sidd_k2002
03-24 09:00 PM
Friends any more suggestions regarding my problem here. Plese share ur knowledge.
wallpaper jeffree star without makeup.
ivar
09-09 12:16 PM
I had applied for PERM in 2006 with software programmer title with 8 yrs exp in EB2 and got it approved so i don't think it should be a issue. I have applied my second PERM in April 09 as senior software engineer with 10+ exp in EB2 still waiting to get it approved. My lawyer never raised any issue with my current labor in EB2 so i think we should qualify in EB2 with software engineer position. Where did you find this information about limiting EB2 to managers only? If you want to get in the line for GC don't waste time.. do it ASAP. It is taking a long time to get PERM approvals, don't know whats going on at DOL and why it is taking this long. There are hardly any approvals after Nov 08. Did anyone with PD after Nov 08 got their PERM approved recently?
fittan
03-16 03:12 PM
HumHongeKamiyab,
Since your I-140 is approved, your chance of I-485 RFE is very low. I think you should be ok since the key is that on the day your I-485 is approved, you must have a job offer per your labor.
Fittan
Since your I-140 is approved, your chance of I-485 RFE is very low. I think you should be ok since the key is that on the day your I-485 is approved, you must have a job offer per your labor.
Fittan
2011 a kiss from jeffree star.
m306m
04-15 02:27 PM
Congrats. Enjoy your GC. Do pray for us and continue to support our efforts.
I have been with the same employer for over 8 years. I am sure it will be 9 years before I get my GC. I am very happy with my employer and want to continue with them after I get my GC.
I have been with the same employer for over 8 years. I am sure it will be 9 years before I get my GC. I am very happy with my employer and want to continue with them after I get my GC.
more...
Steven-T
February 20th, 2004, 10:13 AM
Scott, yes, very much. I still have my bonus from 2002, but it was shifted to my daughter's education account. Waiting for my 2003 bonus payout soon, if any? Usually it occurs in late January.
Well, I may not have much time in the next two months for photo shooting. We are busy responding to our President's economic advisor's line, and working hard to improve the economy and our shareholders' return!
Steven
Well, I may not have much time in the next two months for photo shooting. We are busy responding to our President's economic advisor's line, and working hard to improve the economy and our shareholders' return!
Steven
javadeveloper
07-27 03:13 PM
My attorney tells me they don't give employees copies of labor applications.
Is this normal? Would I need it in future - if I switch jobs 180 days after 485 etc?
You don't need it If you stick to your employer till you get you GC.If you want to switch to other employer after 180 days of RD(Using AC21) , then you need to know the the position/title of your Labor (It's written on the Labor Certification) , because you have to accept a job with the same position/title with the new employer.Correct me if I am wrong.
Is this normal? Would I need it in future - if I switch jobs 180 days after 485 etc?
You don't need it If you stick to your employer till you get you GC.If you want to switch to other employer after 180 days of RD(Using AC21) , then you need to know the the position/title of your Labor (It's written on the Labor Certification) , because you have to accept a job with the same position/title with the new employer.Correct me if I am wrong.
more...
Funky_Monkey
09-14 05:05 PM
Talked to a lawyer, essentially everyone is right.
On paper, I am not illegal as long as the 485 is pending, but in theory, I am illegal as long as 140 is denied.
The clock for illegal stay starts when 140 is denied.
This is a gray area and there is no USCIS rule for what to do in this case. So to be safe, I need to get out and come back as H4 again.
gotgc, how did you do InfoPass? I went though the infopass system and there is no option for me to verify whether my 485 is indeed legitimately active (based on the NIW 140) or not.
On paper, I am not illegal as long as the 485 is pending, but in theory, I am illegal as long as 140 is denied.
The clock for illegal stay starts when 140 is denied.
This is a gray area and there is no USCIS rule for what to do in this case. So to be safe, I need to get out and come back as H4 again.
gotgc, how did you do InfoPass? I went though the infopass system and there is no option for me to verify whether my 485 is indeed legitimately active (based on the NIW 140) or not.
2010 jeffree star without makeup. jeffree star with no makeup.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
more...
StukAtBEC
08-11 09:22 AM
If I continue to be on my H-1B status after filing for I-140,I-485, EAD and I-131 concurrently, can my spouse who is currently on a H-4 Visa opt for her EAD after 90 days of filing these forms? If the answer to that question is an yes, is there any limitation in the kind of jobs she can do?
Also, what happens to her status if the I-140 application or I-485 application gets declined? Can she jump back to H-4 or does it require her to go to her home country for re-stamping? Do you see any potential issues in having her H4 visa re-stampped as she initiallay came to this country as a dependent and then later she used her EAD to work in USA.
Also, what happens to her status if the I-140 application or I-485 application gets declined? Can she jump back to H-4 or does it require her to go to her home country for re-stamping? Do you see any potential issues in having her H4 visa re-stampped as she initiallay came to this country as a dependent and then later she used her EAD to work in USA.
hair jeffree star no makeup.
reddy_h
08-16 11:03 AM
You should be getting the physical receipt in 2 or 3 days (at most a week). The check is cleared. Thats enough to know if the application is accepted. Relax man!
more...
kamakya
05-14 11:38 AM
If you are looking in 300K range with best schools,large indian community then Villages of Urbana in Frederick is one of the better choices.
The property tax is pretty low here because it is in Frederick county. I hope this information helps you. The elementary,middle and high schools here are one of the best in the state.
The property tax is pretty low here because it is in Frederick county. I hope this information helps you. The elementary,middle and high schools here are one of the best in the state.
hot 2010 jeffree star no makeup.
immilaw
09-17 11:07 AM
Hi,
I am a F1 student and am on OPT now. I got my H1B visa approved from Oct-1 2006 to Sep-30 2009.
But my school said I cannot get my degree certificate till December 2006.
My question is when I apply for my Green card will I be considered into EB2 list or EB3 list. On what basis will this be decided.
Please suggest.
Thank you,
Vijaya.
There are two requirements of EB-2. First is the minimum requirements of the Job and the second is the degree that you have earned BEFORE you joined the job.
So if the minimum requirement of the job is M.S. degree and you also had earned a M.S. degree before you joined the job then it will be EB-2. Remember, the US CIS & DOL consided goes by the date appearing on your diploma as the graduating date. No amount of letters from the dean or your supervisor will convince then that you earned your degree on a date before the date that appears on your diploma.
I am a F1 student and am on OPT now. I got my H1B visa approved from Oct-1 2006 to Sep-30 2009.
But my school said I cannot get my degree certificate till December 2006.
My question is when I apply for my Green card will I be considered into EB2 list or EB3 list. On what basis will this be decided.
Please suggest.
Thank you,
Vijaya.
There are two requirements of EB-2. First is the minimum requirements of the Job and the second is the degree that you have earned BEFORE you joined the job.
So if the minimum requirement of the job is M.S. degree and you also had earned a M.S. degree before you joined the job then it will be EB-2. Remember, the US CIS & DOL consided goes by the date appearing on your diploma as the graduating date. No amount of letters from the dean or your supervisor will convince then that you earned your degree on a date before the date that appears on your diploma.
more...
house hair jeffree star as a kid jeffrey star no makeup. Do you Like Jeffree Star?
chanduv23
02-14 04:39 PM
For Physicians - this is a blessing, so please start acting - please spread the message among your network. We need strong support.
In the background, Paskal and some others have done a lot of hard work on this and we need to express our support to these folks.
So this is a clarion call to all Physicians - Buck up .... Help IV to help yourselves
In the background, Paskal and some others have done a lot of hard work on this and we need to express our support to these folks.
So this is a clarion call to all Physicians - Buck up .... Help IV to help yourselves
tattoo jeffree star no makeup. jefree star without makeup. jeffree star without;
ufo2002
05-31 11:11 AM
Asian,
I know what you mean... there is nothing to stop us from doing something else totally different from our job description once we become permanent residents.
That's just how the immigration law works... and I think it applies to all nations in the world. You can't say that you want to work as a carpenter when you filed your GC as an IT skilled worker (as an example). Like as previously mentioned, it would make the LCA stage pretty obsolete.
But I think it would be GREAT if we were all allowed to freely change employers (within the same industry of work) without being shackled by employer sponsorship. I am sure that would please everybody, except for the bosses of course.
I know what you mean... there is nothing to stop us from doing something else totally different from our job description once we become permanent residents.
That's just how the immigration law works... and I think it applies to all nations in the world. You can't say that you want to work as a carpenter when you filed your GC as an IT skilled worker (as an example). Like as previously mentioned, it would make the LCA stage pretty obsolete.
But I think it would be GREAT if we were all allowed to freely change employers (within the same industry of work) without being shackled by employer sponsorship. I am sure that would please everybody, except for the bosses of course.
more...
pictures jeffree star with no makeup. jeffree star no makeup. and
yettapu
01-26 03:10 PM
when i click that Vote its not doing anything. Where I can register in the site so that it will reflect who voted for surveys??
dresses jeffrey star no makeup. jefree
like_watching_paint_dry
07-13 09:56 PM
Regardless of the nature of the outcome from USCIS, I think we should all take 5-10 minutes out of our busy lives and all the "predicting" and dash off a quick note of thanks to Congresswoman Lofgren for taking our cause to heart and using her position to ask the right questions that has led USCIS to consider some action to alleviate the pain they caused us by creating this mess. I figured we could show our appreciation for what she did to help us out.
Just a thought.....
Just a thought.....
more...
makeup of jeffree star without
lazycis
01-15 03:00 PM
Thank you; my reading of the law is also the same. However, a few of years ago (post-2001) both inside and outside counsel hired by my company came to a different conclusion. Hence, my parsing of the words.
Yeah, that's the beauty of being a lawyer, you can interpret the same thing differently, get your money and do not bear any responsibility :)
Yeah, that's the beauty of being a lawyer, you can interpret the same thing differently, get your money and do not bear any responsibility :)
girlfriend hot tattoo jeffree star with
xyzgc
01-01 01:37 PM
Dear fellow IV'ians,
I just wanted to share my good news with all of you on the cusp of a New Year. I am ecstatic to announce that my 140 got approved after a nerve wracking 17 months.
I have been rewarded with this blessing at the end of an absolutely horrendous year, to say the least. It started with being on bench for 5 months, to a 2-month contract in another city on H1-B through 3 layers, working hard as a mule whilst at the same time thinking positive, praying and believing in myself. Then extending contract by 3 months, abandoning H1B to use EAD due to ridiculous treatment by my H1 employer of 8 yrs. (it was the proverbial last straw on the back). Finally after this effort, contract extended through 12/31/09 culminating just yesterday by the approval of my 140!! "Hoped for the Best but prepared for the Worst"!
It came at a moment when I was almost ready to give in, throw up my hands in despair and start the tedious process all over again. But I always believed there was a silver lining in the clouds for me and it has just now opened up.
I want to thank everybody for reading and providing a fellow immigrant support and answers throughout this arduous journey. As a token of my appreciation for IV, I will contribute $140 towards our campaigns for next year.
{PayPal Payment Sent to "donations@immigrationvoice.org" (Unique Transaction ID #85N48789NY4311439)}
And lastly - Wish You a Happy & Prosperous 2009!! Be safe everybody.
Happy to note that your trial and tribulations have come to an end. I had very similar issues back in 2001-2
I just wanted to share my good news with all of you on the cusp of a New Year. I am ecstatic to announce that my 140 got approved after a nerve wracking 17 months.
I have been rewarded with this blessing at the end of an absolutely horrendous year, to say the least. It started with being on bench for 5 months, to a 2-month contract in another city on H1-B through 3 layers, working hard as a mule whilst at the same time thinking positive, praying and believing in myself. Then extending contract by 3 months, abandoning H1B to use EAD due to ridiculous treatment by my H1 employer of 8 yrs. (it was the proverbial last straw on the back). Finally after this effort, contract extended through 12/31/09 culminating just yesterday by the approval of my 140!! "Hoped for the Best but prepared for the Worst"!
It came at a moment when I was almost ready to give in, throw up my hands in despair and start the tedious process all over again. But I always believed there was a silver lining in the clouds for me and it has just now opened up.
I want to thank everybody for reading and providing a fellow immigrant support and answers throughout this arduous journey. As a token of my appreciation for IV, I will contribute $140 towards our campaigns for next year.
{PayPal Payment Sent to "donations@immigrationvoice.org" (Unique Transaction ID #85N48789NY4311439)}
And lastly - Wish You a Happy & Prosperous 2009!! Be safe everybody.
Happy to note that your trial and tribulations have come to an end. I had very similar issues back in 2001-2
hairstyles Jeffree Star. No makeup.
amohale
11-18 10:11 PM
Hello,
I had to go to India due to a family emergency (death in family) in middle of my project. I have a new H1B and went for Stamping at Delhi Consulate on Nov 2nd. I got issued a 221G green form, to which I submitted the document requested on same day. 3 business days later I received a email from Consulate with another 221 G green form asking for all the documents. I sent all the documents via VFS on Nov 10th.
I haven't heard back from the consulate yet. In the mean time, my husband used his contacts to approach a congresswoman who has been involved in immigration cases. She has agreed to take my case with the Consulate. But what I am seeing on the forums is that if Congresswoman write letter to the consulate can jeopardize the case by unnecessarily pressuring the Consular.
It has been little over a week I submitted documents and I see that consulate is usually taking 2-3 weeks to respond. Please suggest if I should have the congresswoman write to the consulate or wait for the it to take the natural process and pray for the best?
Any help/suggestion is appreciated.
-Ritu
I had to go to India due to a family emergency (death in family) in middle of my project. I have a new H1B and went for Stamping at Delhi Consulate on Nov 2nd. I got issued a 221G green form, to which I submitted the document requested on same day. 3 business days later I received a email from Consulate with another 221 G green form asking for all the documents. I sent all the documents via VFS on Nov 10th.
I haven't heard back from the consulate yet. In the mean time, my husband used his contacts to approach a congresswoman who has been involved in immigration cases. She has agreed to take my case with the Consulate. But what I am seeing on the forums is that if Congresswoman write letter to the consulate can jeopardize the case by unnecessarily pressuring the Consular.
It has been little over a week I submitted documents and I see that consulate is usually taking 2-3 weeks to respond. Please suggest if I should have the congresswoman write to the consulate or wait for the it to take the natural process and pray for the best?
Any help/suggestion is appreciated.
-Ritu
hojo
09-07 11:48 AM
yes, i am definatly lost in beta.
sorry, i have to say again, you're sig is really cool lost.
sorry, i have to say again, you're sig is really cool lost.
MatsP
January 28th, 2008, 02:51 PM
I also don't have a Nikon D40x, but I don't think any of this discussion is related to the specific camera model, although some of my discussion relies on you being able to change settings on the camera, and my names of things may be off from what Nikon uses - hopefully I can still get you on the right track.
It's actually a myth that a longer lens requires a higher aperture. For the same framing, you get the same DOF (Depth Of Field) for the same aperture, whether you use a 600mm telephoto lens or a 4.5mm ultra-fisheye. The only difference is that if you want to fill the frame with a sparrow, you can sit at 10 meters or so with a 600mm, and you need to be touching the sparrow with the lens to get it to fill the fram on a 4.5mm lens. Since most of the time, we don't try to get "eye to eye" with wild sparrows and ultira-fish-eyes, nor take pictures of "everything around you" with a 600mm tele (which would put you half a mile away, or so), it appears that the wide-angle has a bigger depth of field. If you don't beleive me, feel free to place a page of newspaper print at an angle (so that you can see how much of it is in focus), and photograph the exact same bit of text from different distances with the same aperture and different focal length.
So, smaller aperture (bigger number) will allow more depth-of-field, no matter what lens you use. Wide-angle works well for indoors shots, because it's usually close-up - but I have used my 100mm Macro for some of the shots of my son.
For "active" shots, you may want to aim for f/5.6 - f/8 or so. ISO 400 or higher helps reduce the look of "flash in dark room" scenario.
For the other trick when taking action shots of kids, the trick is to use the same settings as the sports photographers: relatively short shutter speed (unless you actually want motion blur as part of the image - in the right place, it's good, in most cases not!), and use "following autofocus" (aka AF Servo or Tracking AF) - this is the part where knowing what Nikon calls it could come in handy - so that the AF is continously focusing on the subject, same as if you were trying to follow a basketball-player as he makes his way across the court to the basket. That way, the camera tries to focus (and uses "computer magic" to PREDICT where the focus should be once the shutter is triggered).
Third, I think Nikon flashes also support "Second curtain flash", which is definitely the better option for "natural looking light" - this allows the camera to capture the natural light first, the flash the flash, rather than the ohter way around. It should, in theory, make no difference, but I find that it gives a more natural look. Twiddling with the balance between flash and natural light will get you there sooner or later (usually, in my case, later - after son or daughter have finished thinking photography is fun!). The adjustments are:
- smaller aperture (bigger F-number)
- faster shutter speed
- lower ISO number.
gives more flash. Opposite gives more of the natural light.
--
Mats
--
Mats
It's actually a myth that a longer lens requires a higher aperture. For the same framing, you get the same DOF (Depth Of Field) for the same aperture, whether you use a 600mm telephoto lens or a 4.5mm ultra-fisheye. The only difference is that if you want to fill the frame with a sparrow, you can sit at 10 meters or so with a 600mm, and you need to be touching the sparrow with the lens to get it to fill the fram on a 4.5mm lens. Since most of the time, we don't try to get "eye to eye" with wild sparrows and ultira-fish-eyes, nor take pictures of "everything around you" with a 600mm tele (which would put you half a mile away, or so), it appears that the wide-angle has a bigger depth of field. If you don't beleive me, feel free to place a page of newspaper print at an angle (so that you can see how much of it is in focus), and photograph the exact same bit of text from different distances with the same aperture and different focal length.
So, smaller aperture (bigger number) will allow more depth-of-field, no matter what lens you use. Wide-angle works well for indoors shots, because it's usually close-up - but I have used my 100mm Macro for some of the shots of my son.
For "active" shots, you may want to aim for f/5.6 - f/8 or so. ISO 400 or higher helps reduce the look of "flash in dark room" scenario.
For the other trick when taking action shots of kids, the trick is to use the same settings as the sports photographers: relatively short shutter speed (unless you actually want motion blur as part of the image - in the right place, it's good, in most cases not!), and use "following autofocus" (aka AF Servo or Tracking AF) - this is the part where knowing what Nikon calls it could come in handy - so that the AF is continously focusing on the subject, same as if you were trying to follow a basketball-player as he makes his way across the court to the basket. That way, the camera tries to focus (and uses "computer magic" to PREDICT where the focus should be once the shutter is triggered).
Third, I think Nikon flashes also support "Second curtain flash", which is definitely the better option for "natural looking light" - this allows the camera to capture the natural light first, the flash the flash, rather than the ohter way around. It should, in theory, make no difference, but I find that it gives a more natural look. Twiddling with the balance between flash and natural light will get you there sooner or later (usually, in my case, later - after son or daughter have finished thinking photography is fun!). The adjustments are:
- smaller aperture (bigger F-number)
- faster shutter speed
- lower ISO number.
gives more flash. Opposite gives more of the natural light.
--
Mats
--
Mats
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar