sonia_sd
02-11 09:11 PM
Please forward this to everyone who are in the queue
wallpaper Cute Love Quotes Love Quotes
.jpg "love quotes for him in")
lfadgyas
05-20 09:15 PM
I�m not a lawyer or attorney or anything official
-So you ended up in the US as a intercompany transfer on L1B and you are working for �A�. Probably you started to work for �A� around 1999 summer.
-L1b is expiring on Aug 29, 2001, but few days before they submit an extension, but there is no approval just some RFEs;
I assume you kept working after Aug 29, 2001 for the same company �A� still here in the US.
-After a year you applied for H1-B with company �B� on August 20, 2002 which is approved on Sep 2002 and you travel back home to have the visa stamped and you came back to the US and started working for �B� (on June 2003).
-Later you transferred your H1B and started to work for company �C� which is your current emp. Company �C� started your labor/gc process and you were able to file your case during the 2007 visa fiasco (when all categories were �current� for July or so ).
I believe that from Aug 29, 2001 till Sep 2002 (or till the date you left the country - but this does not really count for now I think) you were working with no USCIS authorization.
Based on the dates this is more than one year � there is some bar for this 3 or 10 years � that is the time you cannot reenter or apply for new visas etc. I guess . Your lawyer (any) should know this better.
Even if you applied for H1b afterward� and that process went ok - probably by this time they realized that there was an unauthorized employment before� I do not know that a correctly field H1 and later and approved LC and filed I485 can "cancel out" such a thing. Probably not.
This is definitely a �lawyer� case . You might would be able to show and prove that you unintentionally ended up with this gray period with your first employer (this would be hard though) and ever since you followed the immigration law. From your stand point (unfortunately this will be not the USCIS�s one ) you are here legally since 2003 June. This is already 7 years. You might can file for some relief - based on extra hardship or something - I do not know this side .
If this unauthorized employment issue is true then consult about the real chances you might have with a lawyer who knows this pretty well...
Good luck
-So you ended up in the US as a intercompany transfer on L1B and you are working for �A�. Probably you started to work for �A� around 1999 summer.
-L1b is expiring on Aug 29, 2001, but few days before they submit an extension, but there is no approval just some RFEs;
I assume you kept working after Aug 29, 2001 for the same company �A� still here in the US.
-After a year you applied for H1-B with company �B� on August 20, 2002 which is approved on Sep 2002 and you travel back home to have the visa stamped and you came back to the US and started working for �B� (on June 2003).
-Later you transferred your H1B and started to work for company �C� which is your current emp. Company �C� started your labor/gc process and you were able to file your case during the 2007 visa fiasco (when all categories were �current� for July or so ).
I believe that from Aug 29, 2001 till Sep 2002 (or till the date you left the country - but this does not really count for now I think) you were working with no USCIS authorization.
Based on the dates this is more than one year � there is some bar for this 3 or 10 years � that is the time you cannot reenter or apply for new visas etc. I guess . Your lawyer (any) should know this better.
Even if you applied for H1b afterward� and that process went ok - probably by this time they realized that there was an unauthorized employment before� I do not know that a correctly field H1 and later and approved LC and filed I485 can "cancel out" such a thing. Probably not.
This is definitely a �lawyer� case . You might would be able to show and prove that you unintentionally ended up with this gray period with your first employer (this would be hard though) and ever since you followed the immigration law. From your stand point (unfortunately this will be not the USCIS�s one ) you are here legally since 2003 June. This is already 7 years. You might can file for some relief - based on extra hardship or something - I do not know this side .
If this unauthorized employment issue is true then consult about the real chances you might have with a lawyer who knows this pretty well...
Good luck
mdipi
10-21 06:37 PM
i heard that steve ODed on drugs, thats why he left. almost dieed.:evil:
2011 love quotes for him in
crazydesi
09-03 07:57 PM
It helps for the older PD's who were stuck in name check for many years.
They are collecting this for New visa # which are going to come in Oct.
So it does help them in identifying the cases with old pd's and solve the puzzle of why they are not being approved. Based on this number of cases they might move the visa dates accordingly.
Guru's any insights.
They are collecting this for New visa # which are going to come in Oct.
So it does help them in identifying the cases with old pd's and solve the puzzle of why they are not being approved. Based on this number of cases they might move the visa dates accordingly.
Guru's any insights.
more...
rb_248
07-16 05:22 PM
Me too...it was posted 15th of June... This is not the July one :p
That is why this GCKabhayega has so many red dots....
That is why this GCKabhayega has so many red dots....
eb3retro
06-17 01:20 PM
Hello,
While I understand that there is legal limit on number of times AC21 can be invoked assuming it for similar job transfer, but I was wondering if some one on this forum has changed job multiple times after 180 days of 485 filing.
My husband recently changed companies for same job profile after 180 days of filing 485 and having I140 approved, but now job is not what he initially expected (in fact lot different in terms of work and responsibility) , so he is now on lookout for another change in same profile.
His title in both jobs is Sr Software Engineer.
He is the primary applicant, and has 3 three years of H1-B extension. Is there any chances for RFE? His lawyer at current company did send AC21 letter to USCIS.
hi vikki, if its of any help, i changed job already twice in ac21. given the eb3-India situation, I am assuming i may be changing jobs couple of times, before I get my GC..hey after all this is what we have been waiting for right??? freedom to change jobs when we want...i was so frustrated sticking to a bad employer for 7 years...
While I understand that there is legal limit on number of times AC21 can be invoked assuming it for similar job transfer, but I was wondering if some one on this forum has changed job multiple times after 180 days of 485 filing.
My husband recently changed companies for same job profile after 180 days of filing 485 and having I140 approved, but now job is not what he initially expected (in fact lot different in terms of work and responsibility) , so he is now on lookout for another change in same profile.
His title in both jobs is Sr Software Engineer.
He is the primary applicant, and has 3 three years of H1-B extension. Is there any chances for RFE? His lawyer at current company did send AC21 letter to USCIS.
hi vikki, if its of any help, i changed job already twice in ac21. given the eb3-India situation, I am assuming i may be changing jobs couple of times, before I get my GC..hey after all this is what we have been waiting for right??? freedom to change jobs when we want...i was so frustrated sticking to a bad employer for 7 years...
more...
johnnybhai
03-19 10:09 AM
For the folks (Ajju) who e-filed using a new SSN for their wives - and used the Paperless option: I understand that you have to put $0 for AGI, how about the PIN - should I (correctly) enter the PIN that was used for the 2006 filing OR does that have to change as well?
I have e-filed using $0 and last year's PIN, waiting to see if that goes through. It's been rejected twice so far, since I was using non-zero AGI amount.
Thanks!
I have e-filed using $0 and last year's PIN, waiting to see if that goes through. It's been rejected twice so far, since I was using non-zero AGI amount.
Thanks!
2010 Love Quotes In Spanish For Him
Blog Feeds
09-18 10:20 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQOpM4PnQVo8WqHmK3YbOGSMWH6C6umPLX1haSrfvJUNMGao6exjhLvLx93rNkl1TOQT7xvi4vLwe2cyKoI5SBa2AkqFJ0T1k0Twx_XHSwThwYzS93SIjx8scrEfBeIDzHQ5x79ctFOrc/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQOpM4PnQVo8WqHmK3YbOGSMWH6C6umPLX1haSrfvJUNMGao6exjhLvLx93rNkl1TOQT7xvi4vLwe2cyKoI5SBa2AkqFJ0T1k0Twx_XHSwThwYzS93SIjx8scrEfBeIDzHQ5x79ctFOrc/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQOpM4PnQVo8WqHmK3YbOGSMWH6C6umPLX1haSrfvJUNMGao6exjhLvLx93rNkl1TOQT7xvi4vLwe2cyKoI5SBa2AkqFJ0T1k0Twx_XHSwThwYzS93SIjx8scrEfBeIDzHQ5x79ctFOrc/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQOpM4PnQVo8WqHmK3YbOGSMWH6C6umPLX1haSrfvJUNMGao6exjhLvLx93rNkl1TOQT7xvi4vLwe2cyKoI5SBa2AkqFJ0T1k0Twx_XHSwThwYzS93SIjx8scrEfBeIDzHQ5x79ctFOrc/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
more...
bikram_das_in
01-22 03:32 PM
1) Only the company for you are working right now with L1 VISA can apply for your green card. You should be able to get green card in 2-3 years if everything goes fine.
2) Your daughter can sponsor your green card when she is 21 years old. You cannot change job on L1. In order to change job, you have to find an employer who can sponsor H1B for you. H1b is another type of work visa.
2) Your daughter can sponsor your green card when she is 21 years old. You cannot change job on L1. In order to change job, you have to find an employer who can sponsor H1B for you. H1b is another type of work visa.
hair Going Crazy Love Poems For Him
FraudGultee
04-17 09:09 AM
i heard one can have both valid L1 and B2 visas not sure if it works with H1b
more...
saatiish
05-14 12:02 AM
something new, I did not know that.
BTW, I got labor approved on 3/1/2010, 140 on 3/25 and 485 approved on 5/5.
A slightly off topic - but how did you know that your 485 was approved ?
Can you tell us in detail how you got this information about your case ? I want to know if mine is approved or not.
BTW, I got labor approved on 3/1/2010, 140 on 3/25 and 485 approved on 5/5.
A slightly off topic - but how did you know that your 485 was approved ?
Can you tell us in detail how you got this information about your case ? I want to know if mine is approved or not.
hot Love Quotes For Him In Spanish
ivjobs
11-09 08:33 PM
^^
more...
house love quotes in spanish for him
manderson
08-15 09:26 AM
"IV was very active in lobbying for CIR 2006, which was passed in senate. "
True but most people don't know the difference between passing it in senate and signing it into law - they will think it simply passed (this has been my experience when talking to GC/485 newbies). Please say something like "which was passed in the senate (upper house of parliament), short of passing into law".
True but most people don't know the difference between passing it in senate and signing it into law - they will think it simply passed (this has been my experience when talking to GC/485 newbies). Please say something like "which was passed in the senate (upper house of parliament), short of passing into law".
tattoo love quotes for him in spanish
allybarbar
06-22 05:18 PM
I worked in Boston. I was laid off Friday. I have been advised by 2 immigration lawyers that it is ok to file for Unemployment benefits. I filed today. I will let you know the outcome. The lady at Unemployment office seems to think there is no reason i won't get it, but shes really just a data entry person really. Fingers crossed i hear nothing.
Specifics of my case are i am an EB3 doing the i-140 and the 485 at the same time. The notice on the i140 is feb 2008 recieved april 2007, the i485 notice is oct 2007. I received an RFE in late May but it was only for the medical which they have lost. I have done that, mailed it back in and heard nothing more. When you fill out the unemployment form in MA though there is a space for your USCIS A#. That would possibly be where the information gets back to the USCIS to request a proof of employment. My lawyer said there is an outside chance i will get another RFE but its unlikely. My company has been advised to send a notice of termination to the USCIS for my old H1B anyway so unemployment is the least of my worries. We'll see. If that happens my fiance and I will have to head to the registry office earlier than the reception day we paid for. I really hope they do not ask. I know hopes not the best course, but thats what I chose to do.
Specifics of my case are i am an EB3 doing the i-140 and the 485 at the same time. The notice on the i140 is feb 2008 recieved april 2007, the i485 notice is oct 2007. I received an RFE in late May but it was only for the medical which they have lost. I have done that, mailed it back in and heard nothing more. When you fill out the unemployment form in MA though there is a space for your USCIS A#. That would possibly be where the information gets back to the USCIS to request a proof of employment. My lawyer said there is an outside chance i will get another RFE but its unlikely. My company has been advised to send a notice of termination to the USCIS for my old H1B anyway so unemployment is the least of my worries. We'll see. If that happens my fiance and I will have to head to the registry office earlier than the reception day we paid for. I really hope they do not ask. I know hopes not the best course, but thats what I chose to do.
more...
pictures love quotes in spanish for
optimystic
09-15 11:52 AM
It still says Aug 15th. I don't think they will release it yet.
I can see it. Refresh your browser
Thanks inskrish for the news.
Anyway, the Proc. dates are a heap of bull shit. The NSC Proc date for I-485 says July 08 2007. We all know the dates were 'U' and noone could have filed a I-485 between July 2 - July 17th (July 2 fiasco). So how can the oldest application that the NSC is blocked on can be dated July 08 2007 !!!
Even if they came across ineligible applications like that, wouldn't they just outright reject them and quickly move on to some other application that they can process??? Why would they consider themselves blocked on such application(s) and issue the processing date to reflect such transient status ???
I can see it. Refresh your browser
Thanks inskrish for the news.
Anyway, the Proc. dates are a heap of bull shit. The NSC Proc date for I-485 says July 08 2007. We all know the dates were 'U' and noone could have filed a I-485 between July 2 - July 17th (July 2 fiasco). So how can the oldest application that the NSC is blocked on can be dated July 08 2007 !!!
Even if they came across ineligible applications like that, wouldn't they just outright reject them and quickly move on to some other application that they can process??? Why would they consider themselves blocked on such application(s) and issue the processing date to reflect such transient status ???
dresses love quotes for him in
GCBy3000
09-25 02:33 PM
If this is derivative, then how come H1 obtained should be counted towards H4. H1 is standalone and should not be counted.
Again, my wife is on H4 for 6 years and I did not get into 485 stage. Now she wants to go to India and come back after a one year break. If she comes back after a year on new H1, it would be fine for her. If she come back on H4, can she get a H1 after one year?
Any idea, whether this is possible?
I'm not a lawyer, but my assumption would be that this is cannot be changed by an USCIS memo. Why? Because H4 is simply a derivative status which means that it obeys all the rules pertinent to the primary beneficiary's status plus additional restrictions imposed to the particular classification by law. H status is restricted to 6 year continuous presence in the US.
It would be helpful to find the definition of a derivative status; INA does not provide such definition, but I'm sure they wouldn't be using these words loosely without a proper definition.
So my guess would be is that the answer to the question of "decoupling" H4 and H1b time will boil down to the answer to another question: what really defines a derivative status.
Again, my wife is on H4 for 6 years and I did not get into 485 stage. Now she wants to go to India and come back after a one year break. If she comes back after a year on new H1, it would be fine for her. If she come back on H4, can she get a H1 after one year?
Any idea, whether this is possible?
I'm not a lawyer, but my assumption would be that this is cannot be changed by an USCIS memo. Why? Because H4 is simply a derivative status which means that it obeys all the rules pertinent to the primary beneficiary's status plus additional restrictions imposed to the particular classification by law. H status is restricted to 6 year continuous presence in the US.
It would be helpful to find the definition of a derivative status; INA does not provide such definition, but I'm sure they wouldn't be using these words loosely without a proper definition.
So my guess would be is that the answer to the question of "decoupling" H4 and H1b time will boil down to the answer to another question: what really defines a derivative status.
more...
makeup love quotes for him in spanish
guy03062
07-17 07:00 PM
Kudos to IV Core team and all of its members for this big success!!
Charge From Credit Card (ID #50578943NT35xxxxx)
Original Transaction
Date Type Status Details Amount
Jul. 17, 2007 Payment To Immigration Voice Completed Details -$50.00 USD
Status: Completed
Charge From Credit Card (ID #50578943NT35xxxxx)
Original Transaction
Date Type Status Details Amount
Jul. 17, 2007 Payment To Immigration Voice Completed Details -$50.00 USD
Status: Completed
girlfriend love quotes for him in
snathan
02-17 09:14 PM
Thanks a lot snathan.
emploer A is still holding my H1b, they did not revoke it.
employer A(American Company) has offered me a job and asked me to start from Monday(02/23) but employer B(Indian Company) has applied for
H1b transfer.
The only thing I am worried, if there is another layoff with employer A before H1B transfer with employer B. In that situation can I join employer B and maintain my status.
please help me.
Yes...if you get the approval, you can join the company B, anytime you want.
emploer A is still holding my H1b, they did not revoke it.
employer A(American Company) has offered me a job and asked me to start from Monday(02/23) but employer B(Indian Company) has applied for
H1b transfer.
The only thing I am worried, if there is another layoff with employer A before H1B transfer with employer B. In that situation can I join employer B and maintain my status.
please help me.
Yes...if you get the approval, you can join the company B, anytime you want.
hairstyles love quotes for him pics. love
gkdgopi
08-30 05:01 PM
Congratulations! Enjoy the moment.
aj_jadeja
02-08 12:11 PM
Also as I understand AMSTREDAM does not require transit visa? is it true?
TRUE
TRUE
kiranberu
03-14 07:16 PM
This is more pertinent to Physicians - I heard that following residency or J1 expiration one has to return to home country for 5 yrs. I have the following questions
- What are the options for Fellowships and how do they weigh against the fellowship options for H1 holders ?
- How difficult is it to obtain J1 waivers ?
- Is the new J1 conrad law beneficial ?
- Can someone share their success story of converting J1 to another visa, Thanks all
- What are the options for Fellowships and how do they weigh against the fellowship options for H1 holders ?
- How difficult is it to obtain J1 waivers ?
- Is the new J1 conrad law beneficial ?
- Can someone share their success story of converting J1 to another visa, Thanks all
No comments:
Post a Comment