenship application $250.
No charge for any RFE. He will respond in detail. I don't know about AC21. May be $250.
HIGHLY RECOMENDED. New York based. Young man in his 30's. Respond emails with an hour.
He is a British guy like one of us came here in the USA as a student F1, H1 and greencard and pass the Bar license to become a lawyer.
So he have first hand knowledge of all the process. So this make him diffrent from any Immigration lawyers.
Andrew Dutton, Esq., P.C., lawyers in Franklin Square, NY, New York (http://www.immigrationcounselorlaw.com/)
Telephone: 516-308-3670
Fax: 516-308-3669
http://www.immigration-counselor.builderspot.com
immigrationcounselorlaw.com
email.
immigration_counselor@yahoo.com
girlfriend Descarga iPod Touch 3G iOS 4.1
return_to_india
12-19 02:36 AM
California unemployment quite high.
I have my backup as India ( i will sell one of my land properties there and survive ,
also no worry about medical costs - leading cause of bankrupt americans ), but what
about the citizen here, where do they go to survive ?!
I have my backup as India ( i will sell one of my land properties there and survive ,
also no worry about medical costs - leading cause of bankrupt americans ), but what
about the citizen here, where do they go to survive ?!
hairstyles 3G
lazycis
06-05 10:14 PM
In such cases, the PO Box owner or auth rep. takes the note that is left in the PO Box and collects the mail piece. This also applies for signature confirmation and other USPS services that requires a signature
I second this. Eventually it will be delivered and signed off.
I second this. Eventually it will be delivered and signed off.
jsb
01-23 11:17 AM
.... If the receipt date shown on your receipt notice is prior to the processing date shown below, you may call USCIS Customer Service at 1-800-375-5283. ...
Although reference in the text above refers to "receipt date shown on your receipt", I doubt if they really mean that. As per latest processing status, all cases with RD = July 2 should have been processed by now. Is that true? I doubt.
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
Although reference in the text above refers to "receipt date shown on your receipt", I doubt if they really mean that. As per latest processing status, all cases with RD = July 2 should have been processed by now. Is that true? I doubt.
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
ayazali17
12-18 01:38 PM
what about foreign stocks?