gene-O
10-20 05:27 PM
Hello! I'm on H1B, and my spouse is on H4. We received an ITIN for my spouse for our taxpaying needs. My spouse managed to get employed using the ITIN. We filed a joint tax return this year. We received a letter from SS administration saying "We cannot put these earnings on your Social Security record until the name and SSN reported agree with our records." My lawyer says: "your spouse is now barred from GC, because when she's worked for more than X amount of days she became OOS."
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
CCC2006
10-04 03:32 PM
Hi there,
There is premium processing available for 140 but like for everything else that is premium .. u have to pay a premium for it. I believe $1k.
Best of luck.
There is premium processing available for 140 but like for everything else that is premium .. u have to pay a premium for it. I believe $1k.
Best of luck.
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.
dartkid31
05-17 11:30 PM
That is true. This thing called "special handling" in common parlance is, thank god, not a hot topic of discussion. I hope this clause doesn't get weeded out given the current scenario where they have killed F4. I really wonder if "highly skilled" legal immigrants would ultimately get any benefit out of this bill. Limboland is where many people are - and at the end of the day you still get to live in Limboland and become its citizens by default.
My two cents! :( :(
The original language that was in CIR would exempt from the quota STEM graduates who have worked for 3 years, under the F 4 provision. More importantly, it allows for self petitioning and adjustment of status following a $2000 fee. If this amendment passes, all that would be gone, and simply replaced with the exemption that was already in the original bill. Again I'm puzzled: why are we supporting this amendment?
My two cents! :( :(
The original language that was in CIR would exempt from the quota STEM graduates who have worked for 3 years, under the F 4 provision. More importantly, it allows for self petitioning and adjustment of status following a $2000 fee. If this amendment passes, all that would be gone, and simply replaced with the exemption that was already in the original bill. Again I'm puzzled: why are we supporting this amendment?
more...
pezz77
05-24 09:09 AM
I thought this would be the most appropriate place to post.
I am on my 3rd year of H1-B (non-technical field), just moved to a new company and was going to start my process toward getting a gc in the next month or so. Now, with all of this, I am very confused.
Do you folks think that it is most appropriate to sit tight and wait to see what happens? or to just go for it now?
I'd appreciate your input, as I have to make a decision soon.
I am on my 3rd year of H1-B (non-technical field), just moved to a new company and was going to start my process toward getting a gc in the next month or so. Now, with all of this, I am very confused.
Do you folks think that it is most appropriate to sit tight and wait to see what happens? or to just go for it now?
I'd appreciate your input, as I have to make a decision soon.
gc28262
08-27 06:37 PM
Use FOIA form to get a copy of your I-140 approval notice. It is a slow process. Can take upto a year to get the document.
USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
more...
BharatPremi
07-27 02:37 PM
After EAD is approved, H4 can work anywhere in any job.
O.K. Once you get EAD being a H4 Visa holder you can do multiple jobs in multiple field as you were having H4 status. But now if you are having H1 status then you can do multiple jobs with all jobs having similar description to the job description for what your original employer filed your green card (485).
Now real question should be "Should I use EAD or Should I be on H1/H4?"
If U choose to use your EAD than from that moment your H status expires. In normal circumstances you would not care. But in reality your 485 process will still continue for years and say unfortunately something bad happen to your 485 process and get denied then you will have one choice that is to leave USA. But if you have maintained your H status not using EAD then in that kind of scenario you still keep working and staying in USA.
O.K. Once you get EAD being a H4 Visa holder you can do multiple jobs in multiple field as you were having H4 status. But now if you are having H1 status then you can do multiple jobs with all jobs having similar description to the job description for what your original employer filed your green card (485).
Now real question should be "Should I use EAD or Should I be on H1/H4?"
If U choose to use your EAD than from that moment your H status expires. In normal circumstances you would not care. But in reality your 485 process will still continue for years and say unfortunately something bad happen to your 485 process and get denied then you will have one choice that is to leave USA. But if you have maintained your H status not using EAD then in that kind of scenario you still keep working and staying in USA.
cjain
08-10 04:36 PM
...if you want...i'll post here..
Great find..
Please post all news related info here http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4805&highlight=media
Great find..
Please post all news related info here http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4805&highlight=media
more...
freedom4ever
04-20 07:12 AM
I filed on March 10 2011 at texas service center, check was cashed on 3/15. Hope that helps.
jsb
12-31 10:59 AM
Dear friends,
My h1 is valid till Dec 2009. H1 stamping is expired in passport in Oct 2007.
My AP is approved. I am planning to travel in Jan 2008. Can I us AP to reenter in Feb 2008 and continue working on H1 or do I have to use EAD to work?
Thanks
MOnica
Not sure. AP allows to enter the contry because your AOS is pending. In the meantime until decision on your AOS made, you work on whatever status (H1, EAD etc.). As your H1 stamp has expired, you might need to use EAD.
My h1 is valid till Dec 2009. H1 stamping is expired in passport in Oct 2007.
My AP is approved. I am planning to travel in Jan 2008. Can I us AP to reenter in Feb 2008 and continue working on H1 or do I have to use EAD to work?
Thanks
MOnica
Not sure. AP allows to enter the contry because your AOS is pending. In the meantime until decision on your AOS made, you work on whatever status (H1, EAD etc.). As your H1 stamp has expired, you might need to use EAD.
more...
enthu999
03-27 01:40 AM
Just an idea, if emails or letters doesn't reach Obama...may be IV should consider an open letter to Obama,Congress and Senate by buying space in major news papers
and suggesting the obvious economic benefits(buying homes, home renovations, buying durable goods etc) of speeding legal immigration.
and suggesting the obvious economic benefits(buying homes, home renovations, buying durable goods etc) of speeding legal immigration.
rajeshalex
10-14 02:19 PM
Its better to take it from India. Check with ur travel agent.
Also note that pre existing conditions are not covered in most of the insurance plans.
Rajesh
Also note that pre existing conditions are not covered in most of the insurance plans.
Rajesh
more...
vts31
10-20 03:33 PM
photoshop is more editing oriented while painter is more create oriented. Painter is designed to be used with a wacom tablet, so if you dont have one its pretty lame. Painter 5 sucks because the layers were retarded, Painter 6's layers are much more like photoshop.
amitjoey
02-12 03:09 PM
Thanks. All we need is 800 people like Hari, who can contribute a little amount of money and a little amount of time by inviting other friends.
Is it not true that it only takes about 10 minutes or so to invite other friends by mail to join IV and a $20/month.
Is it not true that it only takes about 10 minutes or so to invite other friends by mail to join IV and a $20/month.
more...
go_gc_way
05-25 10:37 PM
My sincere , Thanks for your support & help provided to IV.
YOU ARE GREAT.
YOU ARE GREAT.
monikainusa
03-22 09:14 AM
the notice says:
based on the document you have submitted to us and the information elicited in your interview with an american consuller officer we are not able to issue
you an h-4 temporary visa because :
the petetioner does not appear to be either able or willing to provide qualifying employemnt for the principle applicant in the united states in accordance with
a appropriate laws and regulations
I have provided all the documents including client letter.please advise.. also does it revoke my husband's H1B visa ?
based on the document you have submitted to us and the information elicited in your interview with an american consuller officer we are not able to issue
you an h-4 temporary visa because :
the petetioner does not appear to be either able or willing to provide qualifying employemnt for the principle applicant in the united states in accordance with
a appropriate laws and regulations
I have provided all the documents including client letter.please advise.. also does it revoke my husband's H1B visa ?
more...
Queen Josephine
January 5th, 2005, 12:06 AM
Geesh, these are all really nice compositions that lend themselves well to this technique. I think I'd like to see one of the pots in the first pic also colored. Really nice work though on both your parts.
saibaba
03-31 09:50 PM
raj,ronnie and others,,,thanx a lot guys
aj1234567
11-21 05:52 PM
hi-
What will happen if 140 still penidng agter passed 6months 485 recipt date,can i cahnge the jobs in this situtation also
Thanks
Aj
What will happen if 140 still penidng agter passed 6months 485 recipt date,can i cahnge the jobs in this situtation also
Thanks
Aj
reddog
07-08 01:25 PM
Though it is not of my concern - I see that you want to file a divorce with your current spouse and then remarry another person - while I don't know your personal specific situation - I would suggest that you must try and work it out with your current spouse
I see a lot of divorce cases these days among the immigrant community and when we look into it further - many cases divorces could have been avoided if spouses were more accomodating.
Once again - I have written this with a good intent. Please do niot shoot me down. Admins can delete my post if needed.
wb, agony aunt
and stop watching those Karan Johar movies.
I see a lot of divorce cases these days among the immigrant community and when we look into it further - many cases divorces could have been avoided if spouses were more accomodating.
Once again - I have written this with a good intent. Please do niot shoot me down. Admins can delete my post if needed.
wb, agony aunt
and stop watching those Karan Johar movies.
AB1275
12-12 11:29 AM
My PERM was applied in Nov 2007 and 140 in early- mid 2008.
It was applied under EB2 category (Masters Degree). Currently, I'm on the 5th yr of my H1. My 6th year starts in Feb 2009.
Had received an RFE to which we responded but it still got denied. The main reason being the company has a loss and the books are not audited.
My lawyer suggested that we appeal the deinal and start a new PERM in EB3 category.
Are these my only option to make sure I can renew my H1 after the 6th year? Any suggestions?
I'm confused and scared at the same time. Not sure what to do..
please suggest me all the options available to me.
Thanks!
It was applied under EB2 category (Masters Degree). Currently, I'm on the 5th yr of my H1. My 6th year starts in Feb 2009.
Had received an RFE to which we responded but it still got denied. The main reason being the company has a loss and the books are not audited.
My lawyer suggested that we appeal the deinal and start a new PERM in EB3 category.
Are these my only option to make sure I can renew my H1 after the 6th year? Any suggestions?
I'm confused and scared at the same time. Not sure what to do..
please suggest me all the options available to me.
Thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment