ilikekilo
01-09 12:49 PM
BUt keep in mind that when you enroll in a GROUP insurance which is typically your new insruance with you new company..most of the companies DONT have any restrictions on the pre existing condnitions, per my experience.
however if you buy a individual pocliy they will unload on you a TON of restrictions...no wonder why we see many old people working in Walmart and other places just for insurance..God save us when we get old :)
however if you buy a individual pocliy they will unload on you a TON of restrictions...no wonder why we see many old people working in Walmart and other places just for insurance..God save us when we get old :)
wallpaper emo quotes and sayings about
ArunAntonio
08-22 01:52 PM
Cant make it to the DC rally?
Sponsor someone else to represent you.
Please vote -- > http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=12441
Sponsor someone else to represent you.
Please vote -- > http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=12441
PG75
09-29 11:33 PM
Hi folks,
Need some help.
During e-filing of AP, certify page has a TITLE field. Any ideas what needs to be filled in it ?
I am filing I-131 for myself and spouse.
Thanks
Need some help.
During e-filing of AP, certify page has a TITLE field. Any ideas what needs to be filled in it ?
I am filing I-131 for myself and spouse.
Thanks
2011 sad emo quotes and sayings.
kak1978
11-03 09:49 AM
Today I was talking to IO in Texas service center, during discussion I told her that India dates might retrogress.. can you please expedite my case. For that she replied that " that's what they are doing"
I am not sure how reliable is this and on what she has in her mind.. Just wanted to share the information. Don't give me RED for this.
May be she meant that they are trying to expedite your case.
I am not sure how reliable is this and on what she has in her mind.. Just wanted to share the information. Don't give me RED for this.
May be she meant that they are trying to expedite your case.
more...
ragz4u
03-16 01:32 PM
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18845
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee finally broached the controversial subject of the undocumented population on day five of the Committee's markup of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform, but deferred any votes on the subject until after next week's congressional recess.
Chairman Specter began the day's proceedings by reiterating that it would be a "colossal mistake" for Senate Majority Leader Frist to bring an immigration bill to the Senate floor that had not been completely vetted by the Senate Judiciary Committee. As background, Senator Frist has threatened to bring his enforcement-only legislation directly to the Senate floor unless the Judiciary Committee produces a bill by March 27. Senator Frist could do this using the seldom employed "Rule 14" procedure that permits him to introduce a bill and bypass the committee process so that it goes directly to the Senate calendar. According to Senate sources, Senator Frist's bill would simply take Chairman Specter's proposal and strip out the guestworker plan and the provisions dealing with the estimated 12 million undocumented aliens present in the U.S.
Because Senator Frist apparently will not back off of his deadline, Chairman Specter proposed this morning to continue the Committee's work beyond what was to have been the final day of the markup (today). Unfortunately, the Senate is out on recess next week, leaving tomorrow or Monday, March 27, as the only available options for continued work. Most of the Senators present agreed that meeting on March 27 would make sense, with the exception of Senator Cornyn, who disagreed that bringing the Committee's incomplete bill to the floor would be problematic (clearly an attempt on his part to stave off debate in the Committee on what to do with the undocumented population). However, in a clear rebuke to Senator Cornyn, Chairman Specter responded that the Committee would proceed immediately to debate on the controversial issue of a path to citizenship for the undocumented!
Chairman Specter said that he and Senator Kennedy talked at length yesterday about the issue of the undocumented. He reiterated his concerns about the undocumented workers jumping the line in front of those who have followed the legal channels. He's concerned about 25-year backlogs for 4th preference beneficiaries and other long backlogs. However, he noted his willingness to find a way to put the undocumented on a path to citizenship at the end of the line. Chairman Specter also reiterated that he wants a bill to come out of Committee that can pass the floor and be reconciled with the House bill.
Senator Kennedy argued that the McCain/Kennedy bill will not lead to line-jumping, explaining that the bill's formula would clear backlogs and deal with the lines themselves. In addition, he noted his willingness to accept a 2nd degree amendment to ensure that legal permanent residence would not be granted to the undocumented population until both the current employment-based and family-based backlogs had been cleared. "What really is the alternative," he asked? "Mass deportations? Criminalization and a permanent subclass?"
Senator Kennedy continued by talking eloquently about the pure motives of immigrants who have come to this country, both historically and currently, to make a better life for themselves and their families. He said that we should admire the drive of these people. We should not treat them as criminals but should give them an opportunity. We should bring them out of shadows, have them pay a fine, work, and wait their turn. Senator Kennedy also noted that some 60,000 legal permanent residents currently serve in the U.S. Armed Forces.
Senator Kyl noted that no one on the Committee supports enforcement only, adding that his and Senator Cornyn's proposal would provide a "work opportunity," not a punishment. He said that the Specter "gold card" would be just like a green card but without the right to citizenship. He also opined that people waiting in the family-based backlog don't have the right to be in the U.S. now, so letting undocumented aliens get in line would harm those individuals who have been waiting patiently. At one point, he allowed that it might be OK to give a path to citizenship to high skilled workers but not to low skilled workers.
Senator Cornyn associated himself with Senator Kyl's remarks. "We can't accept everyone in the world who wants to come here," he said. And while he professed agreement with Senator Kennedy about the beneficial contributions and benevolent motivations of the undocumented population, he couldn't seem to get past the "law breaking" issue. "The American people won't accept a program to deal with the undocumented if we haven't finished the bill's enforcement titles," he argued. He also defended the Cornyn/Kyl "report to deport" proposal, noting that it is neither a ruse nor impractical. He added that the intention of the proposal is not to strand people outside of the country as some have accused.
Senator Durbin weighed in by stating that the immigration system has been broken for a long while. He recounted stories about important individuals he knows whose parents were undocumented aliens. He stood in support of the McCain/Kennedy proposal, calling it "tough but fair," and reiterated that we should not be criminalizing undocumented status, as both the Chairman's Mark and H.R. 4437 would do.
Senator Graham noted that many people, including many on the Republican side of the aisle, don't even want to debate this complex issue. For them, rounding these immigrants up and deporting them is the only answer. "Such a proposal is simply not feasible," Senator Graham added. He also noted that half of his family likely would not be able to meet the requirements of the McCain/Kennedy legislation, thereby buttressing the argument that it is no easy give away. "While there are lots of people on talk radio complaining about the undocumented, these folks are out there working," he said. "This is not a 'get out of jail free' card." In addition to those who would deport the undocumented population, there are others who would put them all in jail, he continued, adding that this also would not work. He warned Chairman Specter and others that they shouldn't be trying to avoid criticism on this issue, because they're all going to get it. He agreed that the undocumented population should be put in line behind all those currently waiting in the backlogs but does not believe it is appropriate to force them to leave the country in order to take part in the program, as this would break up families.
Senator Feinstein argued that the DHS would be incapable of handling such a massive program. She was also concerned with what would happen to those who apply for the program if they are unable to pass the requisite background checks. "Could people with minor misdemeanors get status,?" she asked. She requested a letter from Senator Kennedy's staff on the issue. Senator Feinstein also returned to the issue of DHS's processing capabilities, asking for additional information on the subject before the issue is brought to a vote.
Senator Specter indicated that he intends to work through the undocumented issue by beginning with the McCain/Kennedy bill and the 2nd degree amendment mentioned above by Senator Kennedy. He also indicated that there is a deal on the table between Senators Cornyn and Kennedy on the temporary worker (future flows) program.
Senator Feinstein brought up the subject of agricultural workers and wanted to know why they weren't included as part of the guestworker program. Senator Kennedy responded that the reason is because Senator Craig, the chief sponsor of AgJobs, would offer it as an amendment on the floor. Senator Brownback opined that they needed to have staff work out the details of any agricultural program.
Chairman Specter then noted that staff would be working out various details during next week's recess, confirmed continuation of the markup on March 27th, and gaveled the meeting to a close.
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee finally broached the controversial subject of the undocumented population on day five of the Committee's markup of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform, but deferred any votes on the subject until after next week's congressional recess.
Chairman Specter began the day's proceedings by reiterating that it would be a "colossal mistake" for Senate Majority Leader Frist to bring an immigration bill to the Senate floor that had not been completely vetted by the Senate Judiciary Committee. As background, Senator Frist has threatened to bring his enforcement-only legislation directly to the Senate floor unless the Judiciary Committee produces a bill by March 27. Senator Frist could do this using the seldom employed "Rule 14" procedure that permits him to introduce a bill and bypass the committee process so that it goes directly to the Senate calendar. According to Senate sources, Senator Frist's bill would simply take Chairman Specter's proposal and strip out the guestworker plan and the provisions dealing with the estimated 12 million undocumented aliens present in the U.S.
Because Senator Frist apparently will not back off of his deadline, Chairman Specter proposed this morning to continue the Committee's work beyond what was to have been the final day of the markup (today). Unfortunately, the Senate is out on recess next week, leaving tomorrow or Monday, March 27, as the only available options for continued work. Most of the Senators present agreed that meeting on March 27 would make sense, with the exception of Senator Cornyn, who disagreed that bringing the Committee's incomplete bill to the floor would be problematic (clearly an attempt on his part to stave off debate in the Committee on what to do with the undocumented population). However, in a clear rebuke to Senator Cornyn, Chairman Specter responded that the Committee would proceed immediately to debate on the controversial issue of a path to citizenship for the undocumented!
Chairman Specter said that he and Senator Kennedy talked at length yesterday about the issue of the undocumented. He reiterated his concerns about the undocumented workers jumping the line in front of those who have followed the legal channels. He's concerned about 25-year backlogs for 4th preference beneficiaries and other long backlogs. However, he noted his willingness to find a way to put the undocumented on a path to citizenship at the end of the line. Chairman Specter also reiterated that he wants a bill to come out of Committee that can pass the floor and be reconciled with the House bill.
Senator Kennedy argued that the McCain/Kennedy bill will not lead to line-jumping, explaining that the bill's formula would clear backlogs and deal with the lines themselves. In addition, he noted his willingness to accept a 2nd degree amendment to ensure that legal permanent residence would not be granted to the undocumented population until both the current employment-based and family-based backlogs had been cleared. "What really is the alternative," he asked? "Mass deportations? Criminalization and a permanent subclass?"
Senator Kennedy continued by talking eloquently about the pure motives of immigrants who have come to this country, both historically and currently, to make a better life for themselves and their families. He said that we should admire the drive of these people. We should not treat them as criminals but should give them an opportunity. We should bring them out of shadows, have them pay a fine, work, and wait their turn. Senator Kennedy also noted that some 60,000 legal permanent residents currently serve in the U.S. Armed Forces.
Senator Kyl noted that no one on the Committee supports enforcement only, adding that his and Senator Cornyn's proposal would provide a "work opportunity," not a punishment. He said that the Specter "gold card" would be just like a green card but without the right to citizenship. He also opined that people waiting in the family-based backlog don't have the right to be in the U.S. now, so letting undocumented aliens get in line would harm those individuals who have been waiting patiently. At one point, he allowed that it might be OK to give a path to citizenship to high skilled workers but not to low skilled workers.
Senator Cornyn associated himself with Senator Kyl's remarks. "We can't accept everyone in the world who wants to come here," he said. And while he professed agreement with Senator Kennedy about the beneficial contributions and benevolent motivations of the undocumented population, he couldn't seem to get past the "law breaking" issue. "The American people won't accept a program to deal with the undocumented if we haven't finished the bill's enforcement titles," he argued. He also defended the Cornyn/Kyl "report to deport" proposal, noting that it is neither a ruse nor impractical. He added that the intention of the proposal is not to strand people outside of the country as some have accused.
Senator Durbin weighed in by stating that the immigration system has been broken for a long while. He recounted stories about important individuals he knows whose parents were undocumented aliens. He stood in support of the McCain/Kennedy proposal, calling it "tough but fair," and reiterated that we should not be criminalizing undocumented status, as both the Chairman's Mark and H.R. 4437 would do.
Senator Graham noted that many people, including many on the Republican side of the aisle, don't even want to debate this complex issue. For them, rounding these immigrants up and deporting them is the only answer. "Such a proposal is simply not feasible," Senator Graham added. He also noted that half of his family likely would not be able to meet the requirements of the McCain/Kennedy legislation, thereby buttressing the argument that it is no easy give away. "While there are lots of people on talk radio complaining about the undocumented, these folks are out there working," he said. "This is not a 'get out of jail free' card." In addition to those who would deport the undocumented population, there are others who would put them all in jail, he continued, adding that this also would not work. He warned Chairman Specter and others that they shouldn't be trying to avoid criticism on this issue, because they're all going to get it. He agreed that the undocumented population should be put in line behind all those currently waiting in the backlogs but does not believe it is appropriate to force them to leave the country in order to take part in the program, as this would break up families.
Senator Feinstein argued that the DHS would be incapable of handling such a massive program. She was also concerned with what would happen to those who apply for the program if they are unable to pass the requisite background checks. "Could people with minor misdemeanors get status,?" she asked. She requested a letter from Senator Kennedy's staff on the issue. Senator Feinstein also returned to the issue of DHS's processing capabilities, asking for additional information on the subject before the issue is brought to a vote.
Senator Specter indicated that he intends to work through the undocumented issue by beginning with the McCain/Kennedy bill and the 2nd degree amendment mentioned above by Senator Kennedy. He also indicated that there is a deal on the table between Senators Cornyn and Kennedy on the temporary worker (future flows) program.
Senator Feinstein brought up the subject of agricultural workers and wanted to know why they weren't included as part of the guestworker program. Senator Kennedy responded that the reason is because Senator Craig, the chief sponsor of AgJobs, would offer it as an amendment on the floor. Senator Brownback opined that they needed to have staff work out the details of any agricultural program.
Chairman Specter then noted that staff would be working out various details during next week's recess, confirmed continuation of the markup on March 27th, and gaveled the meeting to a close.
Kitiara
02-03 06:27 AM
Pixel art is <i>hard</i>. :smirk:
Eilsoe and Soul are neck and neck at the moment. Gripping! :beam:
Eilsoe and Soul are neck and neck at the moment. Gripping! :beam:
more...
gc_on_demand
11-03 09:03 AM
During lame duck session , Dems will not push for CIR and Republican will oppose it.
They will come to compromise on Dream Act. Chances are there some pro legal - immigrant republican may add Visa recapture.
They will come to compromise on Dream Act. Chances are there some pro legal - immigrant republican may add Visa recapture.
2010 emo quotes and sayings. cute
GCaspirations
10-04 03:51 PM
Did anyone transferred from NSC to CSC and back got FP notice?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=14143&highlight=transfer
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=14143&highlight=transfer
more...
dskhabra
02-11 02:12 PM
EB2 I should get more spill over from EB2 ROW that what it got last year. The number of labor approvals is very less after June 2008( someone posted it earlier in some other thread). EB2 ROW is always current and I think the usage should be low this year.
hair hair sad emo quotes about
Sakthisagar
10-28 08:38 AM
"This time you have a great opportunity to consolidate and by working in India, by becoming a good quality professional you will sustain the advantage we have created and will make growth in India a permanent rather than a temporary feature."
Guys, wakeup! He isn't telling anything wrong - just a different opinion, very valid for a great percentage of Indians - not everyone can/is going to land in US and wait eternally for GC? and nothing wrong in what he is saying - to go for a better long term India than a spurt of growth. Why ridicule the other guy for giving a genuine advice to youngsters - how many of us haven't almost given up on our careers just for the same of EB GC? Are we just afraid of losing out to our brothers in India in future, rather than them joining our batch in the eternal wait? If we want to make US our home, at least we should start respecting another person's right to his opinion, even if we disagree. Why would it be called a gimmick?! There is no other way - if its not India, it will be China, Philippines etc. Look at the way the general product industry went? The same will happen unless there are restrictive trade policy - which, not only would be against the "US" principals of free trade, but would also automatically be harmful for the US economy.
I personally don't see anything wrong in the article. He puts forth the right things that can be done to improve the life of Indian generations - now and for future. And if that happens, there would be a benefit for us in particular, and US economy and US jobs in general.
hahahaha.. good one.. what a support to Infy... height of slavery. I accept your veiw point as INFY's and YOURS view point. good keep it up.
Guys, wakeup! He isn't telling anything wrong - just a different opinion, very valid for a great percentage of Indians - not everyone can/is going to land in US and wait eternally for GC? and nothing wrong in what he is saying - to go for a better long term India than a spurt of growth. Why ridicule the other guy for giving a genuine advice to youngsters - how many of us haven't almost given up on our careers just for the same of EB GC? Are we just afraid of losing out to our brothers in India in future, rather than them joining our batch in the eternal wait? If we want to make US our home, at least we should start respecting another person's right to his opinion, even if we disagree. Why would it be called a gimmick?! There is no other way - if its not India, it will be China, Philippines etc. Look at the way the general product industry went? The same will happen unless there are restrictive trade policy - which, not only would be against the "US" principals of free trade, but would also automatically be harmful for the US economy.
I personally don't see anything wrong in the article. He puts forth the right things that can be done to improve the life of Indian generations - now and for future. And if that happens, there would be a benefit for us in particular, and US economy and US jobs in general.
hahahaha.. good one.. what a support to Infy... height of slavery. I accept your veiw point as INFY's and YOURS view point. good keep it up.
more...
drak70
04-13 05:19 PM
I think you should write a Complaint letter to State Bar against attorney and second to the USCIS office which laisons with immigration attorneys
State bar (Because for a 485 application he is acting as fiduciary in your best interests).He may be liable for civil damages too
USCIS- Once you have revoked his G28 form on what legal authority did he represent you.
between these authorities you have "gotcha" because either this or that has been violated. Maybe you can even get damages /settlement( and be more generous to your benefactors:))
State bar (Because for a 485 application he is acting as fiduciary in your best interests).He may be liable for civil damages too
USCIS- Once you have revoked his G28 form on what legal authority did he represent you.
between these authorities you have "gotcha" because either this or that has been violated. Maybe you can even get damages /settlement( and be more generous to your benefactors:))
hot emo quotes and sayings and
morchu
11-04 05:03 AM
It is EB3row who deserve a good grudge with EB2India/China, regarding spill-over changes.
Changing to vertical spillover will NOT help EB3 India or China.
Changing to vertical spillover will NOT help EB3 India or China.
more...
house love and life. emo quotes
pappu
11-25 11:32 AM
Immigrationvoice team has been working on the publicly available USCIS data since its release on USCIS website and we have been discussing this data with top USCIS officials to clear doubts.
Immigration Voice is releasing the analysis of the information for the community. You can view the report at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36
We are putting together a list of recommendations about this data for our next meeting with USCIS. If you have suggestions, do post on the thread. We would also be updating this report on regular basis as the data is updated on USCIS site and numbers change due to approvals/pre-adjudications/field office data/ CP and spillovers. The visa bulletin movement will also be compared against the report and checked with USCIS and DOS.
Team IV
Note: Please read the entire document rather than just basing your judgment on the graph and the visa bulletin charts. There are several caveats and limitations of this data.
We feel this is a one step ahead of the IV prediction tool published by IV in the past. We will continue to refine the analysis as we receive information from DOS and USCIS through our advocacy efforts.
Immigration Voice is releasing the analysis of the information for the community. You can view the report at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36
We are putting together a list of recommendations about this data for our next meeting with USCIS. If you have suggestions, do post on the thread. We would also be updating this report on regular basis as the data is updated on USCIS site and numbers change due to approvals/pre-adjudications/field office data/ CP and spillovers. The visa bulletin movement will also be compared against the report and checked with USCIS and DOS.
Team IV
Note: Please read the entire document rather than just basing your judgment on the graph and the visa bulletin charts. There are several caveats and limitations of this data.
We feel this is a one step ahead of the IV prediction tool published by IV in the past. We will continue to refine the analysis as we receive information from DOS and USCIS through our advocacy efforts.
tattoo makeup emo quotes about life
gccube
09-09 02:27 PM
Requirements to change employer when GC is pending:
- I-140 should be approved
- More than 180 days should have passed after filing I-485. The clock for 180 days starts from 485 receipt.
- Approved EAD
Significance of 180 days barrier
If you have approved I-140 and EAD, you can change employer without having to wait for 180 days. But then your employer can revoke the I-140 which invalidates the 485 application. After 180 days from I-485 receipt, I-140 cannot be revoked so that is why it is always recommended to invoke AC-21 after 180 days from the 485 receipt.
After 180 days, you cannot change jobs, you can only change employers
When you invoke AC-21, you have o fulfill two conditions:
1.) You new jobs has the same or similar job description as mentioned in the green card labor certification application
2.) You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application
This means, you have to continue to stay in the same job title and job description till the time your GC is approved. If you fulfill the requirements mentioned above, you do not have to inform USCIS when invoking AC-21. You just switch employer. At some point USCIS will send you a query asking for the information of the employer who continues your green card application. It is best to take up job where the job title and job description is exactly the same as specified in your GC labor certification application. Any variance in the job title or job description could be extremely damaging to the GC application processing.
It is best to not to change to an employer offering you anything less than the wage rate specified in the GC labor certification. On the higher side, it is better not to take up a job that offers more than 4% more salary of that specified in the GC labor certification. It is hard to resist 20-30K higher salary, but one would have to resist the temptation for taking the job offering higher salary. Otherwise, there is a risk of USCIS denying the GC application.
USCIS doesn�t account for dollar appreciation or devaluation. USCIS also doesn�t account for annual inflation when calculating the wage rate. So even if your labor certification was applied in 2003, you still have to continue at the job with the salary specified in the GC labor certification. If GC application takes another 5-7 years, then you have to continue with the salary specified in GC labor certification application.
Hope this is useful.
"You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application or it should not be more than 4% more than what is mentioned in the LC"?
- I-140 should be approved
- More than 180 days should have passed after filing I-485. The clock for 180 days starts from 485 receipt.
- Approved EAD
Significance of 180 days barrier
If you have approved I-140 and EAD, you can change employer without having to wait for 180 days. But then your employer can revoke the I-140 which invalidates the 485 application. After 180 days from I-485 receipt, I-140 cannot be revoked so that is why it is always recommended to invoke AC-21 after 180 days from the 485 receipt.
After 180 days, you cannot change jobs, you can only change employers
When you invoke AC-21, you have o fulfill two conditions:
1.) You new jobs has the same or similar job description as mentioned in the green card labor certification application
2.) You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application
This means, you have to continue to stay in the same job title and job description till the time your GC is approved. If you fulfill the requirements mentioned above, you do not have to inform USCIS when invoking AC-21. You just switch employer. At some point USCIS will send you a query asking for the information of the employer who continues your green card application. It is best to take up job where the job title and job description is exactly the same as specified in your GC labor certification application. Any variance in the job title or job description could be extremely damaging to the GC application processing.
It is best to not to change to an employer offering you anything less than the wage rate specified in the GC labor certification. On the higher side, it is better not to take up a job that offers more than 4% more salary of that specified in the GC labor certification. It is hard to resist 20-30K higher salary, but one would have to resist the temptation for taking the job offering higher salary. Otherwise, there is a risk of USCIS denying the GC application.
USCIS doesn�t account for dollar appreciation or devaluation. USCIS also doesn�t account for annual inflation when calculating the wage rate. So even if your labor certification was applied in 2003, you still have to continue at the job with the salary specified in the GC labor certification. If GC application takes another 5-7 years, then you have to continue with the salary specified in GC labor certification application.
Hope this is useful.
"You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application or it should not be more than 4% more than what is mentioned in the LC"?
more...
pictures Inspiration – Life is about
sunny1000
07-13 11:38 PM
Congrats and good wishes! Thank you for your support to IV. Appreciate it.
dresses emo love quotes and sayings
sairam
07-02 03:10 PM
We spent approxiamtely $4000 not including the filing fee which is another $1500 approx.
This $4000 includes, Attorney fee, Medical exam fee, Flight tickets to attorney office, Mailing charges etc.
This $4000 includes, Attorney fee, Medical exam fee, Flight tickets to attorney office, Mailing charges etc.
more...
makeup Sayings emo love myspace
sat
08-08 09:59 PM
what to do?
girlfriend emo quotes about life and
arc
09-04 07:19 PM
Guys what airline could one fly from San Jose? Which one have best connecting times so one can reach and leave at decent time? which airport is close?
Is there a Motel nearby at the relly start point, what time does the rally end, and what flight have people from CA booked for getting back?
:confused:
Is there a Motel nearby at the relly start point, what time does the rally end, and what flight have people from CA booked for getting back?
:confused:
hairstyles emo quotes and sayings about
MeraNaamJoker
08-12 10:49 AM
Does anyone know if its possible to just renew the green-card or one has to apply for naturalization after 5 years?
You can revnew your GC after an intial period of 10 years. You are at your free will and wish to remain on your GC. You will be eligible for Naturalization after 5 years. That does not mean that you have to use that oppurtunity.
Now to the original question of this thread.
It is highly recommended that one must stay with the original sponsoring company for atleast 6 months after the GC is approved. If you leave the company in good terms with them or rather if they do not create any fuss, then you are safe.
Say in my case, my original employer laid me off and I ported my process with AC21 to another company, where I am working for 3 yrs and just got my GC approved. I am not obligated to stay with this company as they are not my original sponsor. And again they cannot revoke my GC.
Having said that, the employers can create problems for you, if they decide to hunt you down. But that will not do them any good other than the 'revenge' they may enjoy on you.
My collegue was planning to leave his company after GC approval and his employer cancelled the GC process by withdrawing the application. The USCIS has informed him about this officially to him. He was panicked and was about to start another application and one fine morning, his GC approval came to him through snail mail.
What I am trying to say is there are laws, rules, processes and methods. Not everything will be applicable everytime or does not happen all the time. It truly depends on your luck too.
GOOD LUCK!!!
You can revnew your GC after an intial period of 10 years. You are at your free will and wish to remain on your GC. You will be eligible for Naturalization after 5 years. That does not mean that you have to use that oppurtunity.
Now to the original question of this thread.
It is highly recommended that one must stay with the original sponsoring company for atleast 6 months after the GC is approved. If you leave the company in good terms with them or rather if they do not create any fuss, then you are safe.
Say in my case, my original employer laid me off and I ported my process with AC21 to another company, where I am working for 3 yrs and just got my GC approved. I am not obligated to stay with this company as they are not my original sponsor. And again they cannot revoke my GC.
Having said that, the employers can create problems for you, if they decide to hunt you down. But that will not do them any good other than the 'revenge' they may enjoy on you.
My collegue was planning to leave his company after GC approval and his employer cancelled the GC process by withdrawing the application. The USCIS has informed him about this officially to him. He was panicked and was about to start another application and one fine morning, his GC approval came to him through snail mail.
What I am trying to say is there are laws, rules, processes and methods. Not everything will be applicable everytime or does not happen all the time. It truly depends on your luck too.
GOOD LUCK!!!
Horace Jones
07-30 04:46 PM
I agree with most of the comments, the backlog definitely seems to be the overbearing issue here. The USCIS has faced a great deal of criticism because of this backlog, which many people argue is highly unfair. This article explains what I am talking about: Migration Information Source - USCIS Faces Criticism over Visa Backlog (http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=665)
bluekayal
02-27 12:31 AM
I tried putting our flyers at Pacific East Mall, but they only accept "rental" ads. bummer. But that doesn't mean some one else shouldn't try!
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar