bfadlia
03-18 02:56 PM
would that invalidate the SSN?
manderson
03-17 11:02 AM
I think becoz of anti-immigrant trolls on this website such activities has been taken offline to State Chapters. If you really want to participate then it's best to join your State Chapter:
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
eb3_nepa
10-03 01:44 PM
If you did not know about this, then whomever was advising you did you a disservice.
I dont think it is a question of disservice. I mean if they want you to keep a copy of all the I-94s they shud atleast mention that ON the I-94.
I dont think it is a question of disservice. I mean if they want you to keep a copy of all the I-94s they shud atleast mention that ON the I-94.
walking_dude
10-31 02:48 PM
Everyone,
Please provide your First Name, Last Name, Telephone Number, E-mail id (Yahoo). We will call you and let you in ( requests without Telephone numbers will not be approved)
Here's the link to MI Chapter Yahoo group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ivmi
We can end this GC mess Together
Please provide your First Name, Last Name, Telephone Number, E-mail id (Yahoo). We will call you and let you in ( requests without Telephone numbers will not be approved)
Here's the link to MI Chapter Yahoo group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ivmi
We can end this GC mess Together
more...
wandmaker
11-15 08:31 AM
2. If I don't loose my H1B status, I am planning to transfer my H1B in Feb 2010. Will there be any problem in H1B transfer.
.
If you read along the same lines....
Thank you roseball. What is H1 COE?
COE = Change Of Employer
.
If you read along the same lines....
Thank you roseball. What is H1 COE?
COE = Change Of Employer
EB3_SEP04
09-05 08:13 PM
Congratulation to all EB2 who are getting their approvals. Have a wonderful post-GC life :)
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
I personally love and am proficient in Hindi but I don't think we should make this site look like a Desi forum. Even if your post about India, a lot south/east indian people don't speak/understand hindi.
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
I personally love and am proficient in Hindi but I don't think we should make this site look like a Desi forum. Even if your post about India, a lot south/east indian people don't speak/understand hindi.
more...
Winner
04-09 04:44 PM
Thanks everyone.
I remember that some of the states requires you to have a vaild visa (or other proof of legal staus) for more than 2.5/3 years and only then they can get a drivers licence? If you have this information, kindly share that information.
I remember that some of the states requires you to have a vaild visa (or other proof of legal staus) for more than 2.5/3 years and only then they can get a drivers licence? If you have this information, kindly share that information.
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
mnq1979
06-26 03:32 PM
What did u provid as of now?? If can obtain bc u can produce it. If u do not have one then ceritificate of non-availability. Besides this u need to produce secendary evidences such as school, medical and religious documents or affidavits which mentions both your parents and your full names. That is what I did. In anycase, you will be given instructions on the rfe what to respond to the rfe. Good luck.
I jsut spoke to my mom and she confirmed that she has my BC in diffrent language and will get it translated. So i think i m good from that part.
But my wife BC is not available. I have asked my father in law and he said he will ask some one to get. It is possible but will take a little time.
My question is since her BC will be made NOW do i need any other proof with her BC?
I jsut spoke to my mom and she confirmed that she has my BC in diffrent language and will get it translated. So i think i m good from that part.
But my wife BC is not available. I have asked my father in law and he said he will ask some one to get. It is possible but will take a little time.
My question is since her BC will be made NOW do i need any other proof with her BC?
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:24 AM
I have a unique problem with possibly getting a green card too early. Please let me know how I can make this situation better. My priority date in EB2 India is in Jan 2006, which means potentially I could get my green card in 2-3 months.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
more...
lostinbeta
10-20 10:09 PM
I don't have THAT many posts :P
sanprabhu
01-30 09:24 AM
Don't go by Online status message in USCIS website. It is a bull and often flat out incorrect.
more...
cram
08-23 08:34 PM
On July 20, I got an RFE for my employer's 2006 ITR. They are taking forever to subnit the document. How much time are we given to submit the evidence. How many days?
ash0210
08-16 09:36 AM
US Date format on your AP would create some confusion in Immigration officer at Airport in India while coming back to USA..
On Bombay air port, I struggled for 5 minutes on AP date..US dates are MMDDYY format while India have DDMMYY...Our AP date was 9/7/2005 (Sep 7 2005) & we were travelling back to US on Aug 2, 2005 (India format 2/8/2005)...Immigration officer told us that WE Cant travel because our AP was expirered on Jul 9, 2007..I told him that USA dates are in MMDDYY format but he did not listened..then he called his Supervisor, his boss looked at our AP & he also said WE cant travel....Then I "politely" argued that dates in USA are MMDDYY format & my AP is valid...Somehow, his colleague on next counter was listening our converastion with him (& his Boss) and told our IO that I am right and my AP was valid....some how he was convinced by his colleguae and we were let go...
All of our family were tense...so take care of AP date format...
On Bombay air port, I struggled for 5 minutes on AP date..US dates are MMDDYY format while India have DDMMYY...Our AP date was 9/7/2005 (Sep 7 2005) & we were travelling back to US on Aug 2, 2005 (India format 2/8/2005)...Immigration officer told us that WE Cant travel because our AP was expirered on Jul 9, 2007..I told him that USA dates are in MMDDYY format but he did not listened..then he called his Supervisor, his boss looked at our AP & he also said WE cant travel....Then I "politely" argued that dates in USA are MMDDYY format & my AP is valid...Somehow, his colleague on next counter was listening our converastion with him (& his Boss) and told our IO that I am right and my AP was valid....some how he was convinced by his colleguae and we were let go...
All of our family were tense...so take care of AP date format...
more...
meyshimmi
02-09 11:07 PM
Infact, I got good news today. My MTR approved after 3 months. My 485 was denied due to withdrawal of I140 by previous employer (AC21 case).
So I had applied MTR and approved today. Looks like USCIS understood the error and approving all MTR (I didn't hear a single MTR rejection on AC21 case )
Hi bkn96!!! That was a long time to wait for an MTR... Did they ever refund you for the wrongful denial??? =)
So I had applied MTR and approved today. Looks like USCIS understood the error and approving all MTR (I didn't hear a single MTR rejection on AC21 case )
Hi bkn96!!! That was a long time to wait for an MTR... Did they ever refund you for the wrongful denial??? =)
sbmallik
07-23 01:55 PM
In the stated situation, I would opt for changing the I-485 case to consular processing.
more...
somegchuh
06-10 06:45 PM
I was wondering if anyone here who had a canadian PR (i.e. did a landing), got GC later has travelled again to Canada again?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
terpcurt
January 6th, 2005, 09:00 PM
of the technique....
on the back layer, use gaussian blur, then erase, getting a sharper than background coloured bit.
add some saturation....
whadddya think?
Robhttp://images8.fotki.com/v146/photos/1/173093/1080432/2flower-vi.jpg
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
on the back layer, use gaussian blur, then erase, getting a sharper than background coloured bit.
add some saturation....
whadddya think?
Robhttp://images8.fotki.com/v146/photos/1/173093/1080432/2flower-vi.jpg
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
girishvar
08-15 12:20 PM
There should be a good faith job offer from your GC employer as of today. You can decide not to join the job after your I-485 filing and 180 days there after.
Hi,
If I am working with X company & Y company is ready to file GC.
(Assuming Y has no objections even if I do not join the company at all)
Is it mandatory for the candidate to join company Y at certain stage which has file GC?
I would appreciate your comments.
Regards,
Sanjeev.
Hi,
If I am working with X company & Y company is ready to file GC.
(Assuming Y has no objections even if I do not join the company at all)
Is it mandatory for the candidate to join company Y at certain stage which has file GC?
I would appreciate your comments.
Regards,
Sanjeev.
chanduv23
03-05 10:02 AM
As per my understanding here is how it is supposed to work
- One ONLY has to say whether he/she is Authorized to work for any employer in an unrestricted manner
- One ONLY has to say if he/she has a security clearance
- One ONLY has to say if he/she needs a visa sponsership now or in future
- Certain jobs may need that one has to be a US Citizen (not sure about this) - but there must be a valid reason as to why the job needs a US Citizen
Once an employment is offered, the employee has upto 72 hours from the day of joining to provide proof of work authorization and complete the i 9 form. The authorization must be original and the employer must verify this and take a copy and place it in the employee's folder.
Desi3933 or IV Attorneys - please pass on your comments.
This is very important because - due to economy, a lot of employers are coming up with arbitrary rules and applying arbitrary filters and will continue to do so as long as it is not challenged.
- One ONLY has to say whether he/she is Authorized to work for any employer in an unrestricted manner
- One ONLY has to say if he/she has a security clearance
- One ONLY has to say if he/she needs a visa sponsership now or in future
- Certain jobs may need that one has to be a US Citizen (not sure about this) - but there must be a valid reason as to why the job needs a US Citizen
Once an employment is offered, the employee has upto 72 hours from the day of joining to provide proof of work authorization and complete the i 9 form. The authorization must be original and the employer must verify this and take a copy and place it in the employee's folder.
Desi3933 or IV Attorneys - please pass on your comments.
This is very important because - due to economy, a lot of employers are coming up with arbitrary rules and applying arbitrary filters and will continue to do so as long as it is not challenged.
sundevil
06-19 10:04 PM
This time around its unchartered territory with these flood gates open. As for current ways there is a chance(still only chance there is no science) you will get the rcpt date by then, but who knows what will go on.
Guys, this thing is so important, do not play games with it and screw up you application. Unless travel is absolutely must, forget about it. All lawyers including mine are suggesting to cut short any visits, cancel any existing plans and don't make new plans. The dates could retrogress to stone age, do you really want to take a chance and wait for the next opportunity, if something doesn't work out.
Guys, this thing is so important, do not play games with it and screw up you application. Unless travel is absolutely must, forget about it. All lawyers including mine are suggesting to cut short any visits, cancel any existing plans and don't make new plans. The dates could retrogress to stone age, do you really want to take a chance and wait for the next opportunity, if something doesn't work out.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar