Hermione
10-02 06:00 PM
Labor category has little to do with AC21. Your responsibilties should be 'similar', which is kind of a vague term, which means USCIS would generally not mess with anything that has enough of the same words used in description.
wallpaper Matthew Broderick
Blog Feeds
03-10 07:20 AM
St. Jude Children's Hospital is known throughout the world for its groundbreaking research relating to childhood cancer. One of their stars is Australian-born Charles Mullighan who has gained attention for discovering what is described as "the missing piece" in the puzzle of genetic mutations that contribute to the onset of childhood leukemia. Mullighan recently described his work to the Memphis Business Journal: �The most common childhood cancer,� says Mullighan, �is ALL, a genetic disease.� He explains that ALL stops normal white blood cells, which constitute the body�s natural immune system, from growing; without adequate natural immunity, infections eventually overwhelm and...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/immigrant-of-the-day-charles-mullighan-cancer-researcher.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/immigrant-of-the-day-charles-mullighan-cancer-researcher.html)
Macaca
05-19 07:30 AM
A New Reality in Washington, but Can It Last? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19assess.html) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
2011 Enter David (Matthew Broderick
fide_champ
05-22 03:27 PM
Hi Friends,
I have approved I-140 (PD Sep,2007) but recently my H1 extension was denied so had to come on H4, so now what will happen to my GC, do I have to start from scratch OR my I-140 is still valid once I come back on H1 (with different employer).
Please respond
why was your H1-extension denied? If your employer supports, you can still file I-485 but he has to hold on to it till the date becomes current.
I have approved I-140 (PD Sep,2007) but recently my H1 extension was denied so had to come on H4, so now what will happen to my GC, do I have to start from scratch OR my I-140 is still valid once I come back on H1 (with different employer).
Please respond
why was your H1-extension denied? If your employer supports, you can still file I-485 but he has to hold on to it till the date becomes current.
more...
SPAD3S
08-19 11:36 PM
yea not bad
junior1982
03-01 07:38 PM
Hi,
My H1B Visa expires in Aug 2009 (it was after first extension, till date i have already consumed 3 years 6 months in US). I have following questions,
1. After filing the extension next month, Can I leave to India immediately after getting the receiept (before approval). I might plan to come back to US after a year or so! I will be working at offshore for the same company.
2. If i leave a gap of 365 days, would i regain full 6 years after my re-entry in USA with the existing Visa itself?
I am very sorry if this is a repeated question, i did spend ample time investigating this query and then decided to post this in a thread.
Thanks,
Vibav
My H1B Visa expires in Aug 2009 (it was after first extension, till date i have already consumed 3 years 6 months in US). I have following questions,
1. After filing the extension next month, Can I leave to India immediately after getting the receiept (before approval). I might plan to come back to US after a year or so! I will be working at offshore for the same company.
2. If i leave a gap of 365 days, would i regain full 6 years after my re-entry in USA with the existing Visa itself?
I am very sorry if this is a repeated question, i did spend ample time investigating this query and then decided to post this in a thread.
Thanks,
Vibav
more...
anilsal
05-23 08:19 AM
Use your gmail account.
2010 Matthew Broderick, Julie
Blog Feeds
01-15 11:20 AM
In the early 1960s, President Eisenhower worked with the Catholic Church to airlift 14,000+ unaccompanied minors from Cuba to America in an effort called Operation Pedro Pan. In a similar effort, President Obama is working with the Catholic Church to possibly airlift thousands of orphans from Haiti and allow them to remain in the US in a humanitarian parole status. Obviously, this will be a huge challenge and it is always a difficult decision to remove children from their homeland, but the future for orphans in Haiti seems very grim.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/catholic-church-white-house-planning-to-airlift-orphans-from-haiti.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/catholic-church-white-house-planning-to-airlift-orphans-from-haiti.html)
more...
madhurib
01-26 10:54 PM
please reply!!!!
hair Matthew Broderick
goel_ar
03-23 03:36 PM
Good news. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) recently issued guidance on the new H-1B amendment that limits Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) recipients� ability to hire H-1B workers. The USCIS confirmed that the new H-1B amendment does not apply to H-1B extensions for current employees with the same employer.
"EAWA does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking to change the status of a
beneficiary already working for the employer in another work-authorized
category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension
of stay for a current employee with the same employer."
"EAWA does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking to change the status of a
beneficiary already working for the employer in another work-authorized
category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension
of stay for a current employee with the same employer."
more...
mannubhai
01-28 12:42 PM
Now a days VFS is not releasing appointment dates more than 2 - 2.5 weeks in advance. I am not aware of any specific time of the day when these become available.
hot behind Matthew Broderick
portem1
01-19 06:35 AM
I am having a problem and dont know where to start on this one, my experience in c# programming is average and was hoping for some advice on this subject. I have a disc image (an exact duplicate of a 40gb hard disc drive) the format is a dd image.
My task requires me to programmatically read through the files on this image, compare file extensions and recognise certain file types on the drive. Is this possible? I cannot find anyone who has attempted this on the internet and would appreciate any guidance to get the ball rolling.
Thank you
My task requires me to programmatically read through the files on this image, compare file extensions and recognise certain file types on the drive. Is this possible? I cannot find anyone who has attempted this on the internet and would appreciate any guidance to get the ball rolling.
Thank you
more...
house Matthew Broderick, Whoopi Goldberg, Moira Kelly. The Lion King 1.5
Blog Feeds
03-04 08:10 AM
The concept of separation of powers, and of "checks and balances", is as old as Ancient Greece and the Roman Republic. Our Founding Fathers modeled the U.S. Constitution on principles derived from Enlightenment philosophers like Montesquieu who believed that "the judiciary was generally seen as the most important of powers, independent and unchecked..." He specified that "the independence of the judiciary has to be real, and not apparent merely." Unfortunately, in a stunning departure from such principles, under a law enacted in 1996, "discretionary" decisions of the USCIS and the BIA cannot be reviewed by the Federal Courts. And because...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/lack-of-checks-and-balances-in-removal-proceedings.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/lack-of-checks-and-balances-in-removal-proceedings.html)
tattoo and the lion king wasn#39;t
Blog Feeds
01-21 09:50 AM
A fat report and one with some helpful recommendations and statistics. Here are some of the more interesting items I found - - Of the top 150 H-1B employers, 24 were deemed H-1B dependent (a high percentage of workers on the H-1B) and 9 had prior H-1B violations. - Real earnings growth for US workers in occupations with proportionately more H-1B workers - particularly IT - was actually much stronger than the general US worker. - Engineers and IT professionals on H-1Bs were more than twice as likely as their US counterparts to have advanced degrees. - The proportion of...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/government-accountability-office-releases-report-on-h-1b-program.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/government-accountability-office-releases-report-on-h-1b-program.html)
more...
pictures The Lion King, Matthew
kds
01-19 03:09 PM
Hi,
I joined Company A in Oct 2008 and company A applied for my Perm Application in Jul 09. I joined another company in Oct 09 and now i want to join Company A again. can i use the same PERM application or do i need to file a new PERM application. I job description and title is going to be the same. Do i need to transfer my H1B again to Company A. Please help me with these questions.
I joined Company A in Oct 2008 and company A applied for my Perm Application in Jul 09. I joined another company in Oct 09 and now i want to join Company A again. can i use the same PERM application or do i need to file a new PERM application. I job description and title is going to be the same. Do i need to transfer my H1B again to Company A. Please help me with these questions.
dresses Matthew Broderick in a
juan
09-06 04:11 PM
Can someone on H1-B visa buy an investment property and rent it out?
more...
makeup /Matthew broderick dead
illusions
07-18 12:29 PM
The reversal that they are talking about is the July02 bulletin that said that they will not be accepting any applications as for the bulletin that came out in June for the Month of July (where the PD's were current). Nothing to worry about. Relax and continue with your filings. :)
girlfriend joined Matthew Broderick
Blog Feeds
08-11 10:10 AM
In 2008, all four Oscar winners in the acting categories went to foreign-born persons: Daniel Day-Lewis (Best Actor), Marion Cotillard (Best Actress), Javier Bardem (Best Supporting Actor) and Tilda Swinton (Best Supporting Actress). Of course, these actors were all selected by their colleagues, and what do they know about acting? Imagine if the Oscar winners were voted upon by recognized experts in the field, i.e., the immigration examiners at the California Service Center (CSC). Fat chance that the Oscar winners would be a bunch of foreigners! As an article in today's Los Angeles Times reveals, Hollywood is in an uproar...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/08/hollywood-vs-uscis.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/08/hollywood-vs-uscis.html)
hairstyles Matthew Broderick
gc_on_demand
08-07 10:03 AM
Notice Receipt of old I 140 should be attached.
Macaca
10-27 08:32 AM
Voters' contempt for Congress rises (http://www.mercurynews.com/search/ci_7297497?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com) POLL: PELOSI'S NUMBERS TAKE ANOTHER DIVE By Frank Davies (fdavies@mercurynews.com or (202) 662-8921) | Mercury News Washington Bureau, 10/27/2007
WASHINGTON - California voters continue to disapprove of Congress even more than they do of President Bush, and for the first time Speaker Nancy Pelosi's ratings are more negative than positive, according to a Field Poll released today.
The poll found that 22 percent of state voters approve of Congress' job performance, with 64 percent disapproving. The discontent was bipartisan, with 70 percent of Republicans, 63 percent of independents and 58 percent of Democrats giving Congress negative marks.
Those findings, taken in a survey of 1,201 voters from Oct. 11 through Oct. 21, track national surveys. A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll during the same period also found a 22 percent approval rating for Congress. A CBS Poll registered a 27 percent approval rating.
Bush earned a 27 percent approval rating from voters in the same Field Poll.
Political analysts give several reasons for the low marks: Democratic voters' dissatisfaction over the inability to change Iraq war policy, Republicans' opposition to Pelosi and other Democratic leaders, and a sense by many voters that Congress can't come to grips with tough issues such as immigration.
"Republican reaction has remained about the same this year, but the real trend is that rank-and-file Democrats and non-partisans are displeased because they expected more from the Democratic Congress," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll.
Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, earned a 48 percent approval rating in March, two months after Democrats took over Congress. That dropped to 39 percent in August and 35 percent in October, with 40 percent disapproving and 25 percent registering no opinion.
"Iraq is the anchor weighing down Bush," DiCamillo said, "and now it's an anchor on Pelosi because of the complete inability of Congress to change course on the war."
Pelosi and other Democratic leaders held meetings in the last week to find ways to improve their "message" about what they call the New Direction Congress, highlighting such legislation as the minimum wage increase and ethics reform.
Despite the low marks for Congress, Republicans had little to cheer about in the new Field Poll. Voters gave an approval rating of 34 percent to Democrats in Congress, and 20 percent to Republicans.
Only 29 percent of Republican voters in California approved of the GOP performance in Congress, with 53 percent registering disapproval.
"That 2-to-1 disapproval by their own party really jumps out," DiCamillo said. "Republicans in Congress are now playing 'prevent defense' for Bush on the war and on domestic issues, and Republicans in this state do not approve of that."
The state's two senators, Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, earned higher marks than Pelosi and Congress overall, but the approval ratings for each senator dropped 10 percentage points since March.
The survey showed that 51 percent of all voters approved of Feinstein's job, with 31 percent disapproving. Boxer's approval rating was 44 percent positive and 35 percent negative.
WASHINGTON - California voters continue to disapprove of Congress even more than they do of President Bush, and for the first time Speaker Nancy Pelosi's ratings are more negative than positive, according to a Field Poll released today.
The poll found that 22 percent of state voters approve of Congress' job performance, with 64 percent disapproving. The discontent was bipartisan, with 70 percent of Republicans, 63 percent of independents and 58 percent of Democrats giving Congress negative marks.
Those findings, taken in a survey of 1,201 voters from Oct. 11 through Oct. 21, track national surveys. A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll during the same period also found a 22 percent approval rating for Congress. A CBS Poll registered a 27 percent approval rating.
Bush earned a 27 percent approval rating from voters in the same Field Poll.
Political analysts give several reasons for the low marks: Democratic voters' dissatisfaction over the inability to change Iraq war policy, Republicans' opposition to Pelosi and other Democratic leaders, and a sense by many voters that Congress can't come to grips with tough issues such as immigration.
"Republican reaction has remained about the same this year, but the real trend is that rank-and-file Democrats and non-partisans are displeased because they expected more from the Democratic Congress," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll.
Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, earned a 48 percent approval rating in March, two months after Democrats took over Congress. That dropped to 39 percent in August and 35 percent in October, with 40 percent disapproving and 25 percent registering no opinion.
"Iraq is the anchor weighing down Bush," DiCamillo said, "and now it's an anchor on Pelosi because of the complete inability of Congress to change course on the war."
Pelosi and other Democratic leaders held meetings in the last week to find ways to improve their "message" about what they call the New Direction Congress, highlighting such legislation as the minimum wage increase and ethics reform.
Despite the low marks for Congress, Republicans had little to cheer about in the new Field Poll. Voters gave an approval rating of 34 percent to Democrats in Congress, and 20 percent to Republicans.
Only 29 percent of Republican voters in California approved of the GOP performance in Congress, with 53 percent registering disapproval.
"That 2-to-1 disapproval by their own party really jumps out," DiCamillo said. "Republicans in Congress are now playing 'prevent defense' for Bush on the war and on domestic issues, and Republicans in this state do not approve of that."
The state's two senators, Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, earned higher marks than Pelosi and Congress overall, but the approval ratings for each senator dropped 10 percentage points since March.
The survey showed that 51 percent of all voters approved of Feinstein's job, with 31 percent disapproving. Boxer's approval rating was 44 percent positive and 35 percent negative.
obelix
08-21 06:09 PM
Sorry for the cross posting.
My papers were sent on June 21st, but they were receipted only on June 27th. Turns out USCIS returned my $1000 for premium processing :(.
My lawyer said they talked to USCIS and USCIS asked them to re-file with proof of receipt.
Did anyone who filed in end June have their 140 premium processing returned?
My papers were sent on June 21st, but they were receipted only on June 27th. Turns out USCIS returned my $1000 for premium processing :(.
My lawyer said they talked to USCIS and USCIS asked them to re-file with proof of receipt.
Did anyone who filed in end June have their 140 premium processing returned?
No comments:
Post a Comment