iamhopeful
05-24 02:10 PM
Hi,
My 6 yr H1B expires Dec 15,2009. I had applied for labor in 2008 and have received the case number for the labor dated June 26, 2008. My labor is not yet approved and online the status shows "pending". The company has not got any RFE against the labor. I dont know why its taking so much time. My main concern is, Can I apply for h1B extension on the basis of "Pending" Labor approval. What is the time frame to apply for an H1B extension? How long is the extension granted for ? 1 yr or 3 yrs....
Please advise ....
Thank You
My 6 yr H1B expires Dec 15,2009. I had applied for labor in 2008 and have received the case number for the labor dated June 26, 2008. My labor is not yet approved and online the status shows "pending". The company has not got any RFE against the labor. I dont know why its taking so much time. My main concern is, Can I apply for h1B extension on the basis of "Pending" Labor approval. What is the time frame to apply for an H1B extension? How long is the extension granted for ? 1 yr or 3 yrs....
Please advise ....
Thank You
wallpaper Fringe Haircuts for Girls
pkd
09-22 03:51 AM
Hi,
I had an approved I-140 from my previous company with a priority date of Nov 2005. I moved to a new company, and my GC was applied again in Dec 2006. My previous I-140 was used to retain my priority date. However, my new I-140 from this company shows the priority date of Dec 2006.
How do I make sure that my previous priority date (Nov 2005) is on file, and my case will be filed according to that.
Thanks,
Prabhat
I had an approved I-140 from my previous company with a priority date of Nov 2005. I moved to a new company, and my GC was applied again in Dec 2006. My previous I-140 was used to retain my priority date. However, my new I-140 from this company shows the priority date of Dec 2006.
How do I make sure that my previous priority date (Nov 2005) is on file, and my case will be filed according to that.
Thanks,
Prabhat
MDix
02-09 09:23 PM
OP is BOND and there is one JAMES BOND 707. Hopefully you guys will figure it out.:D
2011 Harajuku style hair from japan girl
willgetgc2005
03-31 01:41 PM
Hi,
When u use EAD and AP to come back into US, then u loose your H1 status.
About reverting back to H1 from EAD, there are many Ifs and buts. You should have a valid H1 maintained etc. Consult a good attorney.
When u use EAD and AP to come back into US, then u loose your H1 status.
About reverting back to H1 from EAD, there are many Ifs and buts. You should have a valid H1 maintained etc. Consult a good attorney.
more...
Vexir
05-08 11:24 PM
hehe okay i''l try
designserve
04-07 10:45 AM
SoCal family charged with arranging fake marriages - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_fake_marriages_immigration_fraud)
more...
trump_gc
02-05 11:39 AM
Current VISA availability date is 01AUG02. So u r looking at 5-9 yrs ,,may be worse, or may be even better with any law comin in
2010 emo girl hairstyle long blonde
bijualex29
05-29 02:09 PM
Where is the county Cap in this bill?
more...
nlssubbu
05-17 03:04 PM
It is safe to apply for N-400 after 90 days prior to 5 years and your wife can wait and apply in another couple of months.
hair hairstyles japan girl
kirupa
02-28 05:00 PM
Added :)
more...
yawkabore
01-28 11:46 AM
Please I need advice. I am currently preparing to file I-140/I-485 concurrent application and do not want to include the names of my children who are US citizens on the application. This is because I do not want the name of their mom to come up since I don't want to add her name too to the application. Although we got married outside the US, and I mistakenly wrote that with her name on my B1/B2 application I still will want to file this application as single. She has some issues to clear with USCIS and I do not want to complicate matters by adding her name to my application. I truly will appreciate your advice on this matter before I submit my application. Thank you
hot Cute Japanese Hairstyle For
Macaca
08-05 07:42 AM
A Polarized, and Polarizing, Congress (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301949.html) By David S. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com), August 5, 2007
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
more...
house Hairstyles For Girls
21stIcon
07-02 08:03 AM
Your need to present your total asset / liabilities /previous experience in this field or any other successful venture in the past to your long term bank ally
if you have build up equity at home then consider home equity to start business
or apply
Small Business Administration - Financial Assistance (http://www.sba.gov/services/financialassistance/index.html)
if you have build up equity at home then consider home equity to start business
or apply
Small Business Administration - Financial Assistance (http://www.sba.gov/services/financialassistance/index.html)
tattoo Girl Hairstyles,
skagitswimmer
July 26th, 2005, 12:00 PM
These are nice photos but I for one would appreciate it if new threads are started for discussions and new photographs are added to your personal galleries and if you like critique requests. That way we can look at your photographs by thumbnail and keep the topics on new threads to ones which are topical.
more...
pictures Cool Japanese Hairstyle
drirshad
04-07 12:30 PM
no news yet, i m kinda breaking ........
dresses Rihanna hairstyle: Japanese Girl Lena Fujii Photos
kirupa
07-16 10:22 PM
Added :)
more...
makeup girls Scene HairStyles 2009
gc??
04-28 02:01 PM
Read this else where, about I -140s being reopened and labor certification are being questioned. Is this true?
girlfriend Related topics: Girl hairstyle
kirupa
03-20 08:17 PM
Added!
hairstyles girl asian hairstyles.
STAmisha
12-05 04:32 PM
I applied an LC from an employer on March 27th 2005 (Pre-PERM)
It is shifted to P-BEC. I have not got any 45 day letter for that
How do I get the 45 day letter?
It is shifted to P-BEC. I have not got any 45 day letter for that
How do I get the 45 day letter?
STAmisha
09-21 01:03 PM
gurus
Please post
Please post
cubedflash
01-28 06:53 PM
Example:
www-med.stanford.edu/alum...Award.html (http://www-med.stanford.edu/alumni/sterlingAward.html)
Swift 3D Way:
-Break apart the text
-Rotate the individual letters
-Place in desired location
-Group and rotate object
You can also take the Swift 3D file into Flash and place the letter in the desired location.
-cubedflash
www-med.stanford.edu/alum...Award.html (http://www-med.stanford.edu/alumni/sterlingAward.html)
Swift 3D Way:
-Break apart the text
-Rotate the individual letters
-Place in desired location
-Group and rotate object
You can also take the Swift 3D file into Flash and place the letter in the desired location.
-cubedflash
No comments:
Post a Comment