solaris27
10-02 11:16 AM
Yes it will be Pending Adjustment for all of you if you use EAD .
But as backup and if not required just be on H1B visa and do job for same company again if possible .
or if you are changing company file H1B extension as backup.
But as backup and if not required just be on H1B visa and do job for same company again if possible .
or if you are changing company file H1B extension as backup.
wallpaper In Star Wars minifig style,
Motivated
01-06 08:38 AM
So many bills are introduced but most don't even see day of light.. I personally don't see this ever passing the congress.. For most treaty countries this feature is already available and its called E1/E2 visa.. There is no limit on number of people and number years for visa.
Exactly, many bills are introduced, but >80% of them do not come out of the committees. If the bill has support form a large number of legislators then it has a chance! Besides Lugar and Kerry who else supports this bill?
Exactly, many bills are introduced, but >80% of them do not come out of the committees. If the bill has support form a large number of legislators then it has a chance! Besides Lugar and Kerry who else supports this bill?
Karthikthiru
08-01 11:16 PM
We all have to keep assuming like this only. The only way is to lobby and increase the the VISA numbers per year. So we all should show up on the Sep 13th rally and show our strength
Karthik
Karthik
2011 The Clone Wars Season 3 Whole
yagw
09-27 01:34 AM
Folks,
Am on H1B and have already applied for 485 (EB2 I May 2006). I am not sure if I am allowed to day trade in the current status. By day trading I mean not just investing in stocks and not just buying and selling stocks in a single day -- I am asking about making perhaps 10 trades in a day (5 rounds of buy, sell)? I understand IRS can call you out to be a full-time trader but the rules for this are not laid out clearly, as far as I can understand. Anyone out there with relevant links/personal experience on this one? Would really appreciate your feedback.
Thanks!
Shishya
AFAIK, your visa status will not affect day-trading. You just need to specify the gain/loss when you file taxes (like anyone).
That said, I believe you are aware of the requirement that you need to have a minimum of $25K in your account to do day-trading. And also the risks involved in it.
My 2c as some one who tried it, play only with money you can afford to loose (as you WILL most of the time) and get out if you have to, without emotional attachment.
Have fun and BE SAFE!!!
Am on H1B and have already applied for 485 (EB2 I May 2006). I am not sure if I am allowed to day trade in the current status. By day trading I mean not just investing in stocks and not just buying and selling stocks in a single day -- I am asking about making perhaps 10 trades in a day (5 rounds of buy, sell)? I understand IRS can call you out to be a full-time trader but the rules for this are not laid out clearly, as far as I can understand. Anyone out there with relevant links/personal experience on this one? Would really appreciate your feedback.
Thanks!
Shishya
AFAIK, your visa status will not affect day-trading. You just need to specify the gain/loss when you file taxes (like anyone).
That said, I believe you are aware of the requirement that you need to have a minimum of $25K in your account to do day-trading. And also the risks involved in it.
My 2c as some one who tried it, play only with money you can afford to loose (as you WILL most of the time) and get out if you have to, without emotional attachment.
Have fun and BE SAFE!!!
more...
genius
11-20 09:18 PM
Should we mail paulmcd@cmp.com (Paul McDougall )of information Week.
See: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=194700008&subSection=All+Stories
See: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=194700008&subSection=All+Stories
shsk
07-01 01:02 PM
My friend joined new company from Project Manager he got a job on Associate Director. When GC was filed he was developer :-)
more...
glus
03-19 11:29 AM
If you have left your I-140 company, that I-140 is dead. No wonder you have not heard back. It's not pending, it's cancelled. I-140 is employer based and therefore if USCIS said they were not satisfied with place of work, which reads: not enough income for the company to be able to pay you the salary declared in the I140 app. If you did not reply to their show-cause within the time frame stated, your I-140 application is deemed abandoned.
This is not true. I140 can be approved even after one leaves the company. I140 is only a "check" that the person i qualified and a company able to pay a "FUTURE OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT." Please do not post untrue statements unless your are absolutely sure. He can work in CA and have a 140 approved in NY, and move to NY when his Priority Date becomes current.
I140 is only dead if a company request to withdraw I140 petition before it is approved. If his I140 is "pending" it is not dead.
This is not true. I140 can be approved even after one leaves the company. I140 is only a "check" that the person i qualified and a company able to pay a "FUTURE OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT." Please do not post untrue statements unless your are absolutely sure. He can work in CA and have a 140 approved in NY, and move to NY when his Priority Date becomes current.
I140 is only dead if a company request to withdraw I140 petition before it is approved. If his I140 is "pending" it is not dead.
2010 greatest Star Wars
bkarnik
04-18 09:21 AM
Guys:
Before we get all excited and start signing petitions, please check to confirm whether you are legally safe by doing so. For more information please see this link from Murthy website http://www.murthy.com/news/n_parele.html
I write this because the petition is sponsored by a campaign manager for Kennedy. Please be very careful in signing such petitions. I would recommend discussing any such petition on this forum and getting input from the IV folks or from your lawyers before signing any petition that supports an individual or any particular political party.
Before we get all excited and start signing petitions, please check to confirm whether you are legally safe by doing so. For more information please see this link from Murthy website http://www.murthy.com/news/n_parele.html
I write this because the petition is sponsored by a campaign manager for Kennedy. Please be very careful in signing such petitions. I would recommend discussing any such petition on this forum and getting input from the IV folks or from your lawyers before signing any petition that supports an individual or any particular political party.
more...
ssreenu
04-13 09:46 AM
Gurus, your inputs please: Can I take up a position in India with an American Firm while on H1B?
2 things:
1. Yes, you can be an expat, meaning you can still work elsewhere (any branch) in the world while your payroll is still run in US(using H1B for the same company in US) and taxes are paid in US.
2. Having a H1B does not restrict you to work only in US. You can work elsewhere in the world while your H1B is still valid unless the company revokes it for some reason.
Hope this helps.
*Note I am not an expert, I am just sharing the knowledge I have. :D
2 things:
1. Yes, you can be an expat, meaning you can still work elsewhere (any branch) in the world while your payroll is still run in US(using H1B for the same company in US) and taxes are paid in US.
2. Having a H1B does not restrict you to work only in US. You can work elsewhere in the world while your H1B is still valid unless the company revokes it for some reason.
Hope this helps.
*Note I am not an expert, I am just sharing the knowledge I have. :D
hair training of Savage Opress
senk1s
10-25 04:49 PM
RFE is basically 'looking for proof /more information'
Wait for that then you'll know what they are looking for
-and lately 'anything' is very normal :(
Wait for that then you'll know what they are looking for
-and lately 'anything' is very normal :(
more...
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
hot Star Wars Clone Wars Action
hianupam
04-26 08:17 AM
I'll. I am big foodie (from all places)...
We moved from Allentown, PA to Houston in 2008. As some of the other IVers have alluded, Houston is a BIG city (if you include the burbs that is). Most of the major roads are backed up during peak traffic hours and typical commute time start to be measured in hours.
Finding a place to live in Houston (read buying a house) can be a tough decision when you have so many choice. Things can be complicated if your spouse works and you have school going kids.
Some terms you will hear when you talk about location in houston:
1. Inside the Loop (610) which is the ring road that encircles downtown houston and the medical center. If you are not in the energy corridor, you are most likely to work within the loop. However finding a place to live within the loop can be challenging (that is if you are looking for a house in the sub 1 mil category). Good neighborhoods within the loop are riveroaks, memorial. There are some decent neighborhoods in the medical center montrose area but the schools (publlic schools) may not be to your liking.
When we moved, we initially rented near the medical center (a highrise called mosaic, opposite herman park) and put our daughter in a daycare called Creme De La Creme in downtown.
2. Inside the Beltway (8) which is the outer ring road that encircles houston. You have to be really careful if you choose to live in the area between 610 and 8 as there are some very shady areas. West (along I 10) is mostly fine.
3. Outside the beltway is where you have most of your master planned communites (read burbs). Down south (along 59) you have sugarland. West (along 10) you have Katy (and most of the energy companies). Northwest (along 290) you have Lakewood, Tomball (along 249), spring cypress etc. North (along 45) you have woodlands northeast (along 59 north) you have spring, kingwood and east (again along 45 east) is League City (read NASA).
The main things to consider are (at least I did when I bought a house)
1. Safety : There are some very shady parts of town.
2. School District (ISD)
3. Commute : Both current and future (if you were to change your place of employment). Say now you work downtown and chose to live in sugarland and a year later you found yourself a Job in the woodlands, you will have to move or deal with a 2 hour 1 way commute !
4. Availability of public transport: Which in most cases is non existent in Houston. But they do have a good commuter bus system from several places in the burbs if you work downtown. Lots of employers that have offices downtown will subsidize this. This can be a decent chunk of change as parking downtown will typically run you about $200/month.
These are the salient points that I could think of.
Let me know if you have more questions. PM me if you guys are visting Houston in the near future.
We moved from Allentown, PA to Houston in 2008. As some of the other IVers have alluded, Houston is a BIG city (if you include the burbs that is). Most of the major roads are backed up during peak traffic hours and typical commute time start to be measured in hours.
Finding a place to live in Houston (read buying a house) can be a tough decision when you have so many choice. Things can be complicated if your spouse works and you have school going kids.
Some terms you will hear when you talk about location in houston:
1. Inside the Loop (610) which is the ring road that encircles downtown houston and the medical center. If you are not in the energy corridor, you are most likely to work within the loop. However finding a place to live within the loop can be challenging (that is if you are looking for a house in the sub 1 mil category). Good neighborhoods within the loop are riveroaks, memorial. There are some decent neighborhoods in the medical center montrose area but the schools (publlic schools) may not be to your liking.
When we moved, we initially rented near the medical center (a highrise called mosaic, opposite herman park) and put our daughter in a daycare called Creme De La Creme in downtown.
2. Inside the Beltway (8) which is the outer ring road that encircles houston. You have to be really careful if you choose to live in the area between 610 and 8 as there are some very shady areas. West (along I 10) is mostly fine.
3. Outside the beltway is where you have most of your master planned communites (read burbs). Down south (along 59) you have sugarland. West (along 10) you have Katy (and most of the energy companies). Northwest (along 290) you have Lakewood, Tomball (along 249), spring cypress etc. North (along 45) you have woodlands northeast (along 59 north) you have spring, kingwood and east (again along 45 east) is League City (read NASA).
The main things to consider are (at least I did when I bought a house)
1. Safety : There are some very shady parts of town.
2. School District (ISD)
3. Commute : Both current and future (if you were to change your place of employment). Say now you work downtown and chose to live in sugarland and a year later you found yourself a Job in the woodlands, you will have to move or deal with a 2 hour 1 way commute !
4. Availability of public transport: Which in most cases is non existent in Houston. But they do have a good commuter bus system from several places in the burbs if you work downtown. Lots of employers that have offices downtown will subsidize this. This can be a decent chunk of change as parking downtown will typically run you about $200/month.
These are the salient points that I could think of.
Let me know if you have more questions. PM me if you guys are visting Houston in the near future.
more...
house Savage Opress in the Darkness
mmk123
01-19 08:17 PM
Democrats seem to be loosing senate seat in MA. Message is clear - in this great recession, people don't want more taxes especially when they are happy with their current healthcare policies and their healthcare coverage don't change a dime for those extra taxes. Especially, when MA people are already paying for state universal healthcare. Why should WE pay for THEM?
Probably, this means healthcare reform is dead or congress embraces more conservative bill passed by senate. End of road for more tax burdensome things like cap-n-trade, climate change bill or controversial bills like immigration reform unless some less-conservative republicans are on board. If it is ever considered, be ready for more durbin-grassley measures in the final bill. Fate of the bill depends on what matters for elections in 2010, probably more populist measures like tax cuts, another stimulus, job growth measures will be focussed for rest of the year..
Probably, this means healthcare reform is dead or congress embraces more conservative bill passed by senate. End of road for more tax burdensome things like cap-n-trade, climate change bill or controversial bills like immigration reform unless some less-conservative republicans are on board. If it is ever considered, be ready for more durbin-grassley measures in the final bill. Fate of the bill depends on what matters for elections in 2010, probably more populist measures like tax cuts, another stimulus, job growth measures will be focussed for rest of the year..
tattoo Clone ARC Commander Lego Star
santb1975
02-13 05:17 PM
Please participate
more...
pictures Savage Opress 37
Radhika
07-09 01:38 PM
Was this at TSC, mine is at NSC. My First I140 was approved, My company refiled after acquisition (successor in interest) and later upgraded to Premium
Yes it is at TSC.
Yes it is at TSC.
dresses Star Wars THE CLONE WARS
b2visahelp
06-16 01:54 AM
Thank you so much for all your advice. I will let them know immediately. However, I have one more question. Is it better to apply the visa from a computer in Indonesia compare to I help them apply from my computer in the US or it really doesn't matter? I'm not sure if the embassy tracks IP address or probably has something against it. Just a thought because we're very careful not to mess it up.
more...
makeup Savage Opress courtesy of
Scythe
11-29 02:34 AM
Gah, I knew it! :deranged:
girlfriend Savage Opress 36
krishmunn
02-19 12:46 PM
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
Excellent definitiion. and yes that is the difference between a good lawyer and a bad lawyer. Most of immigration related work (GC, H1) is filling forms which even a layman can do, except when it comes to "discretionary" stuff -- that is the acid test for lawyers
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
Excellent definitiion. and yes that is the difference between a good lawyer and a bad lawyer. Most of immigration related work (GC, H1) is filling forms which even a layman can do, except when it comes to "discretionary" stuff -- that is the acid test for lawyers
hairstyles To own this figure, head over
hibhagya
05-15 12:03 PM
Great job and hope the current immigrations bill will pass this year.
vikramaditya
05-01 12:15 PM
i cannot contact my old employer as the company is taken over by another one .I sure can use the old PD but still have to wait for months till i 140 gets approved .This time i have a high chance of rfe and rejection as it is by a small company and for future employement .
smuggymba
04-21 02:07 PM
Central PA
really depends where your office is, does ur wife work (r u married) and do you have school going kids (school district stuff)
many things to juggle and prioritize.
really depends where your office is, does ur wife work (r u married) and do you have school going kids (school district stuff)
many things to juggle and prioritize.
No comments:
Post a Comment