485Mbe4001
11-18 07:28 PM
I would suggest trying for EB2 if possible. Due to the recent change in the visa allocation from vertical to horizontal most of the countries in EB 3 will be affected and movement will be slow. I dont know the number of applicants from Russia but dont expect any additional visa due to spillover. We have an applicant from Russia in our company, he applied in Eb2 and received his GC in 2 and a half years. Most of the EB3s are still rotting waiting for 4-6yrs.
I have H1 visa and my company started processing my GG. They published some ads, and in August applied for the LC. It turned out that they used EB3. They said that LC would be ready by February next year. Then it will take 4 years minimum for other steps. I was very surprised that I was EB3 but not EB2.
I have couple of questions:
1. How long does it take if to process it using EB3... 4 years, 5 years?
2. How long does it take if to process it using EB2? I am from Russia.
3. Is it possible to switch to EB2 somehow?
4. If I apply one more time now using Eb2, would it be faster? I will lose time for LC processing.
5. At what step of GC processing can I change a compamy that I work for?
Thank you
Michael
I have H1 visa and my company started processing my GG. They published some ads, and in August applied for the LC. It turned out that they used EB3. They said that LC would be ready by February next year. Then it will take 4 years minimum for other steps. I was very surprised that I was EB3 but not EB2.
I have couple of questions:
1. How long does it take if to process it using EB3... 4 years, 5 years?
2. How long does it take if to process it using EB2? I am from Russia.
3. Is it possible to switch to EB2 somehow?
4. If I apply one more time now using Eb2, would it be faster? I will lose time for LC processing.
5. At what step of GC processing can I change a compamy that I work for?
Thank you
Michael
wallpaper friends quotes in spanish.
diptam
08-14 02:04 PM
If this Robin Williams google his name he will get too many Hits and will be amazed to see how popular/famous he is among immigrant community just by working as a mail receiver at USCIS.
Poor fellow - Polls got created in his name :rolleyes:
i am 7:55 NSC r williams too... no receipt yet :(
Poor fellow - Polls got created in his name :rolleyes:
i am 7:55 NSC r williams too... no receipt yet :(
vaishnavilakshmi
07-17 05:16 PM
Hi !,
yeah,Point-D clearly states that the visas available for july applications and applicants earlier and from august priority dates are unavailable.Lets c how they consider us!Iam a july 2nd filer.
vaishu
yeah,Point-D clearly states that the visas available for july applications and applicants earlier and from august priority dates are unavailable.Lets c how they consider us!Iam a july 2nd filer.
vaishu
2011 est friend quotes for
add78
05-01 10:49 AM
I just got my Labor approved (PD - 2/22/2008) . Attorneys are working on filing I-140.
1. Shall I wait for I-140 PP to re-instate or go ahead with normal processing?
2. Is there 'ANY' chance that my PD will be current before I get I-140 approval when filed through normal processing?
Thanks,
Ag
1. Do not delay you i-140 application. Your Labor will expire after 180 days of its approval. You can file I-140 normal now, and if PP goes in effect, you can pay the additional fee and convert it to PP.
2. Doesn't matter as of now. Until USCIS prohibits concurrent filing, you can still file I-485 even if your I-140 is pending, if the dates open up in the summer.
1. Shall I wait for I-140 PP to re-instate or go ahead with normal processing?
2. Is there 'ANY' chance that my PD will be current before I get I-140 approval when filed through normal processing?
Thanks,
Ag
1. Do not delay you i-140 application. Your Labor will expire after 180 days of its approval. You can file I-140 normal now, and if PP goes in effect, you can pay the additional fee and convert it to PP.
2. Doesn't matter as of now. Until USCIS prohibits concurrent filing, you can still file I-485 even if your I-140 is pending, if the dates open up in the summer.
more...
indyanguy
01-14 09:15 PM
Why dont we start an entrepreneur thread here on IV. I know it does not go in line with IV's goals, I can set up a forum real quick and we can get a group going there.
Sounds like a good idea to me. As far as I know, there are a lot of IV members showing interest in this topic.
Sounds like a good idea to me. As far as I know, there are a lot of IV members showing interest in this topic.
GC_Optimist
08-16 11:03 PM
I was told by my attorneys para leagal (so who knows if this is true or not....) that the ITIN number is the same number that will be issued in the form of ssn.
I think this is incorrect. Since both the formats are different and in my
application we validate SSN . which has completly different logic.
Each number of SSN conveys a particular detail about the SSN. Where
as we capture TIN also but that validation is completly different.
I think this is incorrect. Since both the formats are different and in my
application we validate SSN . which has completly different logic.
Each number of SSN conveys a particular detail about the SSN. Where
as we capture TIN also but that validation is completly different.
more...
fatjoe
09-05 01:02 PM
I guess, if you attorney represented you thru' form G-28, then it goes your attr. If you have not sent G28, then you will get it directly. Guys, correct me if I'm wrong.
2010 altquot;friendship quotes
shreekhand
08-05 10:29 AM
True. I had the same question at a one point but got a verbal reply from CBP that since the I-94 has the same number with a new expiry date (the one given on the I-797), you are safe in the records.
Frankly, I never understodd why they can't put the valid until on the I-797's I-94. If you are asked to show your proof of legal stay, you would also need to carry your I-797 everytime now !
Thanks for the reply.
The printed I-797 bottom left is for employee's records and the right part is the equivalent of the I-94. The officer did not put a seal with the expiry date (normally they put a seal on I-94 mentioning the visa type and expiry date) on the right part. If I am surrendering this part while leaving the country,how can they determine if I overstayed my I-94 date or not since there is no expiry date on the bottom right part.
Frankly, I never understodd why they can't put the valid until on the I-797's I-94. If you are asked to show your proof of legal stay, you would also need to carry your I-797 everytime now !
Thanks for the reply.
The printed I-797 bottom left is for employee's records and the right part is the equivalent of the I-94. The officer did not put a seal with the expiry date (normally they put a seal on I-94 mentioning the visa type and expiry date) on the right part. If I am surrendering this part while leaving the country,how can they determine if I overstayed my I-94 date or not since there is no expiry date on the bottom right part.
more...
pappu
09-23 01:32 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1999333595666035699&hl=en
Voice of America coverage. (in Hindi)
Voice of America coverage. (in Hindi)
hair friendship quotes with
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
more...
garybanz
10-28 09:43 AM
visit my blog, it has to-do's after GC.
enjoy
Can you give me the link to your blog?
enjoy
Can you give me the link to your blog?
hot friendship quotes in english.
myimmiv
02-26 10:09 AM
Any thoughts ?
more...
house i miss you friendship quotes.
acecupid
07-08 04:39 PM
Quickly, this is what I know so far. If you bring your wife here on H4 and then decide to work on EAD you will have to change her to F1 before you stop your H1B.
This is because she will have to be in status to aply for change of status (H4 to F1). Howeve she will be stuck in US after she will be on F1, because no US Emabassy will not stamp her F1 visa in India or elsewhere is you are in US and have applied for GC
So, no problme if she comes on H4, then switches to F1 (while you are still on H1B) and stays on F1 until your dates get current and you add her on your app. After she gets F1 from H4 though, she has to stay in the US
I agree with ssterian01. I read similar views from ron gotcher's forum about this issue. Even if wife is in pure non-immigrant category like F1, it is not a problem to add her to I-485 when dates become current. If you are on H1 and cannot mailtain H1 status for long and I-485 for wife has not been applied then you have little choice but to do a COS to F1 for wife.
This is because she will have to be in status to aply for change of status (H4 to F1). Howeve she will be stuck in US after she will be on F1, because no US Emabassy will not stamp her F1 visa in India or elsewhere is you are in US and have applied for GC
So, no problme if she comes on H4, then switches to F1 (while you are still on H1B) and stays on F1 until your dates get current and you add her on your app. After she gets F1 from H4 though, she has to stay in the US
I agree with ssterian01. I read similar views from ron gotcher's forum about this issue. Even if wife is in pure non-immigrant category like F1, it is not a problem to add her to I-485 when dates become current. If you are on H1 and cannot mailtain H1 status for long and I-485 for wife has not been applied then you have little choice but to do a COS to F1 for wife.
tattoo friendship quotes for facebook
sbabunle
11-06 05:54 PM
check_rd,
Its strange. I applied the same time. And I got it.
thanks
Its strange. I applied the same time. And I got it.
thanks
more...
pictures best friend quote glitter
h1techSlave
01-30 05:54 PM
this is a good suggestion from the admins and each and every one of us should spend a couple of minutes to update our profile with correct info.
dresses sad friendship quotes and
JunRN
08-12 03:49 PM
I think there are few applicants between July 4 to July 17 because this the period of limbo - no one knows what to do and waiting for the August VB. I would guess it would not even reach 10% of those who filed in July 1 to 3.
Another guess is that the filers for July 20 to 31 are also many but not as many as July 1 to 3 filers.
I would suspect that there will be many filers before the August 17 deadline and it could be as many as July 1 to 3 filers.
Another guess is that the filers for July 20 to 31 are also many but not as many as July 1 to 3 filers.
I would suspect that there will be many filers before the August 17 deadline and it could be as many as July 1 to 3 filers.
more...
makeup Those Friendship Quotes always
VisaHelp
07-26 09:21 AM
Sounds good, but I didn't apply for an extension. Do you think that makes a difference? I applied to TRANSFER my H1 from company A to company B. While waiting for the transfer my H1 expired. First of all, I didn't think I could apply for an extension while waiting for the transfer. But, even more importantly, I was told by my lawyers that I am not eligible for an extension because I applied for a green card through family, not employer.
I faced a similar situation during my first L1B extension. My L1 extension was filed, but not approved while my L1 visa expired. Per my (then) attorneys advice - it isn't an issue if the application to extend has been applied for. You can be out of status for upto 180 days in such situations. Only issue is if the extension is rejected during this period.
In the future, the receipt for having filed for extension before Visa expiry and/or Received Date on I-797 Notice of Action (approval) can be used as proof. Of course, travelling out of the country and back on a new visa removes the stigma of having been "out of status"
RFE is okay, but rejection is NOT! Do answer it (RFE) in time. Rejection can put you in trouble. Also if the period extends beyond 180 days due to RFE you will be in trouble ( I really doubt it happening but you never know)
I faced a similar situation during my first L1B extension. My L1 extension was filed, but not approved while my L1 visa expired. Per my (then) attorneys advice - it isn't an issue if the application to extend has been applied for. You can be out of status for upto 180 days in such situations. Only issue is if the extension is rejected during this period.
In the future, the receipt for having filed for extension before Visa expiry and/or Received Date on I-797 Notice of Action (approval) can be used as proof. Of course, travelling out of the country and back on a new visa removes the stigma of having been "out of status"
RFE is okay, but rejection is NOT! Do answer it (RFE) in time. Rejection can put you in trouble. Also if the period extends beyond 180 days due to RFE you will be in trouble ( I really doubt it happening but you never know)
girlfriend collage. friendship quotes
ras
02-08 08:18 PM
"- $195 for a 30 minute phone consultation
- $395 for a 60 minute phone or in-office consultation "
looks to be a bit high for consultation
Why dont you consult Prashanthi Reddy who is one of the Attorney's that answers IV Conference calls. Her consultation seems to be quite reasonable to my knowledge. ofcourse check with her anyway the consultation price. Also check with Shusterman, etc.
"I found one group -
EmployementLawGroup.net
And they are asking me
- $195 for a 30 minute phone consultation
- $395 for a 60 minute phone or in-office consultation
I don't know how much they are going ask to answer to my summons along with filing a new case .Tomorrow I'm going to send documents and then I'm going to have appointment with them.
For the time being I'm going ahead with them - If you guys know please advise me.
( I'm really not earned/earning much ) "
- $395 for a 60 minute phone or in-office consultation "
looks to be a bit high for consultation
Why dont you consult Prashanthi Reddy who is one of the Attorney's that answers IV Conference calls. Her consultation seems to be quite reasonable to my knowledge. ofcourse check with her anyway the consultation price. Also check with Shusterman, etc.
"I found one group -
EmployementLawGroup.net
And they are asking me
- $195 for a 30 minute phone consultation
- $395 for a 60 minute phone or in-office consultation
I don't know how much they are going ask to answer to my summons along with filing a new case .Tomorrow I'm going to send documents and then I'm going to have appointment with them.
For the time being I'm going ahead with them - If you guys know please advise me.
( I'm really not earned/earning much ) "
hairstyles friendship quotes that rhyme
ameryki
08-12 12:34 PM
Efiled for my wife May 17th to NSC got LIN number. No update so far. Next week will be 90 days.
varshadas
11-08 12:25 PM
I am not sure how you are seeing 14000 EB3 visa in totals. If you look at the table that says India, there are approx 8000 visas or so around Dec 02 for India alone. In addition, I believe the country quota is 7% and not 10% but I could be mistaken on that.
Since you would get approx 3000 EB3 visa's every year, that is why the PD is not moving.
Since you would get approx 3000 EB3 visa's every year, that is why the PD is not moving.
ngopikrishnan
06-24 10:51 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25356825/
No comments:
Post a Comment