indio0617
03-09 10:06 AM
senator brownback: amendment on Nurses & Physical therapists (removing cap for India, Phi, Mexico)
wallpaper 2011 Ferrari 599 SA Aperta New
new2gc
03-04 12:45 PM
My I-140 approved at TSC on 02/23 and my attorney received the approval notice.
But the online status is still showing the case as pending. I thik TSC is offline on the status now.
But the online status is still showing the case as pending. I thik TSC is offline on the status now.
go_guy123
07-20 10:09 AM
He did not voted
Clinton / Obama will never vote in favor of H1B / EB immigration now as they are running for election.
Clinton / Obama will never vote in favor of H1B / EB immigration now as they are running for election.
2011 PUMA FERRARI 2011 NEW MODEL
ski_dude12
02-24 07:48 AM
There is life outside of GC. Majority of those waiting in line for GC were able to apply their I-485 during the 2007 fiasco and have the option of using EAD to change employers to make things better to a certain extent.
more...
glus
05-13 07:03 AM
I think the advantage of LLC against Sole Prop is about liability.
If some one sues your business, LLC offers you protection, but Sole prop. may not.
If you are on EAD, you can start the business in your wife's name. Now the risk is that she will run away and take the business with her; can't say that would really be a bad thing.
S-corp is much more complex compared to LLC.
There is nothing in the law that disallows one from opening and operating LLC or INC type of business. To open a CORPORATION one needs to be a U.S. Citizen as far as I know, but for LLC or Inc no such requirement. Definitely LLC or Inc is better option for the reason you mentioned; liability protection. Thank you.
If some one sues your business, LLC offers you protection, but Sole prop. may not.
If you are on EAD, you can start the business in your wife's name. Now the risk is that she will run away and take the business with her; can't say that would really be a bad thing.
S-corp is much more complex compared to LLC.
There is nothing in the law that disallows one from opening and operating LLC or INC type of business. To open a CORPORATION one needs to be a U.S. Citizen as far as I know, but for LLC or Inc no such requirement. Definitely LLC or Inc is better option for the reason you mentioned; liability protection. Thank you.
gc_on_demand
07-15 08:12 AM
Just sent 10 USD using BOA bill pay : 7YDGQ-HNRRZ
GO IV GO...
GO IV GO...
more...
vkannan
03-07 01:23 AM
Agree. I still blame name check 180 rule - a major decision by USCIS/FBI helped this backlogg to go from bad to worst.
Name check 180 rule -it allowed thousands of people from EB1 / EB2 Row to get their 485 cleared and consumed major chunk of 2008/09 EB visas. Had it been not there, many old timers, would have used visas as their Name check would have been cleared before them.
Oh yeah, I hear you; I personally know many of my ex-colleagues in a big IT sourcing company who came to US in L1A got their GC through EB1 category within a matter of 6-8 months.....last years 180 rule change does benefit most of these fortunate guys.....
Name check 180 rule -it allowed thousands of people from EB1 / EB2 Row to get their 485 cleared and consumed major chunk of 2008/09 EB visas. Had it been not there, many old timers, would have used visas as their Name check would have been cleared before them.
Oh yeah, I hear you; I personally know many of my ex-colleagues in a big IT sourcing company who came to US in L1A got their GC through EB1 category within a matter of 6-8 months.....last years 180 rule change does benefit most of these fortunate guys.....
2010 the first 2011 model year
coolvigo
06-10 09:57 AM
Guys,
How about having another session of flowers campaign? Got to practice gandhigiri continuously. Should we select a date for that? I will say 23rd June'08? We need to draw media attention!!!
How about having another session of flowers campaign? Got to practice gandhigiri continuously. Should we select a date for that? I will say 23rd June'08? We need to draw media attention!!!
more...
arihant
05-25 07:38 PM
pretty soon they will start requiring photos from worksite to prove that employee exists and that the company exists and is present in the US. LOL :D (I think this was a requirement for H1B...may still be a requirement):rolleyes:
hair Tesla Model S 2011 - Front
johnnybhai
07-14 01:16 PM
Come on guys, go online to your bank's website and make a ONE-TIME payment to IV. Takes 2 minutes -- rebuilds MANY lives .... including yours.
For details refer the 'Contribute Now' tab and look for Checks.
For details refer the 'Contribute Now' tab and look for Checks.
more...
Kodi
06-29 03:49 PM
WOW that's really long. You should ask your attorney to file an inquiry.
hot 2011 ferrari 458 italia by
akhilmahajan
10-21 02:52 PM
I have already sent the emails and will be sending the letters Tomorrow.
GO I/WE GO.
GO I/WE GO.
more...
house Towne Lake Apartments
buddhaas
08-12 01:45 PM
It includes H1s and L1s till 2014. So, It may be possible to cover $600 million.
tattoo Ford Fiesta -- 2011 model The
gc_check
03-05 09:46 PM
My PD is March-2003 and I didn't get the labor cleared till Late 2006
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
Prior to BEC, the Labor certs need to clear the state and then regional processing center. Stated like NJ, NY, CA, etc the wait time for Labor was years, while Iowa, MA, etc cleared labor in few months and many lucky folks got the GC from start / labor to 485 approval in 15-18 months... The unlucky ones (me included) are stuck now even with earlier PD in AOS... Hope something good happens in second half of FY09 atleast.... for all
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
Prior to BEC, the Labor certs need to clear the state and then regional processing center. Stated like NJ, NY, CA, etc the wait time for Labor was years, while Iowa, MA, etc cleared labor in few months and many lucky folks got the GC from start / labor to 485 approval in 15-18 months... The unlucky ones (me included) are stuck now even with earlier PD in AOS... Hope something good happens in second half of FY09 atleast.... for all
more...
pictures March 18, 2011 - 2011 models,
CADude
07-18 04:16 PM
priti8888, What is the USCIS 485 processing date in your senario?
Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
dresses 2011 MODEL FERRARİ 458 ITALIA
chanduv23
10-21 05:00 PM
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
Thats exactly what I heard too, around two to three years of work with the same employer proves original intent to work.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
Thats exactly what I heard too, around two to three years of work with the same employer proves original intent to work.
more...
makeup Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano 2006
dtekkedil
09-13 10:01 PM
Paypal Confirmation Number: 7GT536924Y063193D
girlfriend new cars ferrari 2011 product
mariner5555
05-01 03:45 PM
1. Another reply was If we use All permitted unsed visa, Where would we be in terms of EB visa. His response was Probably china/India Second category will be clear.
2. According to Him 65% of visa has been used for this year. less amount of visa remain now for this year. We shouldn't expect miracle for this year at least.
3. Let Join hands together and follow the HSMP people did in UK.
did he say anything about EB3 ? if u know ..can u share ?
2. According to Him 65% of visa has been used for this year. less amount of visa remain now for this year. We shouldn't expect miracle for this year at least.
3. Let Join hands together and follow the HSMP people did in UK.
did he say anything about EB3 ? if u know ..can u share ?
hairstyles 2011 model ferrari 458 italia
shreekhand
07-18 05:50 PM
priti8888,
That is not true. Receipt Date is when the service center physically receives the package. They date stamp it and then use it to enter that RD when they generate the Notice on the ND.
What you see on the status page for sure reflects the ND and NOT the RD. So you can pretty much ignore what the status page says and rely on what your physical notice says (it states the actual RD when they physically received the package!)
Hope this is a clear explanation.
RECIPT DATE is the date when they input your info in the system. Before inputting in the system they check I140,medicals,etc. Notice date has no bearing. If your packet looks fine you get your receipt number and then you will be able to view the status on uscis.gov. The status will be something like "On july 9th 2007 we received your applivction ..............etc"
"Status :case received and pending"
That is not true. Receipt Date is when the service center physically receives the package. They date stamp it and then use it to enter that RD when they generate the Notice on the ND.
What you see on the status page for sure reflects the ND and NOT the RD. So you can pretty much ignore what the status page says and rely on what your physical notice says (it states the actual RD when they physically received the package!)
Hope this is a clear explanation.
RECIPT DATE is the date when they input your info in the system. Before inputting in the system they check I140,medicals,etc. Notice date has no bearing. If your packet looks fine you get your receipt number and then you will be able to view the status on uscis.gov. The status will be something like "On july 9th 2007 we received your applivction ..............etc"
"Status :case received and pending"
Green.Tech
06-16 04:45 PM
Step up for yourself!
john2255
07-20 12:20 PM
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
No comments:
Post a Comment