joeshmoe
08-31 01:46 PM
I filed on June 5th, TSC.
FP done on July 24th
Got EAD for me and my wife about 3 weeks ago
I am EB3 ROW Dec 04
FP done on July 24th
Got EAD for me and my wife about 3 weeks ago
I am EB3 ROW Dec 04
wallpaper trees in rainforests and
rickyishere
02-27 01:52 PM
Hi All,
I am in the fourth year of mu H1b, and I need to start my GC process. My current employer is a consulting firm which provides services to a third party main client. My questions are :
a) is this a good time to file for GC given the fact that my company falls under employer-employee relationship memo?
b) I plan to go to India in summer and need to get my stamping. Will the new memo from USCIS affect my stamping? My current h1b expires in sept 2011.
c) If I apply for my GC before going to India in summer, does it affect point b ?
Thanks to anyone who can answer my questions.
Ricky
I am in the fourth year of mu H1b, and I need to start my GC process. My current employer is a consulting firm which provides services to a third party main client. My questions are :
a) is this a good time to file for GC given the fact that my company falls under employer-employee relationship memo?
b) I plan to go to India in summer and need to get my stamping. Will the new memo from USCIS affect my stamping? My current h1b expires in sept 2011.
c) If I apply for my GC before going to India in summer, does it affect point b ?
Thanks to anyone who can answer my questions.
Ricky
cinqsit
04-12 03:51 PM
Yes. Your dependents can go for a H4 visa stamping provided you (primary h1 beneficiary) were always in status. (which from your post looks like you were)
You will have to send your paystubs, latest h1 approval notice etc - with your family for the
h4 visa interview.
cinqsit
You will have to send your paystubs, latest h1 approval notice etc - with your family for the
h4 visa interview.
cinqsit
2011 Rainforest Orchids - Orchids
blacktongue
11-10 08:35 AM
Can we call them as many times we want or call once every 3 months?
What if you are not satisfied with answer or worried about case progress?
How reach level 2 officer?
What if you are not satisfied with answer or worried about case progress?
How reach level 2 officer?
more...
sapota
08-30 11:39 AM
Canada gives 50% credit for stay in canada using legal visa, prior to obtaining PR towards citizenship.
Thats great in my book if US implements similar. I already accumulated enough stay.:p But I am only being selfish. :rolleyes:
Thats great in my book if US implements similar. I already accumulated enough stay.:p But I am only being selfish. :rolleyes:
smartboy75
11-09 04:51 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ace7ec20cfbd4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
The I-131 Form update date shown by NSC is 10/18, whereas many of the folks are still awaiting their AP's...and even Texas says I-131 processing date current....So how come majority of them still waiting for AP ??
The I-131 Form update date shown by NSC is 10/18, whereas many of the folks are still awaiting their AP's...and even Texas says I-131 processing date current....So how come majority of them still waiting for AP ??
more...
balram79
03-26 02:02 PM
I resigned my job last year on Dec 15th 2006 by giving my employer a 2 weeks notice (dec 29th was supposed to be the last working day). A week later, i informed my employer that i won't be leaving them at which time, he suggested that i continue working as normal and that he would take care of un-doing the paper work. They had sent out a letter to INS to revoke my 797 even before my last working day with them. The HR contact has failed to follow-up and inform the INS of this development and am told last week that i have been out of status for 10 days now (March 10 was the day INS revoked my H1b). The company has accepted responsibility for this mess and are filing an accelerated H1b (premium) application this week. I had continued employment this whole time and never had any break in my payments. Are there any chances the INS won't put be back on H1 status with my company ?.
Experts .. please advice.
Experts .. please advice.
2010 Orchids in the lush rainforest
hemya
02-28 11:14 AM
Is your I140 approved?
more...
