balu_g
01-06 08:07 AM
Hi Mayra75, Yes this is a bad situation for immigrants. Hope it will be resolved in 2006. If you dont have any other option, you can look for a job in a University or a Non-profit organization which does not come under the cap.
wallpaper Visible Earth: Space Station
Edison99
09-30 12:15 PM
Thanks for the link!
Central Board of Excise and Customs (http://www.cbec.gov.in/)
Personally we never had problem carrying personal Jewelery.
Central Board of Excise and Customs (http://www.cbec.gov.in/)
Personally we never had problem carrying personal Jewelery.
sgorla
02-23 04:25 PM
NV does not allow in-state
OH does allow in-state
AFAIK States that do not have state income tax do not let H4 visa holders pay instate and make Green Card as a requirement for instate qualification.
WA state is a good example of the above situation. I don't know about TX,FL,SD,NV,AK,WY which also do not have state income taxes. You might want to look at the instate qualification website for the state you are interested in.
MD doesn't allow instate
DC has no instate concept at all :)
VA,NY,CA,MA,IL allow instate as of my knowledge.
OH does allow in-state
AFAIK States that do not have state income tax do not let H4 visa holders pay instate and make Green Card as a requirement for instate qualification.
WA state is a good example of the above situation. I don't know about TX,FL,SD,NV,AK,WY which also do not have state income taxes. You might want to look at the instate qualification website for the state you are interested in.
MD doesn't allow instate
DC has no instate concept at all :)
VA,NY,CA,MA,IL allow instate as of my knowledge.
2011 earth view space station
akred
06-03 02:17 PM
akred,
I am not refuting that statistics is a discipline within Mathematics. Just that that particular DOL web page doesn't give the list of disciplines considered as STEM.
The disciplines are in the right hand column on that page.
I think what you are looking for is information classified by degree name. That level of detail is not available.
I am not refuting that statistics is a discipline within Mathematics. Just that that particular DOL web page doesn't give the list of disciplines considered as STEM.
The disciplines are in the right hand column on that page.
I think what you are looking for is information classified by degree name. That level of detail is not available.
more...
akhilmahajan
08-16 03:52 PM
I will like to suggest is, try to talk to them nicely and try to make them understand what they have talked to you before filing GC.
Otherwise u dont have any choice, definitely u cant risk being rude with them. They can still hurt you as they still have all the cards in their hand.
About the G328 form, i have read in other posts that for some companies HR have signed for the applicant.
It seems like every company has their own way of filling GC. I am sure u are not the first one who are filing GC through your company.
I hoep this helps.
Otherwise u dont have any choice, definitely u cant risk being rude with them. They can still hurt you as they still have all the cards in their hand.
About the G328 form, i have read in other posts that for some companies HR have signed for the applicant.
It seems like every company has their own way of filling GC. I am sure u are not the first one who are filing GC through your company.
I hoep this helps.
srikondoji
09-14 07:21 PM
Guys,
Post a link to the recorded radio interview. I want to listen tonight.
--sri
Post a link to the recorded radio interview. I want to listen tonight.
--sri
more...
surge
02-18 05:18 PM
Hi Surge
You should then consult a lawyer.
i did. different lawyers said different thing so i do not know who is right and who is wrong.
should i make an infopass appointment and idscusss it with them?
You should then consult a lawyer.
i did. different lawyers said different thing so i do not know who is right and who is wrong.
should i make an infopass appointment and idscusss it with them?
2010 International Space Station
h1techSlave
01-07 02:56 PM
it is stoop, not stop :)
You know you're getting old when you stop to tie your shoelaces and wonder what else you could do while you're down there.
You know you're getting old when you stop to tie your shoelaces and wonder what else you could do while you're down there.
more...
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
hair Drifting around the Earth
cbpds
09-01 07:12 PM
Even children in India are not looking after their parents properly as our parents looked after theirs.
more...
casper21
07-29 12:56 PM
As long as your marriage date is prior to your 485 approval date and the dates are current(means your priority date) you can apply for spouse 485.
I am also in the same boat and I am waiting my priority date to be current.
I got my 485 approved
Thanks,
Bill
Hey Bill,
If my priority date is current, spouse's priority is should be current as well? right? Does she will have different priority date?
Another question, how is your I 485 is approved when your priority date is not current?
(Sorry for asking.... bit confused....) :confused: :confused: :confused:
I am also in the same boat and I am waiting my priority date to be current.
I got my 485 approved
Thanks,
Bill
Hey Bill,
If my priority date is current, spouse's priority is should be current as well? right? Does she will have different priority date?
Another question, how is your I 485 is approved when your priority date is not current?
(Sorry for asking.... bit confused....) :confused: :confused: :confused:
hot space centre
WeShallOvercome
07-30 02:34 PM
You are correct, they get a copy.
but we do get the original FP notice , right?
but we do get the original FP notice , right?
more...
house Picture of the space shuttle
Hinglish
01-08 12:59 AM
I appreciate your interest in my posts :)
tattoo house space station
puskeygadha
07-17 03:56 PM
They give very generic answer to clients
i dont think they care about individuals...
if they continue like this they will loose business..lots of people are
suffering
i dont think they care about individuals...
if they continue like this they will loose business..lots of people are
suffering
more...
pictures Space Station.
peer123
04-04 04:54 AM
,,,,, others please weigh in
dresses Space Station.
dingox100
04-20 08:44 PM
my EAD is about to expire on may 6th. I applied for EAD renewal in january , i had around 90 days. My application package along with the cheque came back to me after 1month because I forgot to sign the application form.. Dumb right....
Then i signed my form and send it back to TSC . So i was in a bad situation becuase my employer said if i do not get my EAD card before it expires, they will have to lay me off. So here is what i did , i contacted my local Congressman's office through their website and raised a request to expedite my case and stated if i do not get my EAD i will loose my job.
Surprisingly i got a mail from the congressman office that they are looking into my case and they will take it forward... and after a week i got a mail from USCIS saying my case is approved . So if someone is in my kind of situation its better to go through congressman or senator rather than info pass all that route.. Politics and politicians speak in a different language and so it always wins!!!
Then i signed my form and send it back to TSC . So i was in a bad situation becuase my employer said if i do not get my EAD card before it expires, they will have to lay me off. So here is what i did , i contacted my local Congressman's office through their website and raised a request to expedite my case and stated if i do not get my EAD i will loose my job.
Surprisingly i got a mail from the congressman office that they are looking into my case and they will take it forward... and after a week i got a mail from USCIS saying my case is approved . So if someone is in my kind of situation its better to go through congressman or senator rather than info pass all that route.. Politics and politicians speak in a different language and so it always wins!!!
more...
makeup Space Station From Earth
WillIBLucky
12-13 12:58 PM
That was my thought process too. If the immigration systems is corrected then I believe EB3 and EB2 will become current. Then it does not make a difference. Even late 90's the retrogression was there for both Eb2 and Eb3. IN 1999 they opened up for Y2K and then again retrogressed in 2001-2002 I believe. But again after that it was all current till the current retrogression.
Given the gross uncertainity about retrogression and GC, I would not give undue importance to the GC timeline factor. Eventually job / skills are more important than the distant GC.
I was in a similar situation a few months back. I abandoned my GC process with my former employer for a new and much more promising job. I am yet to start the GC process with the new employer. For me JOB was the deciding factor.
My reasoning was simple:
In the current scenario with a broken immigration system if we are to maintain our sanity and move on in our careers he, we have to stop thinking that GC is above everything. Work on it as much as you can, but do not trade it in for good career moves.
Do what you feel is best for you and what you can make peace with. My 2 cents..
Given the gross uncertainity about retrogression and GC, I would not give undue importance to the GC timeline factor. Eventually job / skills are more important than the distant GC.
I was in a similar situation a few months back. I abandoned my GC process with my former employer for a new and much more promising job. I am yet to start the GC process with the new employer. For me JOB was the deciding factor.
My reasoning was simple:
In the current scenario with a broken immigration system if we are to maintain our sanity and move on in our careers he, we have to stop thinking that GC is above everything. Work on it as much as you can, but do not trade it in for good career moves.
Do what you feel is best for you and what you can make peace with. My 2 cents..
girlfriend The space station is made up
smccrea
03-14 05:31 PM
What if a person creates a company (a c-corp) say to run a restaurant and works in it. I know a foreign national can own a corporation in the U.S.; but are there any estrictions on working in your own business?
hairstyles Space Station Mir,
sweet23guyin
02-13 12:47 PM
Don't be LAZZY...activity on IV is easy
satishku_2000
10-05 07:03 PM
"How big of a risk would it be to file on EB2? If they reject me for EB2, would it hurt my chances on applying again on EB3? How much time would I lose in case of a rejection?"
Your PD being what it is ..I dont think it really matters in terms of time whether its EB2 or EB3. Honestly I think the best bet is to have an approved 140 ASAP.
Your date becoming current anytime without congressional action is very rare. But Lets assume there is a congressional action and you have a problem with your 140 .. your petition cannot be approved even though your date becomes current. Another important thing to consider is A2P at 140 stage, it depends on your company's size , profitability ...
One can present a contradictory argument much more eloquently too.
You have to keep in my mind that "there is no premium processing available for 140 now".
Convetional wisdom of my attorney is that dont attract unnecessary scrutiny, so far he has been proven right in my case ....
Good luck with your journey .. you have a pretty long road ahead of ya
Your PD being what it is ..I dont think it really matters in terms of time whether its EB2 or EB3. Honestly I think the best bet is to have an approved 140 ASAP.
Your date becoming current anytime without congressional action is very rare. But Lets assume there is a congressional action and you have a problem with your 140 .. your petition cannot be approved even though your date becomes current. Another important thing to consider is A2P at 140 stage, it depends on your company's size , profitability ...
One can present a contradictory argument much more eloquently too.
You have to keep in my mind that "there is no premium processing available for 140 now".
Convetional wisdom of my attorney is that dont attract unnecessary scrutiny, so far he has been proven right in my case ....
Good luck with your journey .. you have a pretty long road ahead of ya
neel_gump
05-22 12:02 PM
FAQs seems to be a great idea people.
No comments:
Post a Comment