karthkc
07-14 06:27 PM
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
Nowhere in this post, do I see the fact that the OP used AC21 when he moved in August 2007.
Does not AC21 come in when you have used EAD to move instead of a H1 transfer?
In my understanding, by doing a H1 transfer rather than invoking AC21, the OP preserved the status of the original petition unless the employer revoked the I140 for fraud. If that's the case, shouldn't the RFE be worded differently?
If that's not the case, all the OP has to do is craft a response to the RFE with an Employment Verification Letter from his current employer attesting to the similar nature of job etc.. and move forward.
Either way, an attorney would be the safest bet..
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
Nowhere in this post, do I see the fact that the OP used AC21 when he moved in August 2007.
Does not AC21 come in when you have used EAD to move instead of a H1 transfer?
In my understanding, by doing a H1 transfer rather than invoking AC21, the OP preserved the status of the original petition unless the employer revoked the I140 for fraud. If that's the case, shouldn't the RFE be worded differently?
If that's not the case, all the OP has to do is craft a response to the RFE with an Employment Verification Letter from his current employer attesting to the similar nature of job etc.. and move forward.
Either way, an attorney would be the safest bet..
wallpaper brown recluse spider bite
Macaca
01-30 07:03 PM
Asking employees to pay for H1 costs is not legal. It would be in violations of CFR.
Is this a new rule? I have paid for my H1 with a check to INS (before name changed to USCIS). I think everyone else paid for H1 with pay check to INS. I was also supposed to pay for (non-company) lawyer fees for GC.
Is this a new rule? I have paid for my H1 with a check to INS (before name changed to USCIS). I think everyone else paid for H1 with pay check to INS. I was also supposed to pay for (non-company) lawyer fees for GC.
luvschocolates
08-21 02:17 PM
If I was not required to fill out the form I-485, then why did USCIS send me a letter requesting me to do so? I'm sick of the smart a$$ remarks from some of you. This isn't funny and there are human beings involved. If you can't be helpful then please don't bother responding. Keep your remarks to yourself. I came here looking for some help, not a bunch of criticism and hurtful comments. It's not that simple just to go back to Canada like you think and I can't just leave the person I care for because you think I'm considered indispensible. Perhaps you'd like to talk to the people in this household and see just how willing they are to let me go. This is not just about packing up and leaving, I have roots here now and I cannot just abandon these folks. There is NO ONE to take care of them, not family, not friends and they do not want a stranger - period. We already tried that and it didn't work. How many people do you know that would willingly take care of a 500 lb. bedridden person, change catheters, bathe them and cook, clean and take care of other household chores simply for room and board? We offered the job to legal American citizens and when they heard the man was 500 lbs, they backed off before hearing the rest. I AM WILLING, he is used to me, I am used to him and there is no one else, including his own children, who will do what I do, so before you tell me I'm indispensible, try doing this job. We can't even get professional medical personnel in here to help, so exactly how am I indispensible under the circumstances? Should I just abandon him and let him rot and die in his own bed? Is that considered humane in your eyes? If he's obese does he not deserve the same quality of care as an ideal body weight person? Does his obesity make him undeserving of humane treatment? As I said, this is not just about legalities, this is about a human being needing someone to care for him and it's not that simple to get another person in here. I deal with him 24/7, I don't get a day off - would you do that? I doubt it!
If you had to go back to your country under similar circumstances I don't think you would be any more pleased than I am. USCIS has not asked me to leave, they are requesting more information. I have no problem with that part, just the time frame given and the money involved. I am more than willing to submit what they requested, but I need more time, especially for the medical exam after reading what is required.
As for the person that filed on my behalf, HE is the one who spoke to USCIS, so they didn't do their job if they did not tell him what was required. He wrote down every single thing they said we had to file and we did so. If they failed to mention what was needed, how would he find out? He's elderly, disabled and not computer literate so it's hard for him to look things up on his own. He simply did what they told him to do and if he screwed up, it's because he wasn't told what was needed. You can't expect everyone to be knowledgeable on stuff like this, it was all new to him and very unfamiliar.
If I had known more was required, I would have taken care of it myself, but since he was the person to file the application - which by the way was an employment based according to what we were told, then he did only what he was told and had no clue there was more beyond that.
I am trying to find an attorney and I will get this sorted out one way or the other, but leaving this household is not an option and if the American people care so much about each other, then I'd like to see one of them show up here and do what I do. I'm not naive enough to believe that will happen.
If you had to go back to your country under similar circumstances I don't think you would be any more pleased than I am. USCIS has not asked me to leave, they are requesting more information. I have no problem with that part, just the time frame given and the money involved. I am more than willing to submit what they requested, but I need more time, especially for the medical exam after reading what is required.
