NandanIn
09-24 06:00 PM
Hi,
I'm working on H1-B visa since last 6 months.
My wife is joining me on H4 visa and her H4 is approved till July'2010.
I have switched my Employer in the first month as I arrived USA and my New Employer filed my H1-B Transfer petion as regular, but still my case is in pending. But my wife's ticket is confirmed on 7th of October and she is coming to US on OCT 7th.
Two day's back my employer changed my case from Regular to Premium.
My question is that what will happen to my wife case..?? Does she need to re-apply for her H4 visa once my H1-B gets approve..?? Can she come to US with her previous stamp..??
Thanks in advance..
I'm working on H1-B visa since last 6 months.
My wife is joining me on H4 visa and her H4 is approved till July'2010.
I have switched my Employer in the first month as I arrived USA and my New Employer filed my H1-B Transfer petion as regular, but still my case is in pending. But my wife's ticket is confirmed on 7th of October and she is coming to US on OCT 7th.
Two day's back my employer changed my case from Regular to Premium.
My question is that what will happen to my wife case..?? Does she need to re-apply for her H4 visa once my H1-B gets approve..?? Can she come to US with her previous stamp..??
Thanks in advance..
wallpaper gold rush california map.
magatra
11-11 09:58 AM
Hi,
I am on H1b visa and it is expiring on Sep 2010. I heard that we need to apply for renewal 3 months before the expiry date,(i.e,June). I am planning to transfer my H1 to another employer. If I do so, will my H1 be automatically renewed during the transfer process? Also, If I transfer my H1 and go out of the country, do I need to get my visa stamping re-done when I come back to the country...
Thanks
I am on H1b visa and it is expiring on Sep 2010. I heard that we need to apply for renewal 3 months before the expiry date,(i.e,June). I am planning to transfer my H1 to another employer. If I do so, will my H1 be automatically renewed during the transfer process? Also, If I transfer my H1 and go out of the country, do I need to get my visa stamping re-done when I come back to the country...
Thanks
sobers
06-29 09:38 PM
i filed a similar RIR petition couple of years ago (i had mech engg degree) and it got rejected at fed level (altho passed Neb state labor). Had to file again in new category but lost couple of months.
2011 pictures california gold rush
Picasa
07-14 08:52 PM
I went to local USCIS office to expedite my EAD. I got an email from USCIS
...... Upon receipt of your request for expeditious handling, your case was reviewed and a determination was made that we need additional information to make a decision regarding your request. Please fax a letter from your employer to the following number XXX-XXX-XXXX. Please include this notice with your fax......
Do I have to send employment verification letter or something else?
Background:
Company A sponsored my GC (I was on H1B with them). Last year I joined Company B on EAD. But my previous employer told me that they will not revoke my I-140. So why USCIS is asking for letter from Employer.
...... Upon receipt of your request for expeditious handling, your case was reviewed and a determination was made that we need additional information to make a decision regarding your request. Please fax a letter from your employer to the following number XXX-XXX-XXXX. Please include this notice with your fax......
Do I have to send employment verification letter or something else?
Background:
Company A sponsored my GC (I was on H1B with them). Last year I joined Company B on EAD. But my previous employer told me that they will not revoke my I-140. So why USCIS is asking for letter from Employer.
more...
Blog Feeds
03-29 07:50 AM
From the San Francisco Chronicle: A Concord man was sentenced on Friday to six months in prison and three years of supervised release, for making false statements on 11 applications for high-technology worker visas, United States Attorney Melinda Haag and Patrick Durkin, Special Agent In-Charge of the Diplomatic Security Service announced. Chennupati admitted that between April 1, 2008 and March 3, 2009, he submitted 11 foreign worker petitions to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that contained counterfeit job offer letters from the Gap Corporation, Wells Fargo Bank and Genentech. Chennupati also admitted that he falsely stated on the foreign worker...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/03/man-sentenced-to-prison-for-faking-h-1b-tech-worker-petitions.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/03/man-sentenced-to-prison-for-faking-h-1b-tech-worker-petitions.html)
tcfannin
01-12 07:50 AM
I was on H1 visa and laid off from job on 10/30/09. I got severance pay for Nov. and have the pay stubs. I applied for COS from H4 to F1 for my spouse (already in collage) and H1 to F2 for me on 12/9/09. Meanwhile immigration performed spot check at my ex-employers on 12/3/09, so they came to know that i was not working. My employer had not revoked H1 by then. Our COS application was received by USCIS on 12/14/2009, case is currently under Initial Review.
- Will the immigration officers who did spot check inform USCIS that i was out of status?
- Will case get rejected due to delay in applying for COS?
- Will there be any complications in transferring my H1 to new employer as i was out of status for about a month before i applied for COS?
- How to stop F2 COS if i get H1 transfer approved first?
- Will the immigration officers who did spot check inform USCIS that i was out of status?
- Will case get rejected due to delay in applying for COS?
- Will there be any complications in transferring my H1 to new employer as i was out of status for about a month before i applied for COS?
- How to stop F2 COS if i get H1 transfer approved first?
more...
Macaca
11-13 08:06 PM
GOP tacks right after Democratic gains (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6829.html) By Martin Kady II | Politico, Nov 12, 2007
Republicans may trail in the polls on virtually every issue, but conservative influence is surging in both chambers of Congress as the GOP tries to find its soul again.
It�s a risky strategy to tack to the right while Democrats have momentum in most polls, but Republicans clearly believe that they need to recapture their base before they recapture the majority.
When Republicans ran Congress, hardened fiscal conservatives often had a lone voice-in-the-wilderness feel about them.
Whether it was Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) filibustering on earmarks or Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) making a late-night speech about runaway government spending, the conservative caucus had a sympathetic ear from GOP leaders yet rarely prevailed on strategy or party message.
But now that they�ve been thrust into the minority, the conservative agitators have a front-row seat with Republican leaders, and the number of lawmakers who describe themselves as conservatives continues to grow while moderates appear to be a dying breed among Republicans on Capitol Hill.
In the House, the conservative Republican Study Committee has led the caucus in promising to sustain vetoes of children�s health care legislation and spending bills.
In the Senate, the conservative Republican Steering Committee, led by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), is now being invited to weekly Republican leadership meetings on appropriations, a departure from tradition.
The top members of the Senate steering committee also had an exclusive meeting recently with President Bush, who himself is trying to launch a sort of renaissance of fiscal conservatism by vetoing popular spending bills.
The Republican Study Committee now has 104 members, up 50 percent in the past five years.
And 12 of the 15 Republican freshman lawmakers joined the group this year, a clear sign that the small rookie class of Republicans still believes in a conservative future, even while its party struggles nationally.
In contrast, the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership has seen its membership decline 20 percent, from 59 lawmakers in the last Congress to 47 this year.
And seven of those moderates are retiring, further diminishing the power of the middle.
�We don�t need to be shy about what we believe in,� DeMint said in an interview. �We�re starting to act as Republicans around core principles, whether it�s SCHIP or earmarks.�
Democrats are happy to see the Republicans taking a sharp right turn, believing it makes winning independents in 2008 that much easier.
�Republicans can�t try to make fiscal responsibility their mantle when they are responsible for turning record surpluses into record deficits,� said Sarah Feinberg, spokeswoman for the House Democratic Caucus.
�They can�t whine about earmarks when earmarks exploded under their leadership and Democrats have cut them in half and brought accountability to the earmark process.�
The renewed influence by conservatives in the House and Senate Republican caucuses appears to be disconnected from recent poll results.
According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Nov. 4, Americans favor Democrats in handling the economy, 50 percent to 35 percent, and on taxes, 46 percent to 40 percent, showing that Democrats have gained an edge on fiscal issues usually dominated by Republicans.
Independents are also disgruntled. In a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll last month, 63 percent of independents disapproved of the president�s performance.
Some Republican congressional aides privately admit that the energized push for conservative issues amounts to a �minority strategy� in which the party must reclaim its identity after being thrown out of power on Capitol Hill before making a serious run at regaining the majority.
�The far right is not going to bring the Republican Party back to power,� said Charlie Bass, president of the Main Street Republican Partnership and a former GOP House member from New Hampshire.
