The7zen
06-14 08:01 PM
Thank you for your inputs. I really appreciated for your help. We went to Detective office and he allowed my sister only to question. He asked couple of questions regarding that family and theft. My sister explained him that she don't know about that situation. It took about 20 minutes time there. We have below questions still remains in our mind.
1) Do we really required a Lawyer to protect?
2) I believe they should have proper information to arrest or accuse right?
3) We know my sister is innocent but feeling insecure for being happend. so what are all the chances to again question my sister?.
After viewing your messages here, we realized it is wrong to go to Detective office but we went this morning
Please help me in this
1) Its better to have a lawyer in these type of situations, especially if they have to record your statements.
3) Did you talk to the accuser to find out what exactly is happening and why he is suspecting your sister? BTW if you do so, just be polite and listen to what he says dont get agitated over the phone.
Good luck....
1) Do we really required a Lawyer to protect?
2) I believe they should have proper information to arrest or accuse right?
3) We know my sister is innocent but feeling insecure for being happend. so what are all the chances to again question my sister?.
After viewing your messages here, we realized it is wrong to go to Detective office but we went this morning
Please help me in this
1) Its better to have a lawyer in these type of situations, especially if they have to record your statements.
3) Did you talk to the accuser to find out what exactly is happening and why he is suspecting your sister? BTW if you do so, just be polite and listen to what he says dont get agitated over the phone.
Good luck....
wallpaper 521803demi lovato hair
nrk
10-26 02:16 PM
Thanks for the information. Green for you
is this what you are asking for?
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
is this what you are asking for?
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/3rd%20Level%20(Left%20Nav%20Children)/Green%20Card%20-%203rd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I485%20Reports.pdf
akhilmahajan
10-27 09:28 AM
New England Chapter Meeting 10/28/07(Sunday) @3:00 PM at Food Court, Burlington Mall, Burlington, MA
San Jose was the beginning.........................
July 2nd was the next step..........................
Washington DC was a bang..........................
Now lets get together for the supernova........
Date:- October 28th, 2007 (Sunday)
Time:- 3:00 PM
Location : Food Court, Burlington Mall, Burlington, MA
Agenda
1. IV awareness campaign
2. Our experiences at the DC rally and lobby day efforts
3. Is lawmaker meetings really that important? Does it make a difference?
4. How can you help IV activities? Distributing Flyers, emails, etc..
Please spread the message about this meet among your friends.
If you or your friends haven't joined the New England Chapter, please join the state chapter at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MA_Immigration_Voice/
If you have any questions please let me know.
GO IV GO.
TOHGETHER WE CAN
San Jose was the beginning.........................
July 2nd was the next step..........................
Washington DC was a bang..........................
Now lets get together for the supernova........
Date:- October 28th, 2007 (Sunday)
Time:- 3:00 PM
Location : Food Court, Burlington Mall, Burlington, MA
Agenda
1. IV awareness campaign
2. Our experiences at the DC rally and lobby day efforts
3. Is lawmaker meetings really that important? Does it make a difference?
4. How can you help IV activities? Distributing Flyers, emails, etc..
Please spread the message about this meet among your friends.
If you or your friends haven't joined the New England Chapter, please join the state chapter at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MA_Immigration_Voice/
If you have any questions please let me know.
GO IV GO.
TOHGETHER WE CAN
2011 Demi Lovato sports pink hair
vindas
06-14 02:05 PM
Don't worry. I had received a call 3 years back from Department of Homeland security. They asked me that someone was taking picture from my car on the highway. someone had complained that we were taking pictures of "George Washington Bridge sign board" from our car. We had not even gone on that highway that day.
We told him that it is a wrong car. Why would we go on the highway and takie picture of the sign board. Somone have given wrong information.
After that we never got that kind of call. No issue at all.
We told him that it is a wrong car. Why would we go on the highway and takie picture of the sign board. Somone have given wrong information.
After that we never got that kind of call. No issue at all.
more...
prince_ny2000
05-16 02:46 PM
My question to my valuable friends is that if I've filed PERM well before 365 days (i.e. the last year) but it was denied and then i refiled another PERM after the 365-day period was started, then would I still be able to renew my H1 based upon filed PERM or approved I-140 or what? :confused:
Berkeleybee
04-03 04:36 PM
brb2, Thanks for pointing it out. Actually the figure of 15% makes our case stronger. We will have it changed.
Seeing as how I and Stuck labor were the ones to put that National Interest Fact sheet together thought I should respond:
The NAS report is available at http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
The document is quoting from page ES-8 of the NAS report -- I'm cutting and pasting from the document
"In Germany, 36% of undergraduates receive their degrees in science and engineering. In China, the
figure is 59%, and in Japan 66%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 32%."
The NAS document end note says "Based on data from Data are from National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Appendix Table 2-33."
The document you have linked to says
In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.27 In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.
And the document footnote says
Analysis conducted by the Association of American Universities. 2006. National Defense Education and Innovation Initiative. Based on data in National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Appendix Table 2-33. For countries with both short and long degrees, the ratios are calculated with both short and long degrees as the numerator.
So this is pretty odd -- both are based on the same base dataset, and it looks like the second document calculates the % differently. Also not sure why one says "science and engineering" and the other says "natural science and engineering"
Seeing as how I and Stuck labor were the ones to put that National Interest Fact sheet together thought I should respond:
The NAS report is available at http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
The document is quoting from page ES-8 of the NAS report -- I'm cutting and pasting from the document
"In Germany, 36% of undergraduates receive their degrees in science and engineering. In China, the
figure is 59%, and in Japan 66%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 32%."
The NAS document end note says "Based on data from Data are from National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Appendix Table 2-33."
The document you have linked to says
In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.27 In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.
And the document footnote says
Analysis conducted by the Association of American Universities. 2006. National Defense Education and Innovation Initiative. Based on data in National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Appendix Table 2-33. For countries with both short and long degrees, the ratios are calculated with both short and long degrees as the numerator.
So this is pretty odd -- both are based on the same base dataset, and it looks like the second document calculates the % differently. Also not sure why one says "science and engineering" and the other says "natural science and engineering"
more...
kishdam
03-19 12:16 PM
I-140 withdrawal is not mandatory but it's good for both - employer and employee.
Not sure how withdrawing an approved I140 is good for the employee??
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
Not sure how withdrawing an approved I140 is good for the employee??
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
2010 2011 Demi Lovato hair
pbojja
05-22 11:22 AM
I totally agree, but as if there isnt a backlog at I-140 right now!! its been more than an year since I filed my I-140 ..I see a couple of LUDs but no approval in sight!
Does anyone else have the same story? I-140 pending for 12+ months now(transfered from NSC to TSC last month).
I applied my 140 on July 05 07 and still waiting , transfered to TSC last month . I guess the transfer cases box is the last one , so I guess our approvals are not insight , I beleive CIS is working on 485 cases who are current ..thats why I m all in for this rule
Does anyone else have the same story? I-140 pending for 12+ months now(transfered from NSC to TSC last month).
I applied my 140 on July 05 07 and still waiting , transfered to TSC last month . I guess the transfer cases box is the last one , so I guess our approvals are not insight , I beleive CIS is working on 485 cases who are current ..thats why I m all in for this rule
more...
coopheal
12-06 11:03 PM
bump
hair The multi-talented Demi Lovato
shsk
07-17 01:02 AM
Thank you very much, I will be sending the document tomorrow:)
more...
Googler
06-18 08:23 PM
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
please please stop reading the old bill
the new one is on the iv home page
or in thomas look at sa.1150 under the s.1358 bill
Thanks for pointing that out Paskal. I stand corrected.
S.A. 1150 Section 216 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:2:./temp/~r110MkRgxl:e138316:) says:
SEC. 216. STREAMLINED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS.
(a) INFORMATION SHARING; INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--Section 105 (8 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to resolve cases in which an application or petition for an immigration benefit conferred under this Act has been delayed due to an outstanding background check investigation for more than 2 years after the date on which such application or petition was initially filed.
``(2) MEMBERSHIP.--The interagency task force established under paragraph (1) shall include representatives from Federal agencies with immigration, law enforcement, or national security responsibilities under this Act.''.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year, 2008 through 2012 for enhancements to existing systems for conducting background and security checks necessary to support immigration security and orderly processing of applications.
(c) REPORT ON BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the background and security checks conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
(2) CONTENT.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) a description of the background and security check program;
(B) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays associated with different types of immigration applications;
(C) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays by applicant country of origin; and
(D) the steps that the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking to expedite background and security checks that have been pending for more than 180 days.
Doesn't promise any results and it is not clear if this extra appropriations will be used for the much ballyhooed transformation that Michael Cannon says might kick in in 2010, or for clearing the current backlog BUT is much better than trying to take away the right to file mandamus suits. Also leads us to believe that 180 days is the acceptable amount of time for a namecheck.
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
please please stop reading the old bill
the new one is on the iv home page
or in thomas look at sa.1150 under the s.1358 bill
Thanks for pointing that out Paskal. I stand corrected.
S.A. 1150 Section 216 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:2:./temp/~r110MkRgxl:e138316:) says:
SEC. 216. STREAMLINED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS.
(a) INFORMATION SHARING; INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--Section 105 (8 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to resolve cases in which an application or petition for an immigration benefit conferred under this Act has been delayed due to an outstanding background check investigation for more than 2 years after the date on which such application or petition was initially filed.
``(2) MEMBERSHIP.--The interagency task force established under paragraph (1) shall include representatives from Federal agencies with immigration, law enforcement, or national security responsibilities under this Act.''.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year, 2008 through 2012 for enhancements to existing systems for conducting background and security checks necessary to support immigration security and orderly processing of applications.
(c) REPORT ON BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the background and security checks conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
(2) CONTENT.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) a description of the background and security check program;
(B) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays associated with different types of immigration applications;
(C) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays by applicant country of origin; and
(D) the steps that the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking to expedite background and security checks that have been pending for more than 180 days.
Doesn't promise any results and it is not clear if this extra appropriations will be used for the much ballyhooed transformation that Michael Cannon says might kick in in 2010, or for clearing the current backlog BUT is much better than trying to take away the right to file mandamus suits. Also leads us to believe that 180 days is the acceptable amount of time for a namecheck.
hot Demi Lovato#39;s concert
nozerd
01-10 03:10 PM
I know of 2 ppl very close to me who have been laid off. However they both already have GC.
more...
house Demi Lovato looks mature in
roxychaney
03-02 11:39 AM
Just out of curiousity, does traditional painting qualify?
o yea, guess i should have asked this before posting!
o yea, guess i should have asked this before posting!
tattoo demi lovato hair 2011.
ExoVoid
06-13 03:53 PM
I worked that much out, but it shouldn't throw the percentage calculations.
more...
pictures Demi Lovato Dyes Her Hair Back
Soul
06-14 08:36 AM
:beam: Thanks for all your votes peoples!
I vow never to design to this standard again :P:P
- Soul :s:
I vow never to design to this standard again :P:P
- Soul :s:
dresses demi lovato hair 2011.
sledge_hammer
05-30 05:58 PM
Photo copies of LC? You mean approval or the application photocopies?
If you can get your hands on photocopies of Labor certificate, that would be awesome. Otherwise, make sure you at least have the following -
1. Experience letter (with last day of attendance)
2. I140 receipt
3. I485 receipt
4. Paystubs for 6 months of employment post I1485 receive date
You are good to go from there.
If you can get your hands on photocopies of Labor certificate, that would be awesome. Otherwise, make sure you at least have the following -
1. Experience letter (with last day of attendance)
2. I140 receipt
3. I485 receipt
4. Paystubs for 6 months of employment post I1485 receive date
You are good to go from there.
more...
makeup Demi lovato new song 2011
yabadaba
07-13 02:24 PM
hilarious...my last post was 711
go apu!
go apu!
girlfriend Demi Lovato Hair
sreeanne
10-30 02:04 PM
All you need is just apply for H1 extension and wait till USCIS gets back to you, if something happens, change you stat to EAD. I dont see any issues here.
hairstyles DEMI LOVATO photo | Demi
srarao
02-15 10:48 AM
Best thing is call the customer service and explain step by step.
also take an infopass appointment and explain.
also take an infopass appointment and explain.
noone2day78
02-19 08:13 AM
ohh is this really true? can u specify a source for this ?
Dandruff said "You can reapply for H1-B but you are NOT subject to H1-B cap / quota.
It should not be subject to the annual cap unless you have been out of the U.S. for at least one year since you were last in H-1B status."
Is this true for ppl who haven't done masters in usa?
Dandruff said "You can reapply for H1-B but you are NOT subject to H1-B cap / quota.
It should not be subject to the annual cap unless you have been out of the U.S. for at least one year since you were last in H-1B status."
Is this true for ppl who haven't done masters in usa?
guygeek007
07-23 09:25 AM
InspectorFox, Jayant and Tina - Your prompt replies and advice are much appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment