ksurjan
07-23 02:10 PM
J Barrett
wallpaper Vans Preps it Up
mambarg
07-20 09:56 AM
I got the answer.
INS review have steps to lookup info in CLAIMS software to see if there is approved petition.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ff4ed0676988d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=c54f0ccc1793f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD
SO I am sure they will verify the info in enotice before rejecting.
INS review have steps to lookup info in CLAIMS software to see if there is approved petition.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ff4ed0676988d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=c54f0ccc1793f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD
SO I am sure they will verify the info in enotice before rejecting.
glamzon
07-23 03:41 PM
R.William
2011 VANS Zapato Del Barco Boat
vivache
11-06 09:52 PM
Ok .. let me give you the math before getting to the question: )
Looking at the numbers from USCIS: http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
140 k GC numbers every year
85% available for folks in US, which is 199k
Out of these 119 k visas available, 40k are Eb3 category ..
10% for country .. so India's numbers should be 4000 a year
There are 14000 Eb3 visas before mine
Out of these 4750 are from India
So maybe I get the GC in 1 year 2 months?
Starting from? next Oct 10, meaning GC in Dec 11?
7170 visa should be given this year with the Apr 01 cut off .. so roughly 7000 Eb3 visas available so in all probability I should get it next year Dec 10?
What is confusing is this?
As per the latest visa bulletin .. the Eb3 cut off for all countries is around jun 02
And there are about 14k eb3 numbers till Jun 02.. so isn't the cut off be something like Dec 03 .. as current date .. since that's what 40k GC numbers add to?
If 40k GC's available for Eb3 for 2009 ... why is the cut off date Jun 02 .. which accoutns for only 14k GC's?
Looking at the numbers from USCIS: http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
140 k GC numbers every year
85% available for folks in US, which is 199k
Out of these 119 k visas available, 40k are Eb3 category ..
10% for country .. so India's numbers should be 4000 a year
There are 14000 Eb3 visas before mine
Out of these 4750 are from India
So maybe I get the GC in 1 year 2 months?
Starting from? next Oct 10, meaning GC in Dec 11?
7170 visa should be given this year with the Apr 01 cut off .. so roughly 7000 Eb3 visas available so in all probability I should get it next year Dec 10?
What is confusing is this?
As per the latest visa bulletin .. the Eb3 cut off for all countries is around jun 02
And there are about 14k eb3 numbers till Jun 02.. so isn't the cut off be something like Dec 03 .. as current date .. since that's what 40k GC numbers add to?
If 40k GC's available for Eb3 for 2009 ... why is the cut off date Jun 02 .. which accoutns for only 14k GC's?
more...
Appu
08-19 08:34 PM
You are eligible to work as soon as you receive the receipt notice. So I don't see a big gap.
Which service center is this?
Which service center is this?
thomachan72
05-19 02:12 PM
Most of us might not be working for contractors / body shoppers like this but it is definitely for our own good to investigate these incidents in detail. We have to somehow find out the grounds on which these individuals were deported.
If these are the result of FEAR or "imagining" that their entry will result in US job losses then it is "utter ludicrous and idiotic". In fact the opposite is true. The pseudorecovery that we are seeing now is not genuine. The basic thing that has to happen is reduction of wages and increased availability of qualified people here.
Again we have a saying in "malu", "There is no point in chanting vedas into the ear of a buffalo that is taken to be slaughtered". If only they realize that admitting more qualified people will stabilize the wages and prevent offshoring.
I am upset not at these deportation but at the "idiotic" thought behind them; "keep them out and we can have more jobs and better pay"
If these are the result of FEAR or "imagining" that their entry will result in US job losses then it is "utter ludicrous and idiotic". In fact the opposite is true. The pseudorecovery that we are seeing now is not genuine. The basic thing that has to happen is reduction of wages and increased availability of qualified people here.
Again we have a saying in "malu", "There is no point in chanting vedas into the ear of a buffalo that is taken to be slaughtered". If only they realize that admitting more qualified people will stabilize the wages and prevent offshoring.
I am upset not at these deportation but at the "idiotic" thought behind them; "keep them out and we can have more jobs and better pay"
more...
gcpool
11-28 09:42 AM
Now a days I head the appointments are easily available.
2010 VANS ZAPATA black oat shoes
unseenguy
06-19 01:18 PM
Hello Unseenguy,
Thanks for the reply .
I forgot to mention that i was already on h1 before so i dont fall under H1CAP.
This is the reason i applied for H1 from h4 as previously i was on H1B
Yes but you can not work on H4, just after filing H1 papers. So what you do is, go to Chennai and get a stamp that should not be a problem.
Thanks for the reply .
I forgot to mention that i was already on h1 before so i dont fall under H1CAP.
This is the reason i applied for H1 from h4 as previously i was on H1B
Yes but you can not work on H4, just after filing H1 papers. So what you do is, go to Chennai and get a stamp that should not be a problem.
more...
Lasantha
04-11 11:38 AM
I had the same experience on Wednesday. Do not hang up, you will be connected to an IO after a while.
I called (First time in last 4 months) to TSC using POJ method to check how they are trying to process cases. I know it was a futile attempt but wanted to try my luck regardless.
Guess what? When you can't get through right away (which is never) you get put on hold in queue. Instead of background music you would get with any other wait in queue system - the message kept repeating every second - "Your estimated wait time is between 10-15 minutes"...
It annoyed the heck out of me and I hung up rather than hearing the message over and over again.
Since I have not called in past few months, I do not know if this is how it always worked or is this a recent change. As far as I recall, they did have background music which made it a little bearable to wait 10 minutes.
I called (First time in last 4 months) to TSC using POJ method to check how they are trying to process cases. I know it was a futile attempt but wanted to try my luck regardless.
Guess what? When you can't get through right away (which is never) you get put on hold in queue. Instead of background music you would get with any other wait in queue system - the message kept repeating every second - "Your estimated wait time is between 10-15 minutes"...
It annoyed the heck out of me and I hung up rather than hearing the message over and over again.
Since I have not called in past few months, I do not know if this is how it always worked or is this a recent change. As far as I recall, they did have background music which made it a little bearable to wait 10 minutes.
hair The oat shoe comes with a
vamsi_poondla
03-22 09:47 PM
Thank you for your replies. I will try and see.
more...
Steve Mitchell
March 21st, 2004, 07:54 AM
It wa the loudest game of the year. The fans are at Playoff Intensity. I want homecourt throughout....and all seven game series. That would be nice.
hot The Vans Holiday 09 Del Barco
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
more...
house Vans Zapato Del Barco
p_aluri
08-03 06:51 PM
I would say second one is correct...
Hi All,
I am not sure whether this has been answered earlier. Here is my situation.
My H1b is getting over by Jan 2008. My I-140 approved and I have filed my I-485 in July 2nd 2007. I contacted my company law firm and one of the top law firm about 3 year extension. Here is the answer
Attorney from company law firm:- Since you have applied for I-485 you will not be eligible for 3 year or one year extension. The only stage when you can apply for 3 year extension is when your I-140 is approved and the PD is not current. Since there was a time the PD was current and you applied for I-485, you will not be eligible for 3 year extension. Even if you apply you will get rejected.
Then I contacted the other law firm mentioning about the above law firm comments and here is the reply.
Attorney from one of the top law firm:-The law firm is simply reading things wrong. You can file for the three year extension as long as there is not a visa number available. Therefore, if the I-485 was filed and then the visa numbers became unavailable, as is the case right now, the three year extensions are possible. I would see if you can request the law firm to reread the rule that permits the three year extensions. They are reading it too narrowly. We follow this procedure successfully all the time.
So I am confused in this case and my employer will believe in what the company law firm will say.
So I am trying to get an opinion from any one who was in this situation and got a 3 year extension and who is right?
Thanks
Hi All,
I am not sure whether this has been answered earlier. Here is my situation.
My H1b is getting over by Jan 2008. My I-140 approved and I have filed my I-485 in July 2nd 2007. I contacted my company law firm and one of the top law firm about 3 year extension. Here is the answer
Attorney from company law firm:- Since you have applied for I-485 you will not be eligible for 3 year or one year extension. The only stage when you can apply for 3 year extension is when your I-140 is approved and the PD is not current. Since there was a time the PD was current and you applied for I-485, you will not be eligible for 3 year extension. Even if you apply you will get rejected.
Then I contacted the other law firm mentioning about the above law firm comments and here is the reply.
Attorney from one of the top law firm:-The law firm is simply reading things wrong. You can file for the three year extension as long as there is not a visa number available. Therefore, if the I-485 was filed and then the visa numbers became unavailable, as is the case right now, the three year extensions are possible. I would see if you can request the law firm to reread the rule that permits the three year extensions. They are reading it too narrowly. We follow this procedure successfully all the time.
So I am confused in this case and my employer will believe in what the company law firm will say.
So I am trying to get an opinion from any one who was in this situation and got a 3 year extension and who is right?
Thanks
tattoo oat shoe silhouette,
vgayalu
06-19 09:53 PM
I have EB2 i-140 approved with PD Dec. 05. I am planning to change the employer.. was just waiting to see if CIR gonna help.. but looks like its not. If I change job now, I will have to do labor, i140 once again!! might be able to maintain PD. .. my question is... I believe that in Octo. 06, new quota for GC will be available. What are the guesses that the PD will become current (at least for Eb2 India) in Octo 06?? Some educated guesses are highly appreciated.
I wish same. But it is 200% not possible. We are getting lot of Labour approvals from BEC's . If P.D dates stays as 2003 Jan it is great.
I think there is much possibility for more retrogression. It may go back upto 2002 Jan for EB2 also.
vgayalu
I wish same. But it is 200% not possible. We are getting lot of Labour approvals from BEC's . If P.D dates stays as 2003 Jan it is great.
I think there is much possibility for more retrogression. It may go back upto 2002 Jan for EB2 also.
vgayalu
more...
pictures Featuring a oat shoe toebox
duncanidaho
02-01 05:48 AM
There is a seperate thread on this. Look it up.
My 2 c:
- Stay away from Murthy. They've screwed up at least 2 cases that I know of. And their response is slow.
- Thomas Fan in MD: Run like you've seen the devil. I have no idea why malpractice suits has not been filed against him yet.
- Clark Trevor in CA - Guy is awesome but expensive.
- Ellen Krengel in CA - Decent.
- Gowda in MI - Slow, inefficient.
- Rajeev Khanna - seems to be good, efficient and responsive.
- Jon Wu, CA - Slow as hell but knows the ins/outs
My 2 c:
- Stay away from Murthy. They've screwed up at least 2 cases that I know of. And their response is slow.
- Thomas Fan in MD: Run like you've seen the devil. I have no idea why malpractice suits has not been filed against him yet.
- Clark Trevor in CA - Guy is awesome but expensive.
- Ellen Krengel in CA - Decent.
- Gowda in MI - Slow, inefficient.
- Rajeev Khanna - seems to be good, efficient and responsive.
- Jon Wu, CA - Slow as hell but knows the ins/outs
dresses classic oat shoe design.
bp333
07-17 08:06 PM
Great job folks. Justice Prevails!
more...
makeup vans boat shoes.
dce.deepak
09-30 04:05 PM
it doesn't make much sense even after google translation. If you understand then can you please translate. I want to know what other people are planing in that forum
girlfriend oat shoes vans. Boat shoes
NELLAIKUMAR
02-16 03:20 PM
Hi Nayekal,
I am in the same situation as you. My wife's employment is expected to end in the Middle of March.
1. Is it necessary to have receipt number from I-539 in hand by the time the employment is ending or is it ok to mail the I-539 after the employment end date. I am asking this since my H1 is up for extension after April 1st. I am trying to understand whether there is any risk in applying for my wife's COS H1-H4 along with my H1 extension. In this case, there would be gap of 15 days between my wife's last working day and when I plan to send documents for my H1 extension and my wife's H1-H4 COS.
2. Also, if we change it to H4, is it the end of H1. Do we have the option of switching back to H1 at later date without having to go for a fresh H1.
Can you please share your experience.
Thanks....
I am in the same situation as you. My wife's employment is expected to end in the Middle of March.
1. Is it necessary to have receipt number from I-539 in hand by the time the employment is ending or is it ok to mail the I-539 after the employment end date. I am asking this since my H1 is up for extension after April 1st. I am trying to understand whether there is any risk in applying for my wife's COS H1-H4 along with my H1 extension. In this case, there would be gap of 15 days between my wife's last working day and when I plan to send documents for my H1 extension and my wife's H1-H4 COS.
2. Also, if we change it to H4, is it the end of H1. Do we have the option of switching back to H1 at later date without having to go for a fresh H1.
Can you please share your experience.
Thanks....
hairstyles And the oat shoes keep
yabadaba
06-30 04:07 PM
sanju,
CIR is dead. no point flogging a dead horse. right now we are just trying to gather information and facts...by calling this guy names will not help anything. i know he has been ostracized on IV a whole lot for what happened at the guiterrez rally. but let bygones be bygones... cir is dead..no point blaming him for it
CIR is dead. no point flogging a dead horse. right now we are just trying to gather information and facts...by calling this guy names will not help anything. i know he has been ostracized on IV a whole lot for what happened at the guiterrez rally. but let bygones be bygones... cir is dead..no point blaming him for it
cakewalkr7
08-20 01:45 PM
I modified the height instead of the scaleY for the grid and that seemed to work. However I got some unexpected results. When I used the scaleY method all the children in the grid also scaled. But using height left the children's height unaffected. Is this how it should be? It seems strange that the grid below it would slide up as I had hoped yet the upper grid's child textbox and label sizes stay the same and in place.
WeShallOvercome
07-23 02:14 PM
C. UHRMACHER @ 8:26am on July 2
No particular significance but I think it is just to relieve some nerves... If there are other applicants signed by the same person, you can be sure your file reached the right place :) (Or you are not alone if your lawyer screwed up and sent it to wrong address)
No particular significance but I think it is just to relieve some nerves... If there are other applicants signed by the same person, you can be sure your file reached the right place :) (Or you are not alone if your lawyer screwed up and sent it to wrong address)
No comments:
Post a Comment