sk2006
07-04 11:48 AM
Answer to original question: YES any legal resident can buy Guns in CA. There is a test to be passed at authorised Gun dealer and there is a 10 days waiting period before you can be issued a gun.
However What about learning to use the weapons? Are there places where one can learn it?
No point buying a gun when you don't know how to use.
However What about learning to use the weapons? Are there places where one can learn it?
No point buying a gun when you don't know how to use.
wallpaper And never say never.
desi3933
06-23 12:38 PM
Port 2003 PD at the time of filing 2nd I-140, keep copies of old labor + 140 and new approved labor and a cover letter should specify that the beneficiary for both is the same ie YOU and you are not doing labor subsititution. I have been successful porting my pd from 03- the only difference was that my job classification was the same and salary for 2nd job was more
A
This is correct.
However, it does not matter if it is labor substitution (you can still do PD porting). Job Description changes do not matter.
The only requirement is the other I-140 must be approved and active
and it must belong to same beneficiary.
Not a legal advice.
A
This is correct.
However, it does not matter if it is labor substitution (you can still do PD porting). Job Description changes do not matter.
The only requirement is the other I-140 must be approved and active
and it must belong to same beneficiary.
Not a legal advice.
kondur_007
03-29 09:12 PM
Thanks you very much for the reply.I appreciate.
Yes, Thats perfectly right.
Extension with Employer A is pending, reason is Security CheckThats what i was told and can't be done any thing untill they get back).
Yeah I am planning to go to India and try to get stamped there. But am just wondering that as the Extension with Employer A is in security check so does this cause any issues/delay in giving Visa in india.
I personally think (I am not a lawyer), the delay with your current employer's (employer A) petition for extension is very likely to be "employer" (who is probably under review) rather than "you". (the reason I believe that is the fact that they approved your H1b with another employer; so if it is security check on "you", that would not have happened.).
So if my assumption is correct, you should not have any trouble in getting visa stamped for "employer B" (new employer, with new H1b approval that you have - the one that came without I94),
Good Luck. (If at all possible, do one consultation with a competent attorney who can review all the facts, trust me, your money will be worth)
Yes, Thats perfectly right.
Extension with Employer A is pending, reason is Security CheckThats what i was told and can't be done any thing untill they get back).
Yeah I am planning to go to India and try to get stamped there. But am just wondering that as the Extension with Employer A is in security check so does this cause any issues/delay in giving Visa in india.
I personally think (I am not a lawyer), the delay with your current employer's (employer A) petition for extension is very likely to be "employer" (who is probably under review) rather than "you". (the reason I believe that is the fact that they approved your H1b with another employer; so if it is security check on "you", that would not have happened.).
So if my assumption is correct, you should not have any trouble in getting visa stamped for "employer B" (new employer, with new H1b approval that you have - the one that came without I94),
Good Luck. (If at all possible, do one consultation with a competent attorney who can review all the facts, trust me, your money will be worth)
2011 Justin Bieber Born To Be
indianabacklog
07-27 09:32 AM
I don't think its required to work 100% while you an EAD, most of us apply EAD for spouses along with us, but how many are going to start work?
EAD is like a free pass to "living". You have the choice to work, not to work, work for yourself, change employer when you wish etc.
However, if you are the primary applicant if at all possible stay with your H1B employer and let your dependent have this luxury.
EAD is like a free pass to "living". You have the choice to work, not to work, work for yourself, change employer when you wish etc.
However, if you are the primary applicant if at all possible stay with your H1B employer and let your dependent have this luxury.
more...
renupond
10-09 04:35 PM
If 1099 is not acceptable with client, what is the the easiest way to go forward, assuming no intent of other employees?
I think LLC is the only option ( if I dont want to go towards C-Cop ). How long does it take to set that up? What setps? What are the expenses involved other than one time registration fee?
I think LLC is the only option ( if I dont want to go towards C-Cop ). How long does it take to set that up? What setps? What are the expenses involved other than one time registration fee?
sanojkumar
08-21 11:51 AM
bumping up??
more...
roseball
08-03 07:49 PM
If your H1 already expired, you are out of status from the date your H1 ext was denied.....Open a Motion to Reconsider immediately.......
Other option is to find another employer who is willing to file your H1 ASAP. Since the reason for H1 denial was not based on your profile but due to the petitioner, you should get your H1 transfer approved without any issues.....However, its solely upto USCIS whether to transfer your H1 as an extension of stay (I-94 attached) or without an extension (no I-94), in which case you will have to go out of the country, attend the visa interview and re-enter on the new company's H1....If the gap between the H1 denial and new H1 application is small, USCIS generally extends status without any issues.....As currently there is a gap in your H1 status, I dont think you can start working like others do based on the H1 transfer receipt notice......You should immediately consult an attorney and let him handle your case....The key for you is to act fast without any delay. Else, it will jeopardise your 485 application....
Regarding 485, if your current employer is co-operative, then there will be no issues at all....You can just go back to work for him once you get the EAD......File Motion to Re-Open or H1 transfer ASAP....Good luck
Other option is to find another employer who is willing to file your H1 ASAP. Since the reason for H1 denial was not based on your profile but due to the petitioner, you should get your H1 transfer approved without any issues.....However, its solely upto USCIS whether to transfer your H1 as an extension of stay (I-94 attached) or without an extension (no I-94), in which case you will have to go out of the country, attend the visa interview and re-enter on the new company's H1....If the gap between the H1 denial and new H1 application is small, USCIS generally extends status without any issues.....As currently there is a gap in your H1 status, I dont think you can start working like others do based on the H1 transfer receipt notice......You should immediately consult an attorney and let him handle your case....The key for you is to act fast without any delay. Else, it will jeopardise your 485 application....
Regarding 485, if your current employer is co-operative, then there will be no issues at all....You can just go back to work for him once you get the EAD......File Motion to Re-Open or H1 transfer ASAP....Good luck
2010 All song lonely girl lyrics
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
more...
go_guy123
02-28 09:53 AM
Silicon Valley Immigration Lawyer Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The Federal government is about to start knocking on the doors of employers, demanding to see I-9 records and more. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 1,000 audit notices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148590023309196.html?K EYWORDS=miriam+jordan), or notices of inspection, are to be sent out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security, within the next few days. These "audit notices" are actually subpoenas, requiring employers to present original I-9 employment verification forms and payroll documentation. An employer is usually required to produce this documentation within three days. A sample I-9 subpoena is below.
Sample I-9 Subpoena (2-2011) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/49508862/Sample-I-9-Subpoena-2-2011)
The second page of this subpoena shows that ICE demands more than I-9 forms. They request records of all employees hired within the past three years, copies of the documents the employee provided when completing the I-9, detailed information about independent contractors, any Social Security no-match letters, and detailed payroll filings.
Employers should realize that these I-9 audits can target any employer, of any size and in any sector, whether or not the employer has H-1B (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054805.html)workers, L-1 (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054809.html) workers, or sponsors foreign nationals for employment-based green cards (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054839.html). As all employers must complete I-9's for new hires and maintain payroll records, all employers should be prepared for an audit. Fines for uncorrected technical and substantive errors on the I-9 forms range from $110 to $1,100. If an employer had technical or substantive errors on their I-9 forms, they might not necessarily realize this and could be exposing themselves to substantial fines.
These audits come as ICE has created an Employment Compliance Inspection Center. The Head of ICE recently explained that this new center would "address a need to conduct audits even of the largest employers with a very large number of employees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703951704576092381196958362.html?K EYWORDS=I-9+audit)The center is supposed to be staffed with specialists to pore over I-9 employee files of targeted companies.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8z A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rIT s (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?i=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKB A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:7Q72WNTAKBA)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~4/DpyqOn5n_Us
More... (http://rss.justia.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~3/DpyqOn5n_Us/silicon-valley-employers-must.html)
In the era of big government and job growth mainly through increased government payrolls, we will see more of such jobs being "created" and "invented" and in case of the USCIS the costs being passed on in term of increased fees etc.
Unless US is dragged to WTO over these out of control H1B/ L1 fees this will never stop.
The Federal government is about to start knocking on the doors of employers, demanding to see I-9 records and more. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 1,000 audit notices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148590023309196.html?K EYWORDS=miriam+jordan), or notices of inspection, are to be sent out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security, within the next few days. These "audit notices" are actually subpoenas, requiring employers to present original I-9 employment verification forms and payroll documentation. An employer is usually required to produce this documentation within three days. A sample I-9 subpoena is below.
Sample I-9 Subpoena (2-2011) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/49508862/Sample-I-9-Subpoena-2-2011)
The second page of this subpoena shows that ICE demands more than I-9 forms. They request records of all employees hired within the past three years, copies of the documents the employee provided when completing the I-9, detailed information about independent contractors, any Social Security no-match letters, and detailed payroll filings.
Employers should realize that these I-9 audits can target any employer, of any size and in any sector, whether or not the employer has H-1B (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054805.html)workers, L-1 (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054809.html) workers, or sponsors foreign nationals for employment-based green cards (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054839.html). As all employers must complete I-9's for new hires and maintain payroll records, all employers should be prepared for an audit. Fines for uncorrected technical and substantive errors on the I-9 forms range from $110 to $1,100. If an employer had technical or substantive errors on their I-9 forms, they might not necessarily realize this and could be exposing themselves to substantial fines.
These audits come as ICE has created an Employment Compliance Inspection Center. The Head of ICE recently explained that this new center would "address a need to conduct audits even of the largest employers with a very large number of employees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703951704576092381196958362.html?K EYWORDS=I-9+audit)The center is supposed to be staffed with specialists to pore over I-9 employee files of targeted companies.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8z A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rIT s (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?i=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKB A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:7Q72WNTAKBA)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~4/DpyqOn5n_Us
More... (http://rss.justia.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~3/DpyqOn5n_Us/silicon-valley-employers-must.html)
In the era of big government and job growth mainly through increased government payrolls, we will see more of such jobs being "created" and "invented" and in case of the USCIS the costs being passed on in term of increased fees etc.
Unless US is dragged to WTO over these out of control H1B/ L1 fees this will never stop.
hair justin bieber never say never
asanghi
01-24 11:43 AM
I just can't believe how many times this topic has come up, and yet keeps coming up.
We have had long heated discussions on this topic many times, and always come to the same conclusion and that is to push for filing I-485 without visa availability. This topis has so oft debated, there is no merit in kicking it up again.
We have had long heated discussions on this topic many times, and always come to the same conclusion and that is to push for filing I-485 without visa availability. This topis has so oft debated, there is no merit in kicking it up again.
more...
raysaikat
04-07 12:02 AM
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing.
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing before getting your green card. I do not think that you can invoke AC 21 after you have got your GC.
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing before getting your green card. I do not think that you can invoke AC 21 after you have got your GC.
hot never say expedited
styrum
03-14 02:09 PM
hello,
My mother has 10 yr multiple entry visa. She is planning to travel from Bangalore India to USA through Lufthansa Airways. She has a stop over at Frankfurt airport for about 3 hrs. Does she need to get a transit visa for that. Any recent experience or suggestion? Thanks.
No, she doesn't need a EU/German visa if she doesn't leave the "transit area". She can get so called "airport visa" from a German consulate if she has more time between flights and wants to go see the city or spend a night in a hotel.
My relatives had to spend a night on the way from Russia on benches there, because they didn't have a visa and couldn't get out of the "transit zone". But they were OK with that. The "zone" is pretty large. You can buy food, but as for rest, all there is there are benches.
My mother has 10 yr multiple entry visa. She is planning to travel from Bangalore India to USA through Lufthansa Airways. She has a stop over at Frankfurt airport for about 3 hrs. Does she need to get a transit visa for that. Any recent experience or suggestion? Thanks.
No, she doesn't need a EU/German visa if she doesn't leave the "transit area". She can get so called "airport visa" from a German consulate if she has more time between flights and wants to go see the city or spend a night in a hotel.
My relatives had to spend a night on the way from Russia on benches there, because they didn't have a visa and couldn't get out of the "transit zone". But they were OK with that. The "zone" is pretty large. You can buy food, but as for rest, all there is there are benches.
more...
house video, Baby
gulute
03-16 06:31 PM
why is it denied?
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
tattoo Fray song never justin-ieber-
prioritydate
07-28 11:48 PM
Where is the presence of other guys? how many of them responded to "the country of birth" poll? People of other nations doesn't suffer as much as people of India.
more...
pictures Album+justin+ieber+never+
Marphad
03-27 08:47 AM
AP:
Earlieir link provided ( http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245(k)_14Jul08.pdf) has that info too.
An alien, however, who entered the United States pursuant to an advance parole document is not �lawfully admitted,� because the parole is not a final act with respect to admission. Thus, reentry based on a parole or advance parole does not start the clock over for the purpose of section 245(k).
Yes, on AOS you are always in status. Gap in employment should not be an issue on AOS as long as you can produce an EVL.
Status violations are a problem only when you are on H1B.
I entered on H1 not AP. Hope this is safe :).
Earlieir link provided ( http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245(k)_14Jul08.pdf) has that info too.
An alien, however, who entered the United States pursuant to an advance parole document is not �lawfully admitted,� because the parole is not a final act with respect to admission. Thus, reentry based on a parole or advance parole does not start the clock over for the purpose of section 245(k).
Yes, on AOS you are always in status. Gap in employment should not be an issue on AOS as long as you can produce an EVL.
Status violations are a problem only when you are on H1B.
I entered on H1 not AP. Hope this is safe :).
dresses justinbieber neversaynever
jnraajan
03-20 05:19 PM
The best time for seeing any good result for lobbying in the next 8 years would be the end of 2008. Precisely, from Nov-02-2008 till the day, the new president swears in.
If you go through the records of the past presidencies, you can see one interesting thing: Whenever the presidency changes from one person to another, that period is the best to make any sweeping changes that can be done administratively. Bill clinton passed many executive orders during the last 1.5 months of his presidency. The reason for this is: the ruling party will not oppose this as the election is over. The new president will also not oppose this as the election is over and the bad blood of any of this action will not fall on him as well. On top of that, the new president need not address any contentious issues as an initiative from his side. If the old president started something, he could always portray that, he is making the situation better.
The best example for this kind of presidential action: There is a proposal from many parts of the political spectrum to lift the cuban embargo. No one is ready to do that as everyone is scared how it will affect them. If the passing president does this during the last 1.5 months, the blame will only fall on the president and it will not fall on the party or the opposition or on the new president. At the same time, the passing president will be portrayed in the history as someone who did some sweeping change.
Once the new president swears in, he won't be in a position to do sweeping changes as there is always a concern for second term, approval rating etc etc.
Well, the best time for lobbying in the next 8 years would be the end of this year, after Nov 2.
It is true what you are saying, but only partially. The outgoing President cannot change the laws. He can only do what could be an administrative fix. So, lobbying for these administrative fixes is the campaign that we already started. Hopefully, The President can do that.
If you go through the records of the past presidencies, you can see one interesting thing: Whenever the presidency changes from one person to another, that period is the best to make any sweeping changes that can be done administratively. Bill clinton passed many executive orders during the last 1.5 months of his presidency. The reason for this is: the ruling party will not oppose this as the election is over. The new president will also not oppose this as the election is over and the bad blood of any of this action will not fall on him as well. On top of that, the new president need not address any contentious issues as an initiative from his side. If the old president started something, he could always portray that, he is making the situation better.
The best example for this kind of presidential action: There is a proposal from many parts of the political spectrum to lift the cuban embargo. No one is ready to do that as everyone is scared how it will affect them. If the passing president does this during the last 1.5 months, the blame will only fall on the president and it will not fall on the party or the opposition or on the new president. At the same time, the passing president will be portrayed in the history as someone who did some sweeping change.
Once the new president swears in, he won't be in a position to do sweeping changes as there is always a concern for second term, approval rating etc etc.
Well, the best time for lobbying in the next 8 years would be the end of this year, after Nov 2.
It is true what you are saying, but only partially. The outgoing President cannot change the laws. He can only do what could be an administrative fix. So, lobbying for these administrative fixes is the campaign that we already started. Hopefully, The President can do that.
more...
makeup justin bieber never say never
njdude26
08-27 11:33 AM
you are not getting my point. im trying to see if this MBA will help with STEM/SKIL and get me a GC. that is all im interested in.
will it help me or not is the Q ..
will it help me or not is the Q ..
girlfriend Watch justin bieber never
k_sing
09-19 01:00 AM
Unfortunately Bitu72 did not have answer to my specific question, so the question is still Open.
Any appropriate response is much appreciated !
Any appropriate response is much appreciated !
hairstyles never say official ieber
satishku_2000
11-20 12:40 PM
For July 2nd filers, the freedom is attained on Dec 29th (180 days after filing).
I know ... :)
I know ... :)
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
According to Reuters: “A U.S. senator has asked Microsoft Corp about its plans to slash up to 5,000 jobs, urging the world’s biggest software company to preserve the jobs of Americans ahead of foreigners working on visas.““The letter asked Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer to provide a breakdown of the jobs to be eliminated, and [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1228&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/25/us-senator-asks-microsoft-about-job-cuts-h1b-visas/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/25/us-senator-asks-microsoft-about-job-cuts-h1b-visas/)
manand24
08-03 12:17 PM
Well atleast we arent alone I guess
Hopefully we will get them soon! Keeping fingers crossed! Just imagine the wait times for AP, EAD and eventually GC. Just forget about it!
Hopefully we will get them soon! Keeping fingers crossed! Just imagine the wait times for AP, EAD and eventually GC. Just forget about it!
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기