�The districts that were lost were moderate districts. The far right is big on bluster but short on results.�
Congressional Republican leaders, meanwhile, have been coordinating their efforts with some of the leading minds of the party, including pollsters Frank Luntz and David Winston, and Pat Toomey, president of the conservative Club for Growth.
Republican aides say they�ve also had strategy meetings with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).
At its core, this is an effort to re-energize a party demoralized after last year�s elections.
�We need to do a better job of communicating our core beliefs,� said Danny Diaz, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. �We had strayed from the core beliefs that got us the majority.�
Still, the strategy of flexing conservative credentials at the expense of the middle carries great risk.
�The image of the party message being dictated by a small group of doctrinaire senators is not something that people at the top of the ticket are going to want,� said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor and congressional expert at Rutgers University.
�This [strategy] springs up when a party is in the minority and prospects are bleak, so it�s unsurprising they�re having a reawakening.�
Indeed, Republicans are finding it easier to create a unified front on spending, immigration and national security as the minority party because they don�t have to legislate, don�t control the congressional schedule and are outnumbered at virtually every turn.
�There were times in the majority when conservatives disagreed with leadership, but there have been very few of those times this year,� said Hensarling, chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
�There�s nothing like getting hit over the head with a two-by-four to get someone�s attention. The American people thought Republicans weren�t acting like Republicans.�
To be sure, conservatives have always had significant influence within the Republican leadership in both chambers.
But when it came time to cut deals on spending or to craft bipartisan legislation, they often felt like they were cut out of the process.
Many Republicans still regret the arm twisting on their side of the aisle that led them to vote in favor of the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, creating one of the biggest entitlement programs of all time.
Now Republicans are getting their sea legs as a minority party on Capitol Hill, and their rabble-rousers serve a useful purpose in opposing the Democratic majority, especially on spending bills.
Democrats have little chance to override any of the president�s threatened vetoes of appropriations measures, thanks in large part to Republican unity on the issue.
�These fights on spending are important for us to re-establish our credentials,� said House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). �The Democrats have made it easy for us to engage in that fight.�
Democrats have indeed been frustrated in both chambers by Republican procedural maneuvers, but they believe voters will see this as obstructionism.
�It became evident months ago that the only play left in their playbook was to attack Democrats on taxing and spending,� said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
�They needed to shore up what�s left of their base. President Bush and Republicans have engaged in a hypocritical series of attacks on spending issues. The president only recently rediscovered the veto.�
Republicans may trail in the polls on virtually every issue, but conservative influence is surging in both chambers of Congress as the GOP tries to find its soul again.
It�s a risky strategy to tack to the right while Democrats have momentum in most polls, but Republicans clearly believe that they need to recapture their base before they recapture the majority.
When Republicans ran Congress, hardened fiscal conservatives often had a lone voice-in-the-wilderness feel about them.
Whether it was Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) filibustering on earmarks or Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) making a late-night speech about runaway government spending, the conservative caucus had a sympathetic ear from GOP leaders yet rarely prevailed on strategy or party message.
But now that they�ve been thrust into the minority, the conservative agitators have a front-row seat with Republican leaders, and the number of lawmakers who describe themselves as conservatives continues to grow while moderates appear to be a dying breed among Republicans on Capitol Hill.
In the House, the conservative Republican Study Committee has led the caucus in promising to sustain vetoes of children�s health care legislation and spending bills.
In the Senate, the conservative Republican Steering Committee, led by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), is now being invited to weekly Republican leadership meetings on appropriations, a departure from tradition.
The top members of the Senate steering committee also had an exclusive meeting recently with President Bush, who himself is trying to launch a sort of renaissance of fiscal conservatism by vetoing popular spending bills.
The Republican Study Committee now has 104 members, up 50 percent in the past five years.
And 12 of the 15 Republican freshman lawmakers joined the group this year, a clear sign that the small rookie class of Republicans still believes in a conservative future, even while its party struggles nationally.
In contrast, the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership has seen its membership decline 20 percent, from 59 lawmakers in the last Congress to 47 this year.
And seven of those moderates are retiring, further diminishing the power of the middle.
�We don�t need to be shy about what we believe in,� DeMint said in an interview. �We�re starting to act as Republicans around core principles, whether it�s SCHIP or earmarks.�
Democrats are happy to see the Republicans taking a sharp right turn, believing it makes winning independents in 2008 that much easier.
�Republicans can�t try to make fiscal responsibility their mantle when they are responsible for turning record surpluses into record deficits,� said Sarah Feinberg, spokeswoman for the House Democratic Caucus.
�They can�t whine about earmarks when earmarks exploded under their leadership and Democrats have cut them in half and brought accountability to the earmark process.�
The renewed influence by conservatives in the House and Senate Republican caucuses appears to be disconnected from recent poll results.
According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Nov. 4, Americans favor Democrats in handling the economy, 50 percent to 35 percent, and on taxes, 46 percent to 40 percent, showing that Democrats have gained an edge on fiscal issues usually dominated by Republicans.
Independents are also disgruntled. In a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll last month, 63 percent of independents disapproved of the president�s performance.
Some Republican congressional aides privately admit that the energized push for conservative issues amounts to a �minority strategy� in which the party must reclaim its identity after being thrown out of power on Capitol Hill before making a serious run at regaining the majority.
�The far right is not going to bring the Republican Party back to power,� said Charlie Bass, president of the Main Street Republican Partnership and a former GOP House member from New Hampshire.
�The districts that were lost were moderate districts. The far right is big on bluster but short on results.�
Congressional Republican leaders, meanwhile, have been coordinating their efforts with some of the leading minds of the party, including pollsters Frank Luntz and David Winston, and Pat Toomey, president of the conservative Club for Growth.
Republican aides say they�ve also had strategy meetings with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).
At its core, this is an effort to re-energize a party demoralized after last year�s elections.
�We need to do a better job of communicating our core beliefs,� said Danny Diaz, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. �We had strayed from the core beliefs that got us the majority.�
Still, the strategy of flexing conservative credentials at the expense of the middle carries great risk.
�The image of the party message being dictated by a small group of doctrinaire senators is not something that people at the top of the ticket are going to want,� said Ross K. Baker, a political science professor and congressional expert at Rutgers University.
�This [strategy] springs up when a party is in the minority and prospects are bleak, so it�s unsurprising they�re having a reawakening.�
Indeed, Republicans are finding it easier to create a unified front on spending, immigration and national security as the minority party because they don�t have to legislate, don�t control the congressional schedule and are outnumbered at virtually every turn.
�There were times in the majority when conservatives disagreed with leadership, but there have been very few of those times this year,� said Hensarling, chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
�There�s nothing like getting hit over the head with a two-by-four to get someone�s attention. The American people thought Republicans weren�t acting like Republicans.�
To be sure, conservatives have always had significant influence within the Republican leadership in both chambers.
But when it came time to cut deals on spending or to craft bipartisan legislation, they often felt like they were cut out of the process.
Many Republicans still regret the arm twisting on their side of the aisle that led them to vote in favor of the Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, creating one of the biggest entitlement programs of all time.
Now Republicans are getting their sea legs as a minority party on Capitol Hill, and their rabble-rousers serve a useful purpose in opposing the Democratic majority, especially on spending bills.
Democrats have little chance to override any of the president�s threatened vetoes of appropriations measures, thanks in large part to Republican unity on the issue.
�These fights on spending are important for us to re-establish our credentials,� said House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). �The Democrats have made it easy for us to engage in that fight.�
Democrats have indeed been frustrated in both chambers by Republican procedural maneuvers, but they believe voters will see this as obstructionism.
�It became evident months ago that the only play left in their playbook was to attack Democrats on taxing and spending,� said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
�They needed to shore up what�s left of their base. President Bush and Republicans have engaged in a hypocritical series of attacks on spending issues. The president only recently rediscovered the veto.�
2010 gold rush 1849 map.
vallabhu
02-04 01:10 PM
Hi guys, How can i find out processing times for I290 B on I140 denial from Texas service center.
My appeal for Motion to reopen (Appeal to Commissioner) reached them on 1/25/08 and I saw LUD on 2/1/08.
My appeal for Motion to reopen (Appeal to Commissioner) reached them on 1/25/08 and I saw LUD on 2/1/08.
more...
qualified_trash
08-28 10:31 PM
I got my 8th year renewal, 3rd time with the same employer. The company only had to pay USD 190.
hair California Gold Rush Towns
H1Girl
03-13 01:05 AM
Here is my scenario...
1. Applied my first EAD thru some lawyer (hence G-28)
2. I am planning to renew it on "my own"
Can I renew EAD without Attroney help... I know the answer "YES" but the main question is... do I need to inform USCIS saying that I want to withdraw my lawyer's and hence G-28 which was filed along with my first EAD?
If anyone are sucessful, please help me...My question is not on how to self apply EAD..My question is whether we need to inform USCIS about G-28...
1. Applied my first EAD thru some lawyer (hence G-28)
2. I am planning to renew it on "my own"
Can I renew EAD without Attroney help... I know the answer "YES" but the main question is... do I need to inform USCIS saying that I want to withdraw my lawyer's and hence G-28 which was filed along with my first EAD?
If anyone are sucessful, please help me...My question is not on how to self apply EAD..My question is whether we need to inform USCIS about G-28...
more...
GC_Optimist
09-11 09:44 PM
Approximately how many labor applications were filed each day for EB3-India. ?
Assuming around 5-10 each day and around 300 days in a year . it would
be around 3000 . Considering that there was minor downturn in 2001-2002
year i'm assuming that Cut-Off dates should be moving faster for EB3-I.
Note: I'm in EB3 India category and trying to make a calculated guess.
Assuming around 5-10 each day and around 300 days in a year . it would
be around 3000 . Considering that there was minor downturn in 2001-2002
year i'm assuming that Cut-Off dates should be moving faster for EB3-I.
Note: I'm in EB3 India category and trying to make a calculated guess.
hot California Gold Rush Map
sbmallik
06-24 12:26 PM
A RFE is not related to the type of processing (regular / PP) but depends on how well the petition was prepared.
more...
house the California Gold Rush.
bharol
12-09 01:44 PM
Hi,
I go this email on the I 140 which was filed with PERM in 2006 and was approved but this I 140 was never used.
I used another 140 based on my regular Labor filed in 2004 and got my GC a
few months back.
Today I got this email regarding the abandoned 140. What does this mean?
-------------------- Copy paste of the mail ------------------------
The last processing action taken on your case Receipt Number: LIN0623XXXXX
Application Type: I140 , IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: This case has been received from the State Department with a request we review it.
On December 9, 2008, a USCIS office received this case from the State Department with a request that we review it. We will notify you when we complete our review, or if we need something from you. ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I go this email on the I 140 which was filed with PERM in 2006 and was approved but this I 140 was never used.
I used another 140 based on my regular Labor filed in 2004 and got my GC a
few months back.
Today I got this email regarding the abandoned 140. What does this mean?
-------------------- Copy paste of the mail ------------------------
The last processing action taken on your case Receipt Number: LIN0623XXXXX
Application Type: I140 , IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: This case has been received from the State Department with a request we review it.
On December 9, 2008, a USCIS office received this case from the State Department with a request that we review it. We will notify you when we complete our review, or if we need something from you. ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
tattoo gold rush 1849 pictures.
go_guy123
02-15 01:23 PM
Remember, the worse the grade, the more we love 'em. And where's Jeb Bush? He'd definitely get a D-. Thanks NUSA for making it easy for the pro-immigration folks as well.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/02/numbers-usa-grades-2012-presidential-hopefuls.html)
Jeb Bush D-...pro immigrant. I do see Jeb Bush or his son making a presidencial run in future. But they will only be for the CIR folks.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/02/numbers-usa-grades-2012-presidential-hopefuls.html)
Jeb Bush D-...pro immigrant. I do see Jeb Bush or his son making a presidencial run in future. But they will only be for the CIR folks.
more...
pictures hot 1848 California Gold Rush
krishmunn
04-14 12:09 PM
Has anyone traveled to India by Virgin Atlantic connecting to Jet Airways at London ?
The ticket is from Virgin Atlantic (through ticket, Jet is their Code Share) .
For baggage rules, Virgin website says --
"Any passengers travelling from India to the USA, (and vice-versa), with Virgin Atlantic for their entire journey, which involves a connecting flight via London Heathrow, will be entitled to an additional bag up to 23kg ."
I sent them an email before ticketing and they replied I am entitled to two piece.
When I contacted them after ticketing , they say I am entitled to one piece. Logic was London - Mumbai is by Jet Airways (but my argument is the ticket shows VS flight number).
Does any one have any experience ?
The ticket is from Virgin Atlantic (through ticket, Jet is their Code Share) .
For baggage rules, Virgin website says --
"Any passengers travelling from India to the USA, (and vice-versa), with Virgin Atlantic for their entire journey, which involves a connecting flight via London Heathrow, will be entitled to an additional bag up to 23kg ."
I sent them an email before ticketing and they replied I am entitled to two piece.
When I contacted them after ticketing , they say I am entitled to one piece. Logic was London - Mumbai is by Jet Airways (but my argument is the ticket shows VS flight number).
Does any one have any experience ?
dresses pictures 1848 California Gold
nmuralidhar
10-01 07:47 PM
My application reached 13 July at NSC nothing got back. Anyone in this boat?
more...
makeup california gold rush.
Blog Feeds
05-07 02:20 PM
Ever the optimist and trying her best to think happy thoughts, Tinker Bell, the world's most famous faerie, has been flying over Washington this week. She soared into town, lifted up by throngs of May Day marchers who believed popular revulsion to Arizona's "Papers, please" law would finally jolt politicians into enacting comprehensive immigration reform. Hailing from the country of Neverland, Tinker flew in solidarity with the marchers, alarmed that she had entered the country without inspection and without papers, and that all she had in her pocket was faerie dust. Then she plummeted, almost to the ground, as she...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/05/tinker-bells-immigration-solution.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/05/tinker-bells-immigration-solution.html)
girlfriend Detour to the California Gold
Blog Feeds
05-21 09:50 PM
The USCIS, on May 18, 2009, once again provided an update on the number of filings for H-1B petitions for the fiscal year 2010 program.
It announced that it has received approximately 45,500 H-1B petitions counting toward the Congressionally-mandated 65,000 cap. It continues to accept petitions subject to the general cap.
I can report personally that the most recent H-1B regular cap I-129 petition that I filed was filed on May 11 and it was approved on May 15 � premium processed.
Also, the USCIS announced that is has received approximately 20,000 petitions for aliens with advanced degrees, consistent with its prior update and it reconfirmed that it is still accepting advanced degree petitions because it assumes that not all the petitions it received are approvable.
It�s beginning to look like the cap isn�t going to be reached any time soon and, who knows, maybe not at all this fiscal year.
More... (http://www.philadelphiaimmigrationlawyerblog.com/2009/05/h1b_cap_update_from_the_uscis.html)
It announced that it has received approximately 45,500 H-1B petitions counting toward the Congressionally-mandated 65,000 cap. It continues to accept petitions subject to the general cap.
I can report personally that the most recent H-1B regular cap I-129 petition that I filed was filed on May 11 and it was approved on May 15 � premium processed.
Also, the USCIS announced that is has received approximately 20,000 petitions for aliens with advanced degrees, consistent with its prior update and it reconfirmed that it is still accepting advanced degree petitions because it assumes that not all the petitions it received are approvable.
It�s beginning to look like the cap isn�t going to be reached any time soon and, who knows, maybe not at all this fiscal year.
More... (http://www.philadelphiaimmigrationlawyerblog.com/2009/05/h1b_cap_update_from_the_uscis.html)
hairstyles gold rush california map.
test101
07-08 02:13 PM
I think immigration firms will stay out of it for the sake of the law suit. However companies like MS, oracle, and hospitals maybe should join.
Macaca
11-14 09:30 PM
Congress Needs Both Comity and Accomplishments (http://aei.org/publications/pubID.27104,filter.all/pub_detail.asp) By Norman J. Ornstein | Roll Call, November 14, 2007
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
ronnie0479
10-02 11:41 AM
do you get a FP notice only if you file AP and EAD along with your 485 ?
FP is for 485. so even if you dont apply for AP or EAD, u should still get FP notice.
FP is for 485. so even if you dont apply for AP or EAD, u should still get FP notice.
No comments:
Post a Comment