As for the person that filed on my behalf, HE is the one who spoke to USCIS, so they didn't do their job if they did not tell him what was required. He wrote down every single thing they said we had to file and we did so. If they failed to mention what was needed, how would he find out? He's elderly, disabled and not computer literate so it's hard for him to look things up on his own. He simply did what they told him to do and if he screwed up, it's because he wasn't told what was needed. You can't expect everyone to be knowledgeable on stuff like this, it was all new to him and very unfamiliar.
If I had known more was required, I would have taken care of it myself, but since he was the person to file the application - which by the way was an employment based according to what we were told, then he did only what he was told and had no clue there was more beyond that.
I am trying to find an attorney and I will get this sorted out one way or the other, but leaving this household is not an option and if the American people care so much about each other, then I'd like to see one of them show up here and do what I do. I'm not naive enough to believe that will happen.
2011 spider bite blister. spider
illinois_alum
08-02 10:28 PM
Add CareFirst - Blue Cross Blue Shield
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
GC is not a right. The corporations are completely within their rights to decide whether they want to sponsor someone's GC (and of course the big question being can they sponsor by following the due process if qualified citizens or existing perm residents are available for the job)
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
GC is not a right. The corporations are completely within their rights to decide whether they want to sponsor someone's GC (and of course the big question being can they sponsor by following the due process if qualified citizens or existing perm residents are available for the job)
more...
GreenLantern
02-15 08:49 PM
:thumb:
I see said the blind man. I like it.
I got started on making a subway and gave up, then I thought I would start with something simple so I started modeling a computer case. (clickity click me (http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=85814))
I see said the blind man. I like it.
I got started on making a subway and gave up, then I thought I would start with something simple so I started modeling a computer case. (clickity click me (http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=85814))
angelina
09-26 12:44 PM
This is nicely being played by big lawyers. They used us for demostration and converted the propaganda to media as it is for H1B . Profitablity is more on new H1B
Yes they can subtly change things and then say that it was just a mistake.
Dirty politics
Yes they can subtly change things and then say that it was just a mistake.
Dirty politics
more...
akilhere
10-21 02:43 PM
I replied to my RFE last Friday and the status changed to Reponse Review. I got a soft LUD yesterday. Nothing after that!
2010 makeup girlfriend Spider bite
pappu
04-23 10:18 AM
This meeting was a success since IV was able to display support for the bill and also then follow up after the meeting. IV core members worked hard to make this event a success and we are happy to report this. We did get an irresponsible member gautamagg in this event by using IV's name and asking a wrong question. This Q and A session should have been used to talk about the general issues of the organization members and that IV fully supports the bill that brings relief to us. And not asking if this congressman can get me a F1 visa because I don't want to spend $100 and ask this question to a lawyer. Or saying I am getting a 100K salary now and if I get my greencard I can get 120K salary and I am very depressed because of that. It is really tough to discipline everyone coming to the meetings and making sure each question will be well thought of and coordinated. There are definitely some lessons learnt after such representations in public meetings.
Many thanks to gsc999 for bringing a banner and wearing IV t-shirt. We also want to acknowledge his contributions of over $1K to immigrationvoice and wish we have more members like him. Many thanks to members who helped us call all CA members and ensured we have a good turnout. Our success will be very close if we have such committed and responsible members.
Members are requested to be mature and responsible in such meetings. If you are using IV’s name and IV has invited you for the meeting, you are representing all 10,700+ members and you are their voice.
Many thanks to gsc999 for bringing a banner and wearing IV t-shirt. We also want to acknowledge his contributions of over $1K to immigrationvoice and wish we have more members like him. Many thanks to members who helped us call all CA members and ensured we have a good turnout. Our success will be very close if we have such committed and responsible members.
Members are requested to be mature and responsible in such meetings. If you are using IV’s name and IV has invited you for the meeting, you are representing all 10,700+ members and you are their voice.
more...
Refugee_New
07-28 01:09 PM
Good point!
As per our religion Parents are always Gods. And there is story of Lord Ganesha about when he was asked that who is your God? He said my parents.
This is where the problem starts chantu. For us in India, anything and everything is god. Indian movie actress's are our gods. We build temple to them. Amitabh is a god, Manisha is a god. These people take the gods avtars in our movies. But we all know how those people are. Most of them in that industry commit adultry.
Our Hindu party BJP uses these movie celebraties during election. We easily portray gods using those filthy people. So this is where problem starts. We have to clean our own backyard first.
As per our religion Parents are always Gods. And there is story of Lord Ganesha about when he was asked that who is your God? He said my parents.
This is where the problem starts chantu. For us in India, anything and everything is god. Indian movie actress's are our gods. We build temple to them. Amitabh is a god, Manisha is a god. These people take the gods avtars in our movies. But we all know how those people are. Most of them in that industry commit adultry.
Our Hindu party BJP uses these movie celebraties during election. We easily portray gods using those filthy people. So this is where problem starts. We have to clean our own backyard first.
hair Picture of Spider Bite Blister
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-10 12:50 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
more...
swo
08-16 01:40 PM
Hi, do you know how long it took them to clear name check? which EB category /country are you? Mine is stuck in name check and am trying to find some pattern and if possible, some solace.. thanks.
Your case is unique. Either it will get through quickly or it won't.
BROADLY SPEAKING, 90% of cases take 6 months of less to get through name check. Some take longer. Depending on how common your name and it's variatiosn are, and depending on whether or not there are hits in the FBIs database, that will determine how it goes for you. Some are through in 2 weeks. Some in 2 years.
Sadly, it's not predictable in any way.
Your case is unique. Either it will get through quickly or it won't.
BROADLY SPEAKING, 90% of cases take 6 months of less to get through name check. Some take longer. Depending on how common your name and it's variatiosn are, and depending on whether or not there are hits in the FBIs database, that will determine how it goes for you. Some are through in 2 weeks. Some in 2 years.
Sadly, it's not predictable in any way.
hot brown recluse spider bite blister. spider bite blister pictures.
eb3retro
08-20 11:39 AM
My kids are 7 & 9. Our fingerprinting and photo date is this Saturday Aug 25.
My child is 6 1/2 years old and not sure why they didnt send a FP notice for the child.
My child is 6 1/2 years old and not sure why they didnt send a FP notice for the child.
more...
house spider bite blister pictures.
prioritydate
12-20 07:09 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Logiclife. I enter U.S in the first week of Feb, 2001. The economy was bad and I didn't manage to get a job. In fact, I didn't managed to get a job for a year. My then employer didn't revoked my H1B and the I-94 was valid until Oct, 2002. I didn't know that I was out of status till now. I don't remember seeing any section in I-485 form, asking for information about out of status. I did attach my previous H1-B approval notice(2000 -2002) while filing I-485. One thing I want to know is, did anyone got a query(RFE), asking to provide all W2 forms since their entry into this country? I am interested to know that.
Now I am really afraid. G-325 form has section to provide last 5 jobs. Since I had a gap, I didn't provide the details for the year 2001. I am royally screwed now! :(
Now I am really afraid. G-325 form has section to provide last 5 jobs. Since I had a gap, I didn't provide the details for the year 2001. I am royally screwed now! :(
tattoo spider bite blister. spider
Canadian_Dream
12-11 02:43 PM
Since this has always been pushed through legilative means (S.1932), there might be a hurdle involved in using "Rulemaking" approach to this solution, nevertheless this idea should atleast be explored. Here is how rulemaking procedures work in Govt Agency: (Adding Flexibility is something that can be done through Rulemaking).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rulemaking
Adding flexibility. More detailed regulations allow for more nuanced approaches to various conditions than a single legislative standard could. Moreover, regulations tend to be more easily changed as new data or technologies emerge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rulemaking
Adding flexibility. More detailed regulations allow for more nuanced approaches to various conditions than a single legislative standard could. Moreover, regulations tend to be more easily changed as new data or technologies emerge.
more...
pictures spider bite blister. spider
laudo
09-28 08:34 PM
I finally got my green card after starting the process 3 years ago (most of the delay was because of a slight mistake of the part of my employee - a university - on the interpretation of how much experience I had and how much experience I was supposed to have to be an acceptable candidate for the job). Anyway, I filed the I-485 last February and received the green card last week. Meanwhile, the USCIS requested additional evidence twice, which probably delayed the decision by 1 to 2 months: first, they inquired on the legal status of my stay in the US - I came as a ph.d. student in 2000, requiring me to send copies of I-20s, I-94s, passport, visas, and a letter detailing dates and place of entry to and exit from the US; second, they requested evidence on bona fide marriage (we got married at the end of 2006), so I had to send our joint rent, insurances, credit card, and bank account contracts.
So this was my experience. Took some time, but it was successful. My advice for self-filing is that you send all of this together with the I-485 to avoid delays with these request for additional evidence.
By the way, I'm from Brazil and I'm an assistant professor in a state university.
Last, I'd like to thank everybody who provides helpful information in this forum.
So this was my experience. Took some time, but it was successful. My advice for self-filing is that you send all of this together with the I-485 to avoid delays with these request for additional evidence.
By the way, I'm from Brazil and I'm an assistant professor in a state university.
Last, I'd like to thank everybody who provides helpful information in this forum.
dresses girlfriend Spider bite
coolmanasip
03-13 10:34 AM
I believe you can get an interim EAD from local USCIS office once the application has been pending for 3 months...
more...
makeup spider bite blister.
grinch
02-27 08:45 PM
You can also use Mental Rey, and check the "final gather" option. Make sure when you use it you set the rays down to like 10 or 20, or it'll take forever to render.
This will actually make all objects emit a certain amount of light depending on their brightness. For example, a stone wall will not make any noticeable light, but a bright white ball (a light bulb) will act as a omni light. I use this in almost all my renders to achieve a more realistic scene.
That shader glow thing isn't what he wants I think. To add it though, open the attributes of the material, and under the special effects menu you just increase the value from 0. That does not make the object a light though, it adds a glow to the object in post (after the render), and so it does no make any actual light. .... i might be thinking of some other glow thing, soulty's way might work as well
I will start my subway soon guys! I love the entries so far! Keep it up!
Cheers!
3dnirvana
yeah I've known about the glow effect, and thats not exactly what I'm trying to acheive. But thanks for the mental ray technique, I'm gonna try it!
This will actually make all objects emit a certain amount of light depending on their brightness. For example, a stone wall will not make any noticeable light, but a bright white ball (a light bulb) will act as a omni light. I use this in almost all my renders to achieve a more realistic scene.
That shader glow thing isn't what he wants I think. To add it though, open the attributes of the material, and under the special effects menu you just increase the value from 0. That does not make the object a light though, it adds a glow to the object in post (after the render), and so it does no make any actual light. .... i might be thinking of some other glow thing, soulty's way might work as well
I will start my subway soon guys! I love the entries so far! Keep it up!
Cheers!
3dnirvana
yeah I've known about the glow effect, and thats not exactly what I'm trying to acheive. But thanks for the mental ray technique, I'm gonna try it!
girlfriend spider bite blister pictures.
ski_dude12
03-09 02:23 PM
No change for EB2-I.
hairstyles spider bite blister. spider
rockstart
03-12 11:55 AM
In theory you are right. But practically Very big corporations/companies have recently started a practice not to hire a person on EAD if I-140 is not clearly approved. Why? Lawyers advise them to do so. I have been hired by very prestigious company recently of course on EAD and first thing they wanted to make a check was on whether I have I-140 approved or not. Secondly they ask if I could submit 3 years audit report for "previous employer". That could make sense to me as it was a clear hint that they wanted to check whether I am coming from good financial based company or not... Why? The reason is that if that would not have been the case then there could be the chance of denying I-140 although it was approved. At least in my network of friends I am the third person who experienced this level of scrutiny before hiring on EAD. The reason is simple. They do not want to hire a guy who can not work at some time of the initial period due to I-140 related problems. So bottom line, I-140 approval is must nowadays for working in big corporations with EAD.
I am worried about this financial reports. I am not sure many consulting companies will give those to employee who is leaving
I am worried about this financial reports. I am not sure many consulting companies will give those to employee who is leaving
sam_hoosier
07-02 12:51 PM
I support it.
vgayalu
10-05 01:34 PM
Hi Guys,
My attorney sent the response last week and it was delivered to the Dallas, TX. I am little concerned that my attorney actually sent the response to a courier address rather than the PO Box for TSC that they ask you to send. So far I have not seen any updates on my case.
Vgayalu: After how many days did you see an update after you sent the response to the RFE.
RFE received date : 09/07/10
RFE Response sent (MAIlED) : 09/29/10
(IN USPS to PO BOX by Express mail)
RFE Response Received by USICS : 09/30/10 ( On line update on same day). - Hard LUD
Again there is one more soft LUD on 10/01/10.
Approval update : Hard LUD 10/05/10.
My attorney sent the response last week and it was delivered to the Dallas, TX. I am little concerned that my attorney actually sent the response to a courier address rather than the PO Box for TSC that they ask you to send. So far I have not seen any updates on my case.
Vgayalu: After how many days did you see an update after you sent the response to the RFE.
RFE received date : 09/07/10
RFE Response sent (MAIlED) : 09/29/10
(IN USPS to PO BOX by Express mail)
RFE Response Received by USICS : 09/30/10 ( On line update on same day). - Hard LUD
Again there is one more soft LUD on 10/01/10.
Approval update : Hard LUD 10/05/10.