nashdel
04-09 08:10 PM
In my non professional opinion if your wife I 140 is approved then you should have a very low risk for any problem. If I 140 is not approved then you are taking a little more risk. If 140 is rejected, your EAD work might be invalid.
good Luck
good Luck
wallpaper Scene hairstyles are all about
malibuguy007
09-16 01:38 PM
House Judiciary Committee MembersBelow or go to the thread mentioned above
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
unseenguy
06-16 01:12 AM
I agree with above posters.
Ask for shorter duration visa.
leave siblings out
Show strong financial position to supprt their stay in US
Show strong ties to home country. (leaving siblings out & adding grandparents care is a good thing), but also show strong monetory ties such as property in home country.
Ask for shorter duration visa.
leave siblings out
Show strong financial position to supprt their stay in US
Show strong ties to home country. (leaving siblings out & adding grandparents care is a good thing), but also show strong monetory ties such as property in home country.
2011 scene blonde hair with black
anindya1234
07-17 10:08 PM
I-140 was from TSC; I filed on July 2..but the employment letter was addressed to NSC. Will that be a problem?
more...
burnt
12-12 03:39 PM
No questions asked about visa or 485. Just had to show my passport and AP document :)
Thanks for the response. My wife has started working on EAD. So when she comes back, will she have to enter on AP? And as you said, they would not ask for I-485 receipts...Correct? I don't have I-485 receipts and I am just scared that if they ask for it, and I don't have it, then what happens...
Do you know of someone who was asked for the I-485 receipts on their way back?
Thanks for the response. My wife has started working on EAD. So when she comes back, will she have to enter on AP? And as you said, they would not ask for I-485 receipts...Correct? I don't have I-485 receipts and I am just scared that if they ask for it, and I don't have it, then what happens...
Do you know of someone who was asked for the I-485 receipts on their way back?
iptel
02-14 01:17 PM
Chapter 2: Skills for the U.S. Workforce.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/ch2-erp06.pdf
covers great deal of importance of H1B and Green Card. May be we can consider it to be part of our presentation.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/ch2-erp06.pdf
covers great deal of importance of H1B and Green Card. May be we can consider it to be part of our presentation.
more...
nhfirefighter13
October 23rd, 2005, 05:53 AM
Adding to what Kevin said about shadows... If you are using strobes or tungsten sources, placing them at the side, down low, of your object will create some nice depth.
Good luck! I'm off to the Islands for a week.
Good luck! I'm off to the Islands for a week.
2010 hair Long Blonde Scene Hair For londe scene hair girls.
Templarian
11-30 12:42 AM
why would flash people move on to flex ? That makes no sense at all.
Because Flash is equivalent to hell from a development standpoint. :evil:
Plus no one here said people should be using Flex over Flash (unless I misread something). :goatee:
Because Flash is equivalent to hell from a development standpoint. :evil:
Plus no one here said people should be using Flex over Flash (unless I misread something). :goatee:
more...
ishwarmahajan@yahoo.com
09-24 05:37 PM
I am hoping you are going to change job in the same profession. What iti means is if you are working on technical side in IT, you are going to continue on technical side no matter what your designation is. I feel that USCIS has clear guidlines on this. please refer to the link below:
http://stats.bls.gov/soc/socguide.htm
I think following information on this link could help you to make a quick decision. I addition you should consult to attorney before you make your final decision.
"Supervisors of professional and technical workers usually have a background similar to the workers they supervise, and are therefore classified with the workers they supervise. Likewise, team leaders, lead workers and supervisors of production, sales, and service workers who spend at least 20 percent of their time performing work similar to the workers they supervise are classified with the workers they supervise.
First-line managers and supervisors of production, service, and sales workers who spend more than 80 percent of their time performing supervisory activities are classified separately in the appropriate supervisor category, since their work activities are distinct from those of the workers they supervise. First-line managers are generally found in smaller establishments where they perform both supervisory and management functions, such as accounting, marketing, and personnel work."
:):):)
Thanks,
Ishwar
http://stats.bls.gov/soc/socguide.htm
I think following information on this link could help you to make a quick decision. I addition you should consult to attorney before you make your final decision.
"Supervisors of professional and technical workers usually have a background similar to the workers they supervise, and are therefore classified with the workers they supervise. Likewise, team leaders, lead workers and supervisors of production, sales, and service workers who spend at least 20 percent of their time performing work similar to the workers they supervise are classified with the workers they supervise.
First-line managers and supervisors of production, service, and sales workers who spend more than 80 percent of their time performing supervisory activities are classified separately in the appropriate supervisor category, since their work activities are distinct from those of the workers they supervise. First-line managers are generally found in smaller establishments where they perform both supervisory and management functions, such as accounting, marketing, and personnel work."
:):):)
Thanks,
Ishwar
hair black girls with scene hair.
hemanth22
07-21 09:24 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
more...
natrajs
08-21 12:07 PM
Best Wishes and Good Luck
hot black and londe scene hair for girls. house londe scene hair color.
ab2k7
07-04 03:08 PM
Gurus, need a lil help clarifying issue in GC process.
I've a question regarding location of work place for a H1B employee filing GC process.
I've learnt that either after filing I-140 or I-485 stage, one should maintain as an employee at the same job position(job description as mentioned in LC) and also the geographical location. I've learnt instances where if an employee is half way through (lets say approved labor or I-140) his GC process has to start all over if he had to move to another branch of the same company in another city/state.
Is this true? I might be wrong about the infomation above but I'm concerned as being consultant, I might have to move to a different city or state if I find a better project and am contemplating whether this would be an issue in future for my green card.
If I'm right, employer has to file LCA for prevailing wage for current city I'm residing now. What will be the process incase I've to move to another city/state.
I'd really appreciate if someone who has better official info or gone through this can clarify my queries so ppl like me can be better informed.
Thanks in advance.
I've a question regarding location of work place for a H1B employee filing GC process.
I've learnt that either after filing I-140 or I-485 stage, one should maintain as an employee at the same job position(job description as mentioned in LC) and also the geographical location. I've learnt instances where if an employee is half way through (lets say approved labor or I-140) his GC process has to start all over if he had to move to another branch of the same company in another city/state.
Is this true? I might be wrong about the infomation above but I'm concerned as being consultant, I might have to move to a different city or state if I find a better project and am contemplating whether this would be an issue in future for my green card.
If I'm right, employer has to file LCA for prevailing wage for current city I'm residing now. What will be the process incase I've to move to another city/state.
I'd really appreciate if someone who has better official info or gone through this can clarify my queries so ppl like me can be better informed.
Thanks in advance.
more...
house londe scene hair girls.
pappu
07-14 01:50 PM
This link didn't work for me either.
try
photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7644/2582/1600/chart_alert7.11.2006.gif
try
photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7644/2582/1600/chart_alert7.11.2006.gif
tattoo Long Scene Hair For Girls
doceb2
04-13 06:20 PM
i also need the answet to this question , how should one respond if somebody gets rfe with different job
more...
pictures #scene hair #scene girl #girl
anil
06-14 10:40 AM
Hi,
My 8th year H1 extension is pending with CIS, and my current H1 expires on June 26, 07. Can I file my 485 when my H1 status is pending from CIS?
Please advise.:confused:
My 8th year H1 extension is pending with CIS, and my current H1 expires on June 26, 07. Can I file my 485 when my H1 status is pending from CIS?
Please advise.:confused:
dresses Scene kids Blond Scene Hair
tammman
10-15 04:50 PM
My wife has EAD but didnt use it yet and she is on L1 and her AP had an RFE today and she has ticket booked for INDIA on dec6th...if her AP doesnt get approved before she leaves can she travel ?
People were mentioned about it needs to approved before u come back to USA ?
Please suggest.
People were mentioned about it needs to approved before u come back to USA ?
Please suggest.
more...
makeup Blonde scene hair
panday
11-21 09:44 AM
HI everybody,
I hope we get some response form this. One can only hope. Ihave done my part and lets hope others follow on our example.
I hope we get some response form this. One can only hope. Ihave done my part and lets hope others follow on our example.
girlfriend scene girls.
a1b2c3
07-24 11:13 PM
wtf!
hairstyles black girls with scene hair
asdqwe2k
04-19 10:02 AM
Job location does not matter, as long as it is mentioned that it will be the case in the Labour application.
All the desi consulting companies do that, so that their employees can work anywhere in USA...
All the desi consulting companies do that, so that their employees can work anywhere in USA...
sdrblr
09-27 12:09 PM
On a side note, what do you guys suggest to use for trading for someone like me who does it occasionally and very low volume both in terms of quantity and $. Currently I use share builder... is there anything cheaper and better than this.
nashim
09-03 09:01 AM
Yes, medical forms been changed. Please refer USCIS site for correct form. It is valid for one year but form should be correct.
Here are the details:
http://immigration-law.com/
07/13/2008: USCIS Changes Old Medical Form, I-693, Invalid Date from 07/14/2008 to 08/01/2008
� Medical form which the USCIS designated civil surgeon is required to use was initially revised on 04/08/2008, followed by the USCIS announcement that any I-693 form version earlier than 04/08/2008 should not be used by the civil surgens from May 1, 2008. In the middle of June, the USCIS released again new version form dated 06/05/2008 and announced that the old version other than 06/05/2008 should not be used effective 07/14/2008. July 14, 2008 is tomorrow. However, without a news release, the USCIS form site extended invalid date of forms earlier than 06/05/2008 to 08/01/2008. Please now note that "Previous editions will be accepted only for medical exams conducted before August 1, 2008. Medical exams conducted on or after August 1, 2008, require use of the 06/05/08 edition," according to the form site instruction.
� There was a confusion in June 2008 on the validity of older version form I-9 because the USCIS form site instructed that the older version was not acceptable from certain date. In Vancouver, the USCIS authority confirmed that the form instruction was an error and the USCIS form instruction has since been corrected. It will help tremendously if the USCIS releases an announcement that the current I-693 form instruction is indeed correct and the civil surgeons can use the I-693 forms which are older than 06/05/2008 version can still be used. In the meantime, the civil surgeons and the immigrants should check on the date of the medical examination with the I-693 form site to protect themselves from any changes. The form site indicates that the information was updated on June 26, 2008. One wonders whether the civil surgeons may be better off to start using the 06/05/2008 version form from even now just to avoid any confusion in the future. For the new form instruction as of today, please click here.
� There was a report one time that the USCIS was experiencing a problem in notifying all the USCIS certified civil surgeons on the form changes by email or other means because some civil surgeons did not have email addresses or proper means to receive such notices quickly. When the 2008 Tuberculosis Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons was implemented by the Center for Disease Control and Prevension of HHS in such a notice on May 1, 2008, it could have been practically impossible for the USCIS to notify such medical form changes timely to every single USCIS certified civil surgeons. Well, doctors, you now have until August 1, 2008 to comply with the new medical form!
� This change can be important that because of the EB-2 visa number progression for the Chinese and Indians, a large number of these foreign professionals must have already scheduled or even completed a medical examination for themselves and their family members using the older versions. Under the new instruction, these medical report should be valid and filed with the I-485 coming August 2008. However, those who schedule their 485 medical examination on or after August 1, 2008 should make it sure that the doctor uses the new version dated 06/05/2008.
Here are the details:
http://immigration-law.com/
07/13/2008: USCIS Changes Old Medical Form, I-693, Invalid Date from 07/14/2008 to 08/01/2008
� Medical form which the USCIS designated civil surgeon is required to use was initially revised on 04/08/2008, followed by the USCIS announcement that any I-693 form version earlier than 04/08/2008 should not be used by the civil surgens from May 1, 2008. In the middle of June, the USCIS released again new version form dated 06/05/2008 and announced that the old version other than 06/05/2008 should not be used effective 07/14/2008. July 14, 2008 is tomorrow. However, without a news release, the USCIS form site extended invalid date of forms earlier than 06/05/2008 to 08/01/2008. Please now note that "Previous editions will be accepted only for medical exams conducted before August 1, 2008. Medical exams conducted on or after August 1, 2008, require use of the 06/05/08 edition," according to the form site instruction.
� There was a confusion in June 2008 on the validity of older version form I-9 because the USCIS form site instructed that the older version was not acceptable from certain date. In Vancouver, the USCIS authority confirmed that the form instruction was an error and the USCIS form instruction has since been corrected. It will help tremendously if the USCIS releases an announcement that the current I-693 form instruction is indeed correct and the civil surgeons can use the I-693 forms which are older than 06/05/2008 version can still be used. In the meantime, the civil surgeons and the immigrants should check on the date of the medical examination with the I-693 form site to protect themselves from any changes. The form site indicates that the information was updated on June 26, 2008. One wonders whether the civil surgeons may be better off to start using the 06/05/2008 version form from even now just to avoid any confusion in the future. For the new form instruction as of today, please click here.
� There was a report one time that the USCIS was experiencing a problem in notifying all the USCIS certified civil surgeons on the form changes by email or other means because some civil surgeons did not have email addresses or proper means to receive such notices quickly. When the 2008 Tuberculosis Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons was implemented by the Center for Disease Control and Prevension of HHS in such a notice on May 1, 2008, it could have been practically impossible for the USCIS to notify such medical form changes timely to every single USCIS certified civil surgeons. Well, doctors, you now have until August 1, 2008 to comply with the new medical form!
� This change can be important that because of the EB-2 visa number progression for the Chinese and Indians, a large number of these foreign professionals must have already scheduled or even completed a medical examination for themselves and their family members using the older versions. Under the new instruction, these medical report should be valid and filed with the I-485 coming August 2008. However, those who schedule their 485 medical examination on or after August 1, 2008 should make it sure that the doctor uses the new version dated 06/05/2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment