eucalyptus.mp
03-13 12:28 PM
Friends,
I came to USA on H1B on Feb-07. I was working all the time except 6 months. I have pay slips with me and W2 forms. Now I am working on the project but it will be over on 15th of April-09.
I will complete my 3 years. But after this project is over, I don't know I can find the job again.
My question is,is it right time to do the visa transfer? Does it requires very recent pay stub of 3 months? I do not have pay stub for Jan and Feb-09.Does it matters?
What will be my best choice to transfer the visa(but don't know will have job after 15th so does it matters for transfer like client letter) or wait until May-June and file the 3 year extension ? But again that time I will have pay slips until April only.
I am really confused. Please give me your suggestions
I came to USA on H1B on Feb-07. I was working all the time except 6 months. I have pay slips with me and W2 forms. Now I am working on the project but it will be over on 15th of April-09.
I will complete my 3 years. But after this project is over, I don't know I can find the job again.
My question is,is it right time to do the visa transfer? Does it requires very recent pay stub of 3 months? I do not have pay stub for Jan and Feb-09.Does it matters?
What will be my best choice to transfer the visa(but don't know will have job after 15th so does it matters for transfer like client letter) or wait until May-June and file the 3 year extension ? But again that time I will have pay slips until April only.
I am really confused. Please give me your suggestions
wallpaper Find Photos gt; London
Blog Feeds
11-08 03:30 PM
Is a person who was deported almost 30 years ago, and returned to the U.S. without inspection a year later subject to the permanent bar under the 1996 immigration law? The 1996 law created the permanent bar to the immigrating to the U.S. Section 212(a)(9)(C)(i)(II)provides as follows: "(C) Aliens unlawfully present after previous immigration violations.- (i) In general.-Any alien who- ...(II) has been ordered removed under section 235(b)(1) , section 240 , or any other provision of law, and who enters or attempts to reenter the United States without being admitted is inadmissible." The question is whether or not this...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/11/uscis-errors-who-should-bear-the-burden.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/11/uscis-errors-who-should-bear-the-burden.html)
anilkumar0902
12-25 09:37 AM
You might have to resort to "Consular based Processing". Talk to your attorney about it.
Good luck.
Cheers
Good luck.
Cheers
2011 Previous London summary
kashish333
10-01 09:28 AM
My problem is
I am on valid L1 with company A and company B has applied for H1 for me. If my H1 gets approved
1. Can I continue to work on L1 with company A.
2. I want to go back to home country on vacation. If my H1 is approved can I go back to my home country and come back on L1?Do I need to get my L1 stamped again to enter back in US on L1? what will happen to my H1?
Please Advice.
I am on valid L1 with company A and company B has applied for H1 for me. If my H1 gets approved
1. Can I continue to work on L1 with company A.
2. I want to go back to home country on vacation. If my H1 is approved can I go back to my home country and come back on L1?Do I need to get my L1 stamped again to enter back in US on L1? what will happen to my H1?
Please Advice.
more...
Macaca
08-16 05:40 PM
Is the Senate Germane? Majority Leader Reid's Lament (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/procedural_politics/19719-1.html) By Don Wolfensberger | Roll Call, August 13, 2007
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
admin
01-09 10:34 AM
Good point file485. I will work on it immediately after finishing the WebFax feature.
Siva
Siva
more...
sagita
05-19 07:18 PM
Hello.
I have lived 6 yrs here & became a U.S. Citizen last Sept. 2010. Last February 2011 i was diagnosed of Breast Cancer. It's been pretty rough living alone without any relatives around. My husband works oversea and he travels frequently, he can't change his job right now, this will be the source of our income to support my health situation. In the next two months my doctor told me to do another surgery on my breast. I did fine with my first surgery as my husband stay home for a couple of weeks while waiting his next project. I'am thinking if it possible for me to petition my knee to live with me in the U.S. as i will need a assistance with all therapy and with my 11 yr. daughter. I am from the Philippines.
Please advice.
Thank you.
I have lived 6 yrs here & became a U.S. Citizen last Sept. 2010. Last February 2011 i was diagnosed of Breast Cancer. It's been pretty rough living alone without any relatives around. My husband works oversea and he travels frequently, he can't change his job right now, this will be the source of our income to support my health situation. In the next two months my doctor told me to do another surgery on my breast. I did fine with my first surgery as my husband stay home for a couple of weeks while waiting his next project. I'am thinking if it possible for me to petition my knee to live with me in the U.S. as i will need a assistance with all therapy and with my 11 yr. daughter. I am from the Philippines.
Please advice.
Thank you.
2010 how London#39;s skyline could
Blog Feeds
09-15 05:40 PM
Immigration Lawyers Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The new visa bulletin is out at this link: http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5145.html. Employment-based categories are as follows: EB-1 remains current for all countries; EB-2 remains current, except for India and China which are at May 2006; EB-3 is at Jan. 2005 for all countries, except for India (Jan. 2002), China (Nov. 2003), and Mexico (April 2001); EB-3 other workers is at March 2003 for all countries, except India (Jan. 2002)and Mexico (April 2001); EB-4, religious workers, EB-5, and targeted employment areas and regional centers are all current. Family based petitions are backlogged, with the most recent date at April 2010.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ImmigrationLawyersBlog/~4/SrfNMX1f9Gc
More... (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ImmigrationLawyersBlog/~3/SrfNMX1f9Gc/october_visa_bulletin.html)
The new visa bulletin is out at this link: http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5145.html. Employment-based categories are as follows: EB-1 remains current for all countries; EB-2 remains current, except for India and China which are at May 2006; EB-3 is at Jan. 2005 for all countries, except for India (Jan. 2002), China (Nov. 2003), and Mexico (April 2001); EB-3 other workers is at March 2003 for all countries, except India (Jan. 2002)and Mexico (April 2001); EB-4, religious workers, EB-5, and targeted employment areas and regional centers are all current. Family based petitions are backlogged, with the most recent date at April 2010.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ImmigrationLawyersBlog/~4/SrfNMX1f9Gc
More... (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ImmigrationLawyersBlog/~3/SrfNMX1f9Gc/october_visa_bulletin.html)
more...
Blog Feeds
01-21 08:30 AM
I am a strong supporter of Comprehensive Immigraton Reform (CIR). I have been on both sides of the fence. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, I was an attorney for the Immigration and Naturalization Service. I spent a couple of years representing the government in deportation proceedings, often conducted in Federal prisons. Are there people in the U.S. who should be deported? Absolutely! I have no regrets. But even while serving as an INS Attorney, I fully realized that the man that I deported on Friday afternoon would be back in the U.S., working at his job to feed...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/01/cir-you-cant-always-get-what-you-want-when-you-want-it.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/01/cir-you-cant-always-get-what-you-want-when-you-want-it.html)
hair View of the London skyline
maddila
04-12 06:54 PM
My 485 is under processesing with a priority date of March 2006.
I was browsing through the instructions to e-file my I-131 (Travel document) and found this interesting point and was a little confused.
This is from USCIS website
You are not eligible to electronically file this form if:
You have a pending I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence Status or Adjust Status currently at a USCIS office and you are eligible to file the I-131 for no additional fee.
Does this mean we can no longer file for I-131 online...? I did this last year and didnot have any issue's. Any thoughts/opinions/experiences are highly appreciated. Thanks
I was browsing through the instructions to e-file my I-131 (Travel document) and found this interesting point and was a little confused.
This is from USCIS website
You are not eligible to electronically file this form if:
You have a pending I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence Status or Adjust Status currently at a USCIS office and you are eligible to file the I-131 for no additional fee.
Does this mean we can no longer file for I-131 online...? I did this last year and didnot have any issue's. Any thoughts/opinions/experiences are highly appreciated. Thanks
more...
Macaca
02-17 04:50 PM
Resources
Learn about Congress (http://clerkkids.house.gov/congress/index.html)
Glossary (http://clerkkids.house.gov/glossary/index.html)
Open Congress (http://www.opencongress.org/)
Congress.org (http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/)
How laws are enacted once they have been passed (http://thomas.loc.gov/home/enactment/enactlawtoc.html)
White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/)
Learn about Congress (http://clerkkids.house.gov/congress/index.html)
Glossary (http://clerkkids.house.gov/glossary/index.html)
Open Congress (http://www.opencongress.org/)
Congress.org (http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/)
How laws are enacted once they have been passed (http://thomas.loc.gov/home/enactment/enactlawtoc.html)
White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/)
hot magnificent view of London
gangadhargs
12-09 02:33 PM
Hello
I am on Advance Parole (AP) and I need to travel to Europe multiple times (at least 3 times) in the next 2-3 months. My new AP has been approved and it is in transit. Last year when I applied for AP, I had received two copies of the AP. Now since I will be making multiple trips, do I need to apply for multiple copies of the AP? I am asking since my understanding is that I will have to surrender one copy of the AP at the entry point every time I come into US.
Thanks in advance for your help,
I am on Advance Parole (AP) and I need to travel to Europe multiple times (at least 3 times) in the next 2-3 months. My new AP has been approved and it is in transit. Last year when I applied for AP, I had received two copies of the AP. Now since I will be making multiple trips, do I need to apply for multiple copies of the AP? I am asking since my understanding is that I will have to surrender one copy of the AP at the entry point every time I come into US.
Thanks in advance for your help,
more...
house London Olympics 2012
papajon
06-24 07:13 PM
As long as the labor cert. appeal is timely filed you should be able to extend for one more year.
Thank you Attorney!
Thank you Attorney!
tattoo for Central London.
biggest_apple
05-01 02:00 PM
Decided to use a couple of shots from my photoblog.
more...
pictures London skyline would look
EB2IMMIGRANT
08-03 11:29 AM
Dear attorneys, I have a situation and will appreciate your response on it.
My PERM was recently approved and my company is getting ready to file the I-140. My attorney just noticed that my company at the time of registering the PERM account accidentally listed the FEIN number of their sister company (with similar name) rather than the FEIN number of the company that filed my PERM and on whose payroll I am for the last three years.
Do you think this would be a problem at the I-140 stage since the FEIN number on the PERM is different from the one on the Form I-140 and my paystubs/ W-2? My attorney is telling me that this should not be a problem as it is a typo and he can explain this to the US CIS at the time of filing the I-140 or maybe we can stay quite about it now and will explain it to the US CIS if they have any questions about it.
I will appreciate your response to this.
Thanks!
My PERM was recently approved and my company is getting ready to file the I-140. My attorney just noticed that my company at the time of registering the PERM account accidentally listed the FEIN number of their sister company (with similar name) rather than the FEIN number of the company that filed my PERM and on whose payroll I am for the last three years.
Do you think this would be a problem at the I-140 stage since the FEIN number on the PERM is different from the one on the Form I-140 and my paystubs/ W-2? My attorney is telling me that this should not be a problem as it is a typo and he can explain this to the US CIS at the time of filing the I-140 or maybe we can stay quite about it now and will explain it to the US CIS if they have any questions about it.
I will appreciate your response to this.
Thanks!
dresses London Skyline 2012 -
suni
02-06 12:28 PM
Hi
I transferred my H1 to new employer and need to go for visa stamping.
I have a couple of qustions.
1.I belong to south india and my regional consulate is chennai.Can I go for calcutta consulat as I heard chennai consulate has delays in vsa processing.In such case,can I have to show any emergency proof?
2.My salary is 30k more than whatever is mentioned in petition.will it be a problem?
3.I recently heard that consulate officer is asking for contact agreement between employer and client.But in my case I have some addition layer B in between my employer A and client.So how can I provide letter.Do I need to show 2 letters.From my employer A to layer B and layer B to client?
Please respond.
I transferred my H1 to new employer and need to go for visa stamping.
I have a couple of qustions.
1.I belong to south india and my regional consulate is chennai.Can I go for calcutta consulat as I heard chennai consulate has delays in vsa processing.In such case,can I have to show any emergency proof?
2.My salary is 30k more than whatever is mentioned in petition.will it be a problem?
3.I recently heard that consulate officer is asking for contact agreement between employer and client.But in my case I have some addition layer B in between my employer A and client.So how can I provide letter.Do I need to show 2 letters.From my employer A to layer B and layer B to client?
Please respond.
more...
makeup An aerial view of London 2012
aries
10-26 09:49 AM
Hi Guys,
Just need an advice to what to do. My wife is currently on F1 and she is graduating in Dec'07.She has and EAD and AP since we applied for her I485 and even mine is pending. Now I have apply for her 7th year H1B extesion.So my question is do we need to even apply for my wife status change from F1 to H4.She is planning to use her EAD.
lets say even if we apply for status change now, can she travel on AP even though status change is pending.
Thanks to all for the advices.
Just need an advice to what to do. My wife is currently on F1 and she is graduating in Dec'07.She has and EAD and AP since we applied for her I485 and even mine is pending. Now I have apply for her 7th year H1B extesion.So my question is do we need to even apply for my wife status change from F1 to H4.She is planning to use her EAD.
lets say even if we apply for status change now, can she travel on AP even though status change is pending.
Thanks to all for the advices.
girlfriend London February 20-23, 2005
StuckInTheMuck
07-16 11:53 AM
There are several threads dealing with your question (for example here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18737) is a popular thread), all you need to do is spend a few minutes browsing the forums.
hairstyles London February 20-23, 2005
yogesh
11-12 09:44 AM
hi guys,
during stage 3, they require a birth certificate. what if I dont have a birth certificate? do they accept an affidavit from my parents with a domicile cerrtificate or not? i dont even have a school leaving certificate. please give me advices.
Thank You
Yogesh
during stage 3, they require a birth certificate. what if I dont have a birth certificate? do they accept an affidavit from my parents with a domicile cerrtificate or not? i dont even have a school leaving certificate. please give me advices.
Thank You
Yogesh
Anders �stberg
February 27th, 2004, 09:17 AM
That's a nice picture, and if you hadn't said snow it might have been white sand! :)