Blog Feeds
07-09 08:40 PM
Sweet! From the Arizona Republic: Seven political activists claiming their civil rights were violated after they were arrested and cited for protesting against Sheriff Joe Arpaio's immigration policies recently were awarded nearly $475,000 by Maricopa County. The settlement, reached this week, was nine times more than what the county's self-insured trust had originally authorized in February, and significantly higher than what the county planned to offer just days before the settlement, according to memos obtained by The Arizona Republic.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/court-orders-sheriff-joe-to-pay-half-million-dollars-to-protestors.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/court-orders-sheriff-joe-to-pay-half-million-dollars-to-protestors.html)
hair Orchids like this vanda are
nk0530
06-18 09:50 AM
I have a question about forming an LLC while being on H1B. I am entering into an agreement with an Incorporated company to provide my technical services to it and in return they need to give me a percentage of the revenue. Clearly, I cannot enter into this kind of arrangement as myself as I not authorized to work in the US. For that I am planning to form an LLC or an Incorporation and my company will enter into a contract with the other Incorporation. Is this legal or will this be construed as an effort to bypass H1B laws? I'll still be doing the daytime job and fulfilling my obligations that I have with the H1B sponsoring employer.
Please let me know your opinion.
Thanks.
Please let me know your opinion.
Thanks.
more...
hibworker
06-08 03:02 PM
If you have a valid I-94 i.e. not expired, you can apply for another I-539 to F1 - make sure to make the application stronger than last time.
If your I-94 is applied, you have no choice but to leave the country and get F1 visa in your home country and come back.
If your I-94 is applied, you have no choice but to leave the country and get F1 visa in your home country and come back.
hot Orchids are a Malaysian
vankadar
07-09 01:30 PM
Hi,
I got conflicting answers for this questions so I thought it would be best to post my question here.
This is the scenario
Company A
I am filing green card with this company based on **FUTURE EMPLOYMENT**
LABOUR APPROVED,I-140 PENDING,PRIORITY DATE : JAN 2009
Company B (Present Employer)
Labor Approved (Priority date : Aug 2009)
Now the question is Can I NOW file 140 with company B before my company A I-140 gets approved...?
In this case will I be able to use my Jan2009 priority date after my pending company-A I-140 gets approved..??
Note: I wanted to file 485 ONLY WITH COMPANY B
Again to summarize, Before my 1st 140 (Company A) gets approved can i apply for 2nd 140 (from company B)and still use 1st company's priority date when filing for 485 with 2nd company (Company B)
I got conflicting answers for this questions so I thought it would be best to post my question here.
This is the scenario
Company A
I am filing green card with this company based on **FUTURE EMPLOYMENT**
LABOUR APPROVED,I-140 PENDING,PRIORITY DATE : JAN 2009
Company B (Present Employer)
Labor Approved (Priority date : Aug 2009)
Now the question is Can I NOW file 140 with company B before my company A I-140 gets approved...?
In this case will I be able to use my Jan2009 priority date after my pending company-A I-140 gets approved..??
Note: I wanted to file 485 ONLY WITH COMPANY B
Again to summarize, Before my 1st 140 (Company A) gets approved can i apply for 2nd 140 (from company B)and still use 1st company's priority date when filing for 485 with 2nd company (Company B)
more...
house Rainforests are lush, green,
vaib.shah1
04-23 12:20 AM
Hi All,
Currently on EAD expire on Feb 2011. I 140 approved. 485 filed and pending.
Do I need AP to travel to India?
Thanks
Currently on EAD expire on Feb 2011. I 140 approved. 485 filed and pending.
Do I need AP to travel to India?
Thanks
tattoo Over 300 fresh orchids and
Macaca
12-02 09:18 AM
Business Lobby Presses Agenda Before �08 Vote (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/washington/02lobby.html?hp) By ROBERT PEAR | NY Times, December 2, 2007
WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 � Business lobbyists, nervously anticipating Democratic gains in next year�s elections, are racing to secure final approval for a wide range of health, safety, labor and economic rules, in the belief that they can get better deals from the Bush administration than from its successor.
Hoping to lock in policies backed by a pro-business administration, poultry farmers are seeking an exemption for the smelly fumes produced by tons of chicken manure. Businesses are lobbying the Bush administration to roll back rules that let employees take time off for family needs and medical problems. And electric power companies are pushing the government to relax pollution-control requirements.
�There�s a growing sense, a growing probability, that the next administration could be Democratic,� said Craig L. Fuller, executive vice president of Apco Worldwide, a lobbying and public relations firm, who was a White House official in the Reagan administration. �Corporate executives, trade associations and lobbying firms have begun to recalibrate their strategies.�
The Federal Register typically grows fat with regulations churned out in the final weeks of any administration. But the push for such rules has become unusually intense because of the possibility that Democrats in 2009 may consolidate control of the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives for the first time in 14 years.
Even as they try to shape pending regulations, business lobbies are also looking beyond President Bush. Corporations and trade associations are recruiting Democratic lobbyists. And lobbyists, expecting battles over taxes and health care in 2009, are pouring money into the campaigns of Democratic candidates for Congress and the White House.
Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the United States Chamber of Commerce, said, �I am beefing up my staff, putting more money aside for economic analysis of regulations that I foresee coming out of a possible new Democratic administration.�
At the Transportation Department, trucking companies are trying to get final approval for a rule increasing the maximum number of hours commercial truck drivers can work. And automakers are trying to persuade officials to set new standards for the strength of car roofs � standards far less stringent than what consumer advocates say is needed to protect riders in a rollover.
Business groups generally argue that federal regulations are onerous and needlessly add costs that are passed on to consumers, while their opponents accuse them of trying to whittle down regulations that are vital to safety and quality of life. Documents on file at several agencies show that business groups have stepped up lobbying in recent months, as they try to help the Bush administration finish work on rules that have been hotly debated and, in some cases, litigated for years.
At the Interior Department, coal companies are lobbying for a regulation that would allow them to dump rock and dirt from mountaintop mining operations into nearby streams and valleys. It would be prohibitively expensive to haul away the material, they say, and there are no waste sites in the area. Luke Popovich, a vice president of the National Mining Association, said that a Democratic president was more likely to side with �the greens.�
A coalition of environmental groups has condemned the proposed rule, saying it would accelerate �the destruction of mountains, forests and streams throughout Appalachia.�
A priority for many employers in 2008 is to secure changes in the rules for family and medical leave. Under a 1993 law, people who work for a company with 50 or more employees are generally entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for newborn children or sick relatives or to tend to medical problems of their own. The Labor Department has signaled its interest in changes by soliciting public comments.
The National Association of Manufacturers said the law had been widely abused and had caused �a staggering loss of work hours� as employees took unscheduled, intermittent time off for health conditions that could not be verified. The use of such leave time tends to rise sharply before holiday weekends, on the day after Super Bowl Sunday and on the first day of the local hunting season, employers said.
Debra L. Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy group, said she was �very concerned that the Bush administration will issue new rules that cut back on family and medical leave for those who need it.�
That could be done, for example, by narrowing the definition of a �serious health condition� or by establishing stricter requirements for taking intermittent leave for chronic conditions that flare up unexpectedly.
The Chamber of Commerce is seeking such changes. �We want to get this done before the election,� Mr. Johnson said. �The next White House may be less hospitable to our position.�
Indeed, most of the Democratic candidates for president have offered proposals to expand the 1993 law, to provide paid leave and to cover millions of additional workers. Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut was a principal author of the law. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York says it has been �enormously successful.� And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois says that more generous family leave is an essential part of his plan to �reclaim the American dream.�
Susan E. Dudley, administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, said, �Research suggests that regulatory activity increases in the final year of an administration, regardless of party.�
Whoever becomes the next president, Democrat or Republican, will find that it is not so easy to make immediate and sweeping changes. The Supreme Court has held that a new president cannot arbitrarily revoke final regulations that already have the force of law. To undo such rules, a new administration must provide a compelling justification and go through a formal rule-making process, which can take months or years.
Within hours of taking office in 2001, Mr. Bush slammed the brakes on scores of regulations issued just before he took office, so his administration could review them. A study in the Wake Forest Law Review found that one-fifth of those �midnight regulations� were amended or repealed by the Bush administration, while four-fifths survived.
Some of the biggest battles now involve rules affecting the quality of air, water and soil.
The National Chicken Council and the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association have petitioned for an exemption from laws and rules that require them to report emissions of ammonia exceeding 100 pounds a day. They argue that �emissions from poultry houses pose little or no risk to public health� because the ammonia disperses quickly in the air.
Perdue Farms, one of the nation�s largest poultry producers, said that it was �essentially impossible to provide an accurate estimate of any ammonia releases,� and that a reporting requirement would place �an undue and useless burden� on farmers.
But environmental groups told the Bush administration that �ammonia emissions from poultry operations pose great risk to public health.� And, they noted, a federal judge in Kentucky has found that farmers discharge ammonia from their barns, into the environment, so it will not sicken or kill the chickens.
On another issue, the Environmental Protection Agency is drafting final rules that would allow utility companies to modify coal-fired power plants and increase their emissions without installing new pollution-control equipment.
The Edison Electric Institute, the lobby for power companies, said the companies needed regulatory relief to meet the growing demand for �safe, reliable and affordable electricity.�
But John D. Walke, director of the clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the rules would be �the Bush administration�s parting gift to the utility industry.�
If Democrats gain seats in Congress or win the White House, that could pose problems for all-Republican lobbying firms like Barbour, Griffith & Rogers, whose founders include Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Loren Monroe, chief operating officer of the Barbour firm, said: �If the right person came along, we might hire a Democrat. And it�s quite possible we could team up in an alliance with a Democratic firm.�
Two executive recruiters, Ivan H. Adler of the McCormick Group and Nels B. Olson of Korn/Ferry International, said they had seen a growing demand for Democratic lobbyists. �It�s a bull market for Democrats, especially those who have worked for the Congressional leadership� or a powerful committee, Mr. Adler said.
Few industries have more cause for concern than drug companies, which have been a favorite target of Democrats. Republicans run the Washington offices of most major drug companies, and a former Republican House member, Billy Tauzin, is president of their trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
The association has hired three Democrats this year, so its lobbying team is split evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
Loren B. Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a policy research organization, said: �Defense contractors have not only begun to prepare for the next administration. They have begun to shape it. They�ve met with Hillary Clinton and other candidates.�
WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 � Business lobbyists, nervously anticipating Democratic gains in next year�s elections, are racing to secure final approval for a wide range of health, safety, labor and economic rules, in the belief that they can get better deals from the Bush administration than from its successor.
Hoping to lock in policies backed by a pro-business administration, poultry farmers are seeking an exemption for the smelly fumes produced by tons of chicken manure. Businesses are lobbying the Bush administration to roll back rules that let employees take time off for family needs and medical problems. And electric power companies are pushing the government to relax pollution-control requirements.
�There�s a growing sense, a growing probability, that the next administration could be Democratic,� said Craig L. Fuller, executive vice president of Apco Worldwide, a lobbying and public relations firm, who was a White House official in the Reagan administration. �Corporate executives, trade associations and lobbying firms have begun to recalibrate their strategies.�
The Federal Register typically grows fat with regulations churned out in the final weeks of any administration. But the push for such rules has become unusually intense because of the possibility that Democrats in 2009 may consolidate control of the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives for the first time in 14 years.
Even as they try to shape pending regulations, business lobbies are also looking beyond President Bush. Corporations and trade associations are recruiting Democratic lobbyists. And lobbyists, expecting battles over taxes and health care in 2009, are pouring money into the campaigns of Democratic candidates for Congress and the White House.
Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the United States Chamber of Commerce, said, �I am beefing up my staff, putting more money aside for economic analysis of regulations that I foresee coming out of a possible new Democratic administration.�
At the Transportation Department, trucking companies are trying to get final approval for a rule increasing the maximum number of hours commercial truck drivers can work. And automakers are trying to persuade officials to set new standards for the strength of car roofs � standards far less stringent than what consumer advocates say is needed to protect riders in a rollover.
Business groups generally argue that federal regulations are onerous and needlessly add costs that are passed on to consumers, while their opponents accuse them of trying to whittle down regulations that are vital to safety and quality of life. Documents on file at several agencies show that business groups have stepped up lobbying in recent months, as they try to help the Bush administration finish work on rules that have been hotly debated and, in some cases, litigated for years.
At the Interior Department, coal companies are lobbying for a regulation that would allow them to dump rock and dirt from mountaintop mining operations into nearby streams and valleys. It would be prohibitively expensive to haul away the material, they say, and there are no waste sites in the area. Luke Popovich, a vice president of the National Mining Association, said that a Democratic president was more likely to side with �the greens.�
A coalition of environmental groups has condemned the proposed rule, saying it would accelerate �the destruction of mountains, forests and streams throughout Appalachia.�
A priority for many employers in 2008 is to secure changes in the rules for family and medical leave. Under a 1993 law, people who work for a company with 50 or more employees are generally entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for newborn children or sick relatives or to tend to medical problems of their own. The Labor Department has signaled its interest in changes by soliciting public comments.
The National Association of Manufacturers said the law had been widely abused and had caused �a staggering loss of work hours� as employees took unscheduled, intermittent time off for health conditions that could not be verified. The use of such leave time tends to rise sharply before holiday weekends, on the day after Super Bowl Sunday and on the first day of the local hunting season, employers said.
Debra L. Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy group, said she was �very concerned that the Bush administration will issue new rules that cut back on family and medical leave for those who need it.�
That could be done, for example, by narrowing the definition of a �serious health condition� or by establishing stricter requirements for taking intermittent leave for chronic conditions that flare up unexpectedly.
The Chamber of Commerce is seeking such changes. �We want to get this done before the election,� Mr. Johnson said. �The next White House may be less hospitable to our position.�
Indeed, most of the Democratic candidates for president have offered proposals to expand the 1993 law, to provide paid leave and to cover millions of additional workers. Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut was a principal author of the law. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York says it has been �enormously successful.� And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois says that more generous family leave is an essential part of his plan to �reclaim the American dream.�
Susan E. Dudley, administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, said, �Research suggests that regulatory activity increases in the final year of an administration, regardless of party.�
Whoever becomes the next president, Democrat or Republican, will find that it is not so easy to make immediate and sweeping changes. The Supreme Court has held that a new president cannot arbitrarily revoke final regulations that already have the force of law. To undo such rules, a new administration must provide a compelling justification and go through a formal rule-making process, which can take months or years.
Within hours of taking office in 2001, Mr. Bush slammed the brakes on scores of regulations issued just before he took office, so his administration could review them. A study in the Wake Forest Law Review found that one-fifth of those �midnight regulations� were amended or repealed by the Bush administration, while four-fifths survived.
Some of the biggest battles now involve rules affecting the quality of air, water and soil.
The National Chicken Council and the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association have petitioned for an exemption from laws and rules that require them to report emissions of ammonia exceeding 100 pounds a day. They argue that �emissions from poultry houses pose little or no risk to public health� because the ammonia disperses quickly in the air.
Perdue Farms, one of the nation�s largest poultry producers, said that it was �essentially impossible to provide an accurate estimate of any ammonia releases,� and that a reporting requirement would place �an undue and useless burden� on farmers.
But environmental groups told the Bush administration that �ammonia emissions from poultry operations pose great risk to public health.� And, they noted, a federal judge in Kentucky has found that farmers discharge ammonia from their barns, into the environment, so it will not sicken or kill the chickens.
On another issue, the Environmental Protection Agency is drafting final rules that would allow utility companies to modify coal-fired power plants and increase their emissions without installing new pollution-control equipment.
The Edison Electric Institute, the lobby for power companies, said the companies needed regulatory relief to meet the growing demand for �safe, reliable and affordable electricity.�
But John D. Walke, director of the clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the rules would be �the Bush administration�s parting gift to the utility industry.�
If Democrats gain seats in Congress or win the White House, that could pose problems for all-Republican lobbying firms like Barbour, Griffith & Rogers, whose founders include Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Loren Monroe, chief operating officer of the Barbour firm, said: �If the right person came along, we might hire a Democrat. And it�s quite possible we could team up in an alliance with a Democratic firm.�
Two executive recruiters, Ivan H. Adler of the McCormick Group and Nels B. Olson of Korn/Ferry International, said they had seen a growing demand for Democratic lobbyists. �It�s a bull market for Democrats, especially those who have worked for the Congressional leadership� or a powerful committee, Mr. Adler said.
Few industries have more cause for concern than drug companies, which have been a favorite target of Democrats. Republicans run the Washington offices of most major drug companies, and a former Republican House member, Billy Tauzin, is president of their trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
The association has hired three Democrats this year, so its lobbying team is split evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
Loren B. Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a policy research organization, said: �Defense contractors have not only begun to prepare for the next administration. They have begun to shape it. They�ve met with Hillary Clinton and other candidates.�
more...
pictures People of the Rainforest
piyu7444
05-05 10:56 PM
You should get to talk to USCIS coz this is wrong for sure......USCIS should issue you a new EAD with no additional cost.........Even if you do not plan to use EAD card get the issue fixed.......
dresses and singapore orchids.
JunRN
08-26 05:54 PM
We can see more of these GC approvals and visa number allocation in September because USCIS and DOS have to use up all available visa numbers.
If not, we can see again about 10,000 visa numbers unused and wasted.
If not, we can see again about 10,000 visa numbers unused and wasted.
more...
makeup Olympic Rainforest is
WaitingForMyGC
01-29 11:14 AM
Its a mundane process. Do not worry or get over excited about it. Your application is just getting a free ride from Texas to Nebraska. Just wish it a safe journey:-)
girlfriend Puerto Galera rainforest.
pepch
03-02 03:18 PM
Hi,
I have applied for my I140 under EB2, I have a question regarding a gab between my employments. I worked for a company A from Dec 2005 to Feb 2007 and then I switched employers, and I was between projects. The next company I started working for gave me an offer letter only when I found a project (May 2007). So technically there is a 2 month gap. Even the experience letters from that company says I have started work from May 2007.
I'm not sure if this will cause a problem in my I140 stage. Kindly advice.
I have changed two companies after that and I'm filing my GC through the current company. Any response will be much appreciated.
I have applied for my I140 under EB2, I have a question regarding a gab between my employments. I worked for a company A from Dec 2005 to Feb 2007 and then I switched employers, and I was between projects. The next company I started working for gave me an offer letter only when I found a project (May 2007). So technically there is a 2 month gap. Even the experience letters from that company says I have started work from May 2007.
I'm not sure if this will cause a problem in my I140 stage. Kindly advice.
I have changed two companies after that and I'm filing my GC through the current company. Any response will be much appreciated.
hairstyles could buy orchids there as
Yass
10-04 09:05 PM
Hi All,
I'm looking for solutions in my situation.
I'm currently under a L1 visa for a company A but I would like to resign and look for another Job.
The thing is, as far as I understood, If I resign I have to leave the US. So here are my questions:
1) How long can I stay in the US after I resigned from my company under a L1 visa? Can I stay in the US even if my I-94 is valid?
2) How is the USCIS notified that I resigned from my company? Should I send a notification or is that done by my company?
3) Can I apply to a H1B COS by myself to then look for a job? Or will I need a company B to sponsor me?
4) If I can't apply to a H1B COS by myself, do I have any other visa options?
Thanks a lot for your advice!
Yacine
I'm looking for solutions in my situation.
I'm currently under a L1 visa for a company A but I would like to resign and look for another Job.
The thing is, as far as I understood, If I resign I have to leave the US. So here are my questions:
1) How long can I stay in the US after I resigned from my company under a L1 visa? Can I stay in the US even if my I-94 is valid?
2) How is the USCIS notified that I resigned from my company? Should I send a notification or is that done by my company?
3) Can I apply to a H1B COS by myself to then look for a job? Or will I need a company B to sponsor me?
4) If I can't apply to a H1B COS by myself, do I have any other visa options?
Thanks a lot for your advice!
Yacine
nihar
03-31 06:05 PM
This is with regard to GC and h1
I have applied for family based GC above 21 yrs old on December 2006 and also currently holding h1 valid from October 2008. I also have my opt till May. Now since my employer was not able to find me a project he wants me to chg my status. I do not know what to do and how to chg my visa as, if I go on student visa I need to show financial documents and since I have not made any money how is it possible . If you can also suggest some schools who will not charge much or some courses which are not very expensive and time consuming and also where I can get work authorization as I will find jobs which are not technical and in line with my educational and work qualification . I have a deadline this evening as my employer just called me and told me this
:confused::(
I have applied for family based GC above 21 yrs old on December 2006 and also currently holding h1 valid from October 2008. I also have my opt till May. Now since my employer was not able to find me a project he wants me to chg my status. I do not know what to do and how to chg my visa as, if I go on student visa I need to show financial documents and since I have not made any money how is it possible . If you can also suggest some schools who will not charge much or some courses which are not very expensive and time consuming and also where I can get work authorization as I will find jobs which are not technical and in line with my educational and work qualification . I have a deadline this evening as my employer just called me and told me this
:confused::(
raj76
05-15 11:55 PM
Guys,
When applying for AP, do we need to submit separate cheques for AP($305) and Biometric($80) or we need to combine both ie., $385 and send as one cheque :confused: ????
Thanks
When applying for AP, do we need to submit separate cheques for AP($305) and Biometric($80) or we need to combine both ie., $385 and send as one cheque :confused: ????
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment