srikondoji
08-07 04:41 PM
Location: MA
Job: Software Engineer-Developer
Okay that is so vague. Wages depend on the location of job, type of job, etc.
Job: Software Engineer-Developer
Okay that is so vague. Wages depend on the location of job, type of job, etc.
wallpaper Share. Pride
Administrator2
07-07 08:05 PM
mbawa,
We regard IV website as an important tool to reach our goal. Please be cautioned that if we find you damage our effort, we will be forced to ban you from this website.
IV Team
We regard IV website as an important tool to reach our goal. Please be cautioned that if we find you damage our effort, we will be forced to ban you from this website.
IV Team
crystal
07-11 12:07 PM
^^^^
2011 Trailer Park: Colin Farrell In
eb3retro
04-09 01:01 PM
Yes I have been in US since 1991. Here is my story.
1991 1996 - Did Bachelors in US.
1996 -1998 - Masters
1999 - 2009 - On H1. Have been with same firm for over 10 yrs though I have had several promotions. Always kept H1 though spouse started working on EAD in Jan 2009.
Its been some wait. There have been time I felt so frustrated with this process I literally cried or felt like punching someone.
I wont really believe till I have card in my hand. Difficult to trust USCIS.
congrats dude. ur pd should be 1991 instead of 2001. You really deserve it. have fun.
1991 1996 - Did Bachelors in US.
1996 -1998 - Masters
1999 - 2009 - On H1. Have been with same firm for over 10 yrs though I have had several promotions. Always kept H1 though spouse started working on EAD in Jan 2009.
Its been some wait. There have been time I felt so frustrated with this process I literally cried or felt like punching someone.
I wont really believe till I have card in my hand. Difficult to trust USCIS.
congrats dude. ur pd should be 1991 instead of 2001. You really deserve it. have fun.
more...
ashkam
03-24 11:26 AM
AFAIK you cannot use your SSN to receive google adsense revenues if you want to continue on H1B. It counts as business income and Google will send you a 1099 form and that is not allowed on an H1B. What people usually do is get someone in their home country to be the Google Adsense beneficiary. If you use your own ssn, on paper, it puts you out of H1B status.
Here (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=714462)is a link with explanations.
Here (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=714462)is a link with explanations.
girishvar
08-21 11:50 AM
I have changed the job on EAD and used AP for returning back. To be on the safeside I have notified USCIS service center about my AC21 change and kept the copy of the package sent to USCIS.
On our return in EWR, we have been sent to secondary inspection. IO asked whom I am working? I said my new employer's name? He took our copies of AP and stamped I-94 as parolled.
On our return in two days our greencard was also approved without any RFEs.
Again it depends on I/O in the port of entry I guess.
On our return in EWR, we have been sent to secondary inspection. IO asked whom I am working? I said my new employer's name? He took our copies of AP and stamped I-94 as parolled.
On our return in two days our greencard was also approved without any RFEs.
Again it depends on I/O in the port of entry I guess.
more...
smaram1
08-11 10:44 PM
It would be great if any one's I485 got approved while their Name Check is Pending?
2010 Colin Farrell movie.
brb2
04-05 08:24 AM
....If there is so much resistance to the bill in the senate, imagine the resistance that it will receive in the house and the various voting processes that it has to go through.
I think, passage of Frist bill with no 'guest worker' provisions for 'undocumented workers' or a separate bill altogether dedicated to legal immigration provisions are our safest bets.
Any thoughts?
This bill if passed in the senate will NOT go to the house. It will go to the house and senate joint conference committee where a sensible common ground is found. This will save house reps who can say that they voted against amenesty while still having a bill passed.
The danger right now is that Kyle and others who are against amnesty (that is what even I would call it!) are trying to put in amendments that would be the poison-pill that will bring the whole bill down. It is very likely that no bill may pass the senate. If the democrats try to gain the 51% vote to end debate and vote on the existing bill, the only tool with republicans is to use the fillibuster and then the democrats will need 61 votes to overcome it which they don't have.
I think, passage of Frist bill with no 'guest worker' provisions for 'undocumented workers' or a separate bill altogether dedicated to legal immigration provisions are our safest bets.
Any thoughts?
This bill if passed in the senate will NOT go to the house. It will go to the house and senate joint conference committee where a sensible common ground is found. This will save house reps who can say that they voted against amenesty while still having a bill passed.
The danger right now is that Kyle and others who are against amnesty (that is what even I would call it!) are trying to put in amendments that would be the poison-pill that will bring the whole bill down. It is very likely that no bill may pass the senate. If the democrats try to gain the 51% vote to end debate and vote on the existing bill, the only tool with republicans is to use the fillibuster and then the democrats will need 61 votes to overcome it which they don't have.
more...
ilikekilo
03-05 09:22 PM
I dont think we have to panic...if needed gvot will print money for FDIC...heck when they can do it for banks..
hair Colin Farrell and Bridget
gc_dream07
01-31 09:39 PM
Immigration reform is not even in the list of items. This reflects the priority of CIR in president's todo list.
more...
pappu
02-02 02:54 PM
House Immigration Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Naturalization
On January 17, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its first oversight hearing of the year, and the subject was the naturalization processing backlogs. Due to a confluence of factors, including a very significant fee increase that went into effect on July 30, 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received approximately double the number of naturalization applications in its Fiscal Year 2007 than it had during the previous year. USCIS is saying that, as of now, anyone who applied for naturalization after June 1, 2007, can expect to wait 16 to 18 months to have their application processed.
Remarks by Subcommittee Members
In her opening comment, Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee, noted that one year ago, the Subcommittee had a hearing on the proposed fee increase, and was told by USCIS that it need the fee increase to increase efficiency. At the time, the processing time for citizenship applications was six months.
Representative Steve King (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee, played the role of immigration historian. In his opening statement (and in his questioning), he focused almost exclusively on the INS� Citizenship USA program of ten years ago�back in the day before computers were standard issue in the immigration agency. In that effort to deal with a naturalization backlog, some applicants were granted citizenship before criminal background checks were completed, and some who received citizenship were found later not to be eligible. (Since then, however, much more stringent processes have been put in place to screen applications for naturalization. And the agency now does have computers.)
USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez
Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS, gave some background on the development of the backlog and summarized what USCIS was doing about it. During June, July, and August of last year, USCIS received three million immigration benefit applications of all kinds. Their first priority was issuing receipts for those applications. Next, they processed and sent work authorizations, which they are required to do within 90 days.
In the meantime, a large number of naturalization applications piled up. To deal with the extra workload, USCIS is hiring 1,500 new employees (in addition to the extra staff they planned to hire after the new fees went into effect). The agency is also re-hiring former (retired) employees. While waiting for the additional staff to be trained and deployed, the agency will be asking current staff to work overtime, using budgeted overtime early in the Fiscal Year.
Other steps are also being taken. Still, Mr. Gonzalez noted (in his written testimony) that it will take until the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 before the agency is back to a six-month processing time.
During the question and answer session, there was a fair amount of discussion about a portion of the backlog that preceded the surge in applications and was caused by a delay in the background checks conducted by the FBI. Some individuals have been in limbo for well over a year waiting for clearance from the FBI, and Mr. Gonzalez noted that last year more than 5,000 lawsuits were filed against the agency�80% on the FBI name check delays. The FBI, he said, has a paper-based system that is only beginning to be addressed. For now, it takes people to handle the files. The FBI has brought on some additional contract personnel and full-time employees to work on this problem.
Rep. Lofgren said that she would ask the FBI to come before the Subcommittee to explain its perspective on the name check delays. [Subsequently, we were told that the full Judiciary Committee will have a hearing with the FBI on a range of issues, including the name check issue.]
Non-Government Witnesses
Also testifying at the hearing were Arturo Vargas, Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and Fred Tsao, Policy Director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Mr. Vargas said that his organization kept USCIS apprised of its efforts to get immigrants to become citizens and the agency should have taken that information, plus experience with past fee increases, into account to take steps to be better prepared for the surge in applications. NALEO is recommending that the agency focus sufficiently on reducing the backlog so that all immigrants who applied for naturalization in Fiscal Year 2007 (which ended September 30, 2007) are sworn in as citizens by July 4, 2008. Otherwise, many immigrants who applied for citizenship last summer will not be able to vote in the elections this November.
Mr. Tsao echoed the point about USCIS having ample information that a surge in applications was coming. He recommended that USCIS (and the FBI) report regularly to the Subcommittee regarding progress being made on reducing the backlog.
In concluding the hearing, Rep. Lofgren suggested that she might also conduct a hearing on the agency�s information technology.
Additional Information
In a subsequent meeting with community-based organizations, Michael Aytes, Associate Director for Domestic Operations of USCIS, gave some additional specifics on the status of the naturalization backlogs. He noted that the total number of new employees being hired will be approximately 3,000�between the additional staff they are hiring to deal with the backlog and the extra staff being paid for by the fee increases. Regarding the FBI name check issue, he noted that, during the House hearing, every member of the Subcommittee�Republican and Democrat�inquired about the name check issue, and that this issue is now being dealt with at high levels both in the Justice Department (in which the FBI is located) and in DHS. He indicated that decisions have been made on the hiring of many of the new adjudicators that are being brought on board, but training and placement are still weeks away, at least.
He also said that the agency is starting Saturday and evening interviews, and applicants should be encouraged to make every effort to show up for their interviews.
On January 17, the House Immigration Subcommittee held its first oversight hearing of the year, and the subject was the naturalization processing backlogs. Due to a confluence of factors, including a very significant fee increase that went into effect on July 30, 2007, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) received approximately double the number of naturalization applications in its Fiscal Year 2007 than it had during the previous year. USCIS is saying that, as of now, anyone who applied for naturalization after June 1, 2007, can expect to wait 16 to 18 months to have their application processed.
Remarks by Subcommittee Members
In her opening comment, Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee, noted that one year ago, the Subcommittee had a hearing on the proposed fee increase, and was told by USCIS that it need the fee increase to increase efficiency. At the time, the processing time for citizenship applications was six months.
Representative Steve King (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee, played the role of immigration historian. In his opening statement (and in his questioning), he focused almost exclusively on the INS� Citizenship USA program of ten years ago�back in the day before computers were standard issue in the immigration agency. In that effort to deal with a naturalization backlog, some applicants were granted citizenship before criminal background checks were completed, and some who received citizenship were found later not to be eligible. (Since then, however, much more stringent processes have been put in place to screen applications for naturalization. And the agency now does have computers.)
USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez
Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS, gave some background on the development of the backlog and summarized what USCIS was doing about it. During June, July, and August of last year, USCIS received three million immigration benefit applications of all kinds. Their first priority was issuing receipts for those applications. Next, they processed and sent work authorizations, which they are required to do within 90 days.
In the meantime, a large number of naturalization applications piled up. To deal with the extra workload, USCIS is hiring 1,500 new employees (in addition to the extra staff they planned to hire after the new fees went into effect). The agency is also re-hiring former (retired) employees. While waiting for the additional staff to be trained and deployed, the agency will be asking current staff to work overtime, using budgeted overtime early in the Fiscal Year.
Other steps are also being taken. Still, Mr. Gonzalez noted (in his written testimony) that it will take until the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 before the agency is back to a six-month processing time.
During the question and answer session, there was a fair amount of discussion about a portion of the backlog that preceded the surge in applications and was caused by a delay in the background checks conducted by the FBI. Some individuals have been in limbo for well over a year waiting for clearance from the FBI, and Mr. Gonzalez noted that last year more than 5,000 lawsuits were filed against the agency�80% on the FBI name check delays. The FBI, he said, has a paper-based system that is only beginning to be addressed. For now, it takes people to handle the files. The FBI has brought on some additional contract personnel and full-time employees to work on this problem.
Rep. Lofgren said that she would ask the FBI to come before the Subcommittee to explain its perspective on the name check delays. [Subsequently, we were told that the full Judiciary Committee will have a hearing with the FBI on a range of issues, including the name check issue.]
Non-Government Witnesses
Also testifying at the hearing were Arturo Vargas, Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials and Fred Tsao, Policy Director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Mr. Vargas said that his organization kept USCIS apprised of its efforts to get immigrants to become citizens and the agency should have taken that information, plus experience with past fee increases, into account to take steps to be better prepared for the surge in applications. NALEO is recommending that the agency focus sufficiently on reducing the backlog so that all immigrants who applied for naturalization in Fiscal Year 2007 (which ended September 30, 2007) are sworn in as citizens by July 4, 2008. Otherwise, many immigrants who applied for citizenship last summer will not be able to vote in the elections this November.
Mr. Tsao echoed the point about USCIS having ample information that a surge in applications was coming. He recommended that USCIS (and the FBI) report regularly to the Subcommittee regarding progress being made on reducing the backlog.
In concluding the hearing, Rep. Lofgren suggested that she might also conduct a hearing on the agency�s information technology.
Additional Information
In a subsequent meeting with community-based organizations, Michael Aytes, Associate Director for Domestic Operations of USCIS, gave some additional specifics on the status of the naturalization backlogs. He noted that the total number of new employees being hired will be approximately 3,000�between the additional staff they are hiring to deal with the backlog and the extra staff being paid for by the fee increases. Regarding the FBI name check issue, he noted that, during the House hearing, every member of the Subcommittee�Republican and Democrat�inquired about the name check issue, and that this issue is now being dealt with at high levels both in the Justice Department (in which the FBI is located) and in DHS. He indicated that decisions have been made on the hiring of many of the new adjudicators that are being brought on board, but training and placement are still weeks away, at least.
He also said that the agency is starting Saturday and evening interviews, and applicants should be encouraged to make every effort to show up for their interviews.
hot a movie with Colin Farrell
rgrant
04-04 07:55 AM
I e-filed for EAD recently and got my biometrics appointment within two weeks, and got the card about 5 weeks after applying. My wife went through the paper process a few months back, and the card took nearly 3 months to arrive. So from this unscientific test, I think that e-filing is much faster for EAD at least.
more...
house Colin Farrell: It All Changed
sankar_203
04-20 10:20 PM
i had the same situation. your friend can apply for H1-B coz he is already counted. He'll loose whatever time that he is used on EAD and get the remaining time that is left on his 6 year period. If 6 years is already passed, he can still file for H1-B based on labor, 140 approval. In my case, my H1-B got denied coz of employer issues and i have an another H1-B with another company. Mean while i have filed AC21 with my new employer to be able to work..Hope this helps..
tattoo colin farrell movies. Photo of Colin Farrell from
sac-r-ten
01-08 11:41 AM
deepakjain:thanks for the latest info on this.
Little clarification required, what do you mean "delivered the next day betn 4:30-5:00". You mean one can collect it the next day in the evening?
jkm2282, sorry for hajacking your post. Any updates from your side?
THe process has changed the passport are now delivered the next day between 4:30 PM to 5:00 PM. Mumbai consulate no longer delivers the passport the same day of interview.
Deepak
Little clarification required, what do you mean "delivered the next day betn 4:30-5:00". You mean one can collect it the next day in the evening?
jkm2282, sorry for hajacking your post. Any updates from your side?
THe process has changed the passport are now delivered the next day between 4:30 PM to 5:00 PM. Mumbai consulate no longer delivers the passport the same day of interview.
Deepak
more...
pictures Buy Colin Farrell movies
paskal
08-01 12:21 AM
you have a G28 for every petition
even if you did not, it's not mandatory
they can't reject anything for lack of a G28
it's entirely optional
even if you did not, it's not mandatory
they can't reject anything for lack of a G28
it's entirely optional
dresses The film stars Colin Farrell,
addsf345
01-13 04:01 PM
Yes. This is an old case.
Isn't assigning a later PD to a earlier PD substitute labor a mistake made by the USCIS? If I put in a request to USCIS to correct this error, will it help?
Thanks!!
it won't correct, as this practice has been long stopped. You may be in trouble for sure. I know you must have discussed this with your lawyer and now asking this on forum. If not, consult one. But if I would have been in your place, I will not go back to CIS on this. There may be some more wait but you must have EAD/AP, so use it and wait for your turn. Do not complicate your case. Its up to you & your lawyer. Best Luck!
Isn't assigning a later PD to a earlier PD substitute labor a mistake made by the USCIS? If I put in a request to USCIS to correct this error, will it help?
Thanks!!
it won't correct, as this practice has been long stopped. You may be in trouble for sure. I know you must have discussed this with your lawyer and now asking this on forum. If not, consult one. But if I would have been in your place, I will not go back to CIS on this. There may be some more wait but you must have EAD/AP, so use it and wait for your turn. Do not complicate your case. Its up to you & your lawyer. Best Luck!
more...
makeup Johnny Depp, Colin Farrell
JunRN
12-17 06:59 PM
What was your status when you filed? H1 or L1 or F1? Have you filed before and got rejected? Were you in deportation proceedings before?
Is your PD current in June?
Is your PD current in June?
girlfriend Posted in Colin Farrell,Movie
akilhere
01-21 12:35 PM
If you do invoke AC-21, you might have problems with your petition as there seems to be a big difference between a Sr. Program Manager and a Programmer Analyst.
However, if i were you, i would still take up the new role and send in the AC21. There is a possibilityt hat they will approve it.
What's the point of a GC if you are locked in on your career growth anyways!?! Remember, these are your most productive years!
However, if i were you, i would still take up the new role and send in the AC21. There is a possibilityt hat they will approve it.
What's the point of a GC if you are locked in on your career growth anyways!?! Remember, these are your most productive years!
hairstyles Scott Caan, Colin Farrell and
baskarans
10-08 02:15 PM
PIO card is valid for 15 years and no need to apply for visa every time you go. You just present it with the passport when entering/departing in India. it takes about 20 days to get it they say 15 working days which is about 3 weeks. if you do in person they will check all documents and let you know if there is some thing wrong so you can correct it and submit it and no issues when issuing. they give you date to pick up or even you can ask them to mail back for 15$. i would say get poi if you have time and also if you are local do pio if you are not getting it by the time of travel you can always go and get visa the same day. http://www.cgisf.org/ is the sfo counslate website can get all the infor and download application there. even you can email them they are very prompt in replying you will get a reply the next day if you have any questions
satishku_2000
01-25 11:09 AM
Some one counting on indian gov. call me pessimist but good luck with that. I would be happy if Indian gov / politicians are out of this. You never know what kind of statements that can come out of their mouths ...
I have more hope and faith US system rather than Indian .
God bless America.
I have more hope and faith US system rather than Indian .
God bless America.
yingli
08-25 02:57 PM
Thanks you all so much for the reply! I really appreciate it!
How do I respond to the government's motion that the USCIS's decision on the adjustment of status (I485) is discretionary, so it does not fall under Mandamus? The U.S. attorneys wrote that only NATURALIZATION (but not greencard application) falls under Mandamus. Any suggestions?
I am thinking about using a different lawyer. My current lawyer only complains that he lost money on my case (I paid $2,500 lawyer fee!), but does not really care about the outcome of my case.
I will definitely check with Sheila Murthy. Any other recommendations? If you do not feel comfortable posting your lawyers' contact info. here, can you send me a private message (yingli95@gmail.com)?
YL
How do I respond to the government's motion that the USCIS's decision on the adjustment of status (I485) is discretionary, so it does not fall under Mandamus? The U.S. attorneys wrote that only NATURALIZATION (but not greencard application) falls under Mandamus. Any suggestions?
I am thinking about using a different lawyer. My current lawyer only complains that he lost money on my case (I paid $2,500 lawyer fee!), but does not really care about the outcome of my case.
I will definitely check with Sheila Murthy. Any other recommendations? If you do not feel comfortable posting your lawyers' contact info. here, can you send me a private message (yingli95@gmail.com)?
YL
No comments:
Post a Comment