dtekkedil
07-03 10:03 AM
I'll draw a flower and send it, how is that? After all the $$$ spent on the lawyer and this whole fiasco in general, I ain't spendin' a penny more on them:mad:
Maybe a stinky garden weed. It's the thought that counts:D.
LOL!
You wont be spending the money on them... in the end it will be for you! Think of it as an investment :)
Maybe a stinky garden weed. It's the thought that counts:D.
LOL!
You wont be spending the money on them... in the end it will be for you! Think of it as an investment :)
karthikgk
10-19 07:13 PM
Same situation here for my wife, we applied only on 29 Jun and current EAD expiring on 22 Aug. We totally forgot about it. She is working for a very reputed bank in NY. Yesterday she received a call from HR asking if she had applied for EAD renewal. She explained the situation and asked them what to do. This is their reply:"That's not a problem. You can work for 180 days after expiry. Just send me a copy of the receipt notice once you receive it".
I think this essentially means the 245(k). So I went back to read the same top to bottom, and looks like you are allowed to work not exceeding 180 days.
I will update once i get more clarification.
Hello,
Looks like probably me and my wife will end up in a situation with an expired EAD - we did receive a receipt of our renewal application.
What did you guys do? Did you continue working after the EAD expired? Or take a temporary break? Or did u luck out and got ur EAD just in time?
Any help/suggestion/advise is much appreciated - as you may imagine, I am worried sick
I think this essentially means the 245(k). So I went back to read the same top to bottom, and looks like you are allowed to work not exceeding 180 days.
I will update once i get more clarification.
Hello,
Looks like probably me and my wife will end up in a situation with an expired EAD - we did receive a receipt of our renewal application.
What did you guys do? Did you continue working after the EAD expired? Or take a temporary break? Or did u luck out and got ur EAD just in time?
Any help/suggestion/advise is much appreciated - as you may imagine, I am worried sick
sr123
05-25 10:43 AM
called Sen Specters Office. The staffer said she will pass it on to the senator.
vnsriv
10-26 03:36 PM
I am also one of those, who received the EAD while the online case status reads as "Case Received and Pending"
Wish that's true for my spouse's GC :)
Wish that's true for my spouse's GC :)
more...
what_now
06-14 03:08 PM
CPO mail today......
priti8888
08-16 11:09 AM
Most IO in India are not aware of "AP"...They ask if you have a GC , H1B ,F1 or tourist visa. Here's what we and our friends have done and it works..
Make a copy of AP and highlight the sentence where it mentions that "this person is allowed to travel....blah blah...". Paper clip the original AP along with it . The IO will cautiosly compare the original to the duplicate.And tell them that you are in the Final stage of GC process...
They have only few mins to look over all your docs...(PP, AP,EAD..Etc...so you might as well help them by highlighting what exactly he needs to see.
Make a copy of AP and highlight the sentence where it mentions that "this person is allowed to travel....blah blah...". Paper clip the original AP along with it . The IO will cautiosly compare the original to the duplicate.And tell them that you are in the Final stage of GC process...
They have only few mins to look over all your docs...(PP, AP,EAD..Etc...so you might as well help them by highlighting what exactly he needs to see.
more...
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
Specialty chemicals company Clariant AG said Tuesday it is cutting 1,000 jobs this year.Clariant said the job cuts are the result of a sharp decline in customer demand for its products in the textile, leather, automotive and construction industries.Source: International Herald TribunePosted in Chemical, Manufacturing, worldwide Tagged: Clariant, Clariant layoff http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1258&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/27/swiss-chemicals-company-clariant-cuts-1000-jobs/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/27/swiss-chemicals-company-clariant-cuts-1000-jobs/)
mrajatish
09-17 12:02 PM
Explain your comments more clearly - do you mean EB1 unused is not getting used by EB2 India/China? If so, this is a matter of grave concern, and yes, we need to find out more information on this. We have to wait till DOS publishes Visa number usage this year. All EB1 and EB2 numbers should be used by over-subscribed countries in those categories and by no means by EB3.
Find out/research as much as you can on this - we need to understand what is going on.
Find out/research as much as you can on this - we need to understand what is going on.
more...
gcisadawg
04-12 08:18 PM
This is correct. Only your attorney will get the RFE.
That is incorrect. USCIS would send a copy of RFE to you as well.
My wife got a medical RFE and I'm looking at the letter from USCIS as I type.
Yes, We did sign the lawyer form. Lawyer first got a copy and informed us. He also told us that we would be getting one. And we got one.
That is incorrect. USCIS would send a copy of RFE to you as well.
My wife got a medical RFE and I'm looking at the letter from USCIS as I type.
Yes, We did sign the lawyer form. Lawyer first got a copy and informed us. He also told us that we would be getting one. And we got one.
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
eilsoe
10-22 04:24 PM
*wrooommm!!*
:P:P:P:P:P
*post*post*post*post*post*post*post*post*post*post *
Huh? Who goes there?
:P:P:P:P:P
*post*post*post*post*post*post*post*post*post*post *
Huh? Who goes there?
VisaVisa
09-10 10:28 AM
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
I agree.
I have also heard that it can be picked up from a consulate. How does that work?
I agree.
I have also heard that it can be picked up from a consulate. How does that work?
more...
amsgc
03-31 03:05 PM
Thank you for sharing your experience.
I am at a loss here, I wish I could tell you what to do. But, I would certainly go back and look at the 1040 instructions for 2004. Rules keep changing, and maybe what you did was the right thing to do.
Perhaps there are others who can throw some light here.
Ams
Hmm....I got married in Nov 2004 and my wife came in to US Dec 2004. and when filing 2004 taxes I didnt think about my wife being NR for tax purposes. I went thru a CPA and I believe she filed 1040 married filing jointly !!
Didnt have any questions or issues so far. Should I bother....file an amendment....or just ignore until in case IRS has an issue?
I am at a loss here, I wish I could tell you what to do. But, I would certainly go back and look at the 1040 instructions for 2004. Rules keep changing, and maybe what you did was the right thing to do.
Perhaps there are others who can throw some light here.
Ams
Hmm....I got married in Nov 2004 and my wife came in to US Dec 2004. and when filing 2004 taxes I didnt think about my wife being NR for tax purposes. I went thru a CPA and I believe she filed 1040 married filing jointly !!
Didnt have any questions or issues so far. Should I bother....file an amendment....or just ignore until in case IRS has an issue?
anantc
06-19 02:08 PM
Hi
Does any one know if it will also be applicable to someone with end of 9th year H1B? I have been getting annual H1Bs fro the past 3 years now, I was wondering if I will be eligible for I-140 premium.
Is Premium Processing of 140 for 9yrs Applicable H1B & 485 pending from June 16th 2008 ?
Appreciate anyone already in same boat!
Does any one know if it will also be applicable to someone with end of 9th year H1B? I have been getting annual H1Bs fro the past 3 years now, I was wondering if I will be eligible for I-140 premium.
Is Premium Processing of 140 for 9yrs Applicable H1B & 485 pending from June 16th 2008 ?
Appreciate anyone already in same boat!
more...
crystal
04-28 03:08 PM
What possible reasons , you think you might get an RFE on h1-b extension?
chanduv23
08-07 08:04 AM
Please visit http://iv-tristate.blogspot.com
Please make it to this event
Please make it to this event
more...
Dhundhun
08-29 03:44 PM
...they want to distribute them judiciously.
USCIS ... judiciously???
LOL
USCIS ... judiciously???
LOL
BharatPremi
04-16 04:34 PM
What is an "MTR"?
freedom_fighter
01-26 09:09 PM
me/spouse finally got our GCs in mail today. Interestingly the green card is not green, it just white mostly
best of luck to others in the journey.
best of luck to others in the journey.
gatsat
10-08 03:10 PM
Hi. I am still unmarried. But i applied for my I-485 when it was current last month . My priority date iss Nov2004 in EB2. Currently it is April2004. I might not be able to get married till May2008. Would i be getting GC by then or is there chances of getting delayed. Please let me know
Also, is there any way that i can keep postponing my application to be processed till i get married ? I filed in Augst 13th and still didnt get my receipt. Also my I-140 is in process in TSC.
Please clarify.
Also, is there any way that i can keep postponing my application to be processed till i get married ? I filed in Augst 13th and still didnt get my receipt. Also my I-140 is in process in TSC.
Please clarify.
amsgc
06-16 12:35 AM
Murali,
It is always good to have your documents in order. If you are aware of the problem, why don't you have it fixed?
It may very well be a typo. on the card, and everything else may be in order. For example, what does it say on your credit report? If it is the other way round, then there is problem that must be fixed.
I would have it fixed it anyway.
Dear Friends
I have a big problem , my name is correct on passport, birthcertificate , H1 but my social security card has my name swapped. I never bothered to change all these years but I hear name check so I am worried.
Will my 1-485 case get stuck because of this
is it a good idea to change the name on SSN now.
Any suggestions.
Thanks
Murali
It is always good to have your documents in order. If you are aware of the problem, why don't you have it fixed?
It may very well be a typo. on the card, and everything else may be in order. For example, what does it say on your credit report? If it is the other way round, then there is problem that must be fixed.
I would have it fixed it anyway.
Dear Friends
I have a big problem , my name is correct on passport, birthcertificate , H1 but my social security card has my name swapped. I never bothered to change all these years but I hear name check so I am worried.
Will my 1-485 case get stuck because of this
is it a good idea to change the name on SSN now.
Any suggestions.
Thanks
Murali
No comments:
Post a Comment