coolmanasip
03-10 10:27 AM
Guys.....if you want to change representation to self in your 485 case, you do not need to file a form G-28......G-28 is for lawyers seeking permission to represent you. You do not need a permission for yourself............all you have to do is send USCIS a letter saying all future correspondence should be done with you and you are representing yourself on this case hereon....follow up after a month after sending the letter to ensure they have changed you as the point of contact on the case........If you are substituting your current lawyer by another one, then you need a new G-28
wallpaper Tagged: 2010 hair, 2010 hair
Sunx_2004
03-12 10:21 AM
I do not believe that one person (Pappu) should be held responsible for whatever going on You should not blame Pappu alone.
However, I agree that donor forum proved to be disastrous and driving people away from IV. Someone in core team should do analysis on how much it helped the IV cause and whether it should exist going forward. Lack of transparency is clearly hurting IV cause.
IV needs to OPEN ITS BOOKS
And show DONORS where their money is going? Where is the sponsors money going? and what is this ORGANIZATION planning to do. IF not, one these days they will find themselves in a audit and public scrutiny.
Any yes people who says open your eyes? Have you got your GC? EAD is only a means and not the destination
PAPU, you need to explain to all IV members and disclose the books and what you are doing as IV head, and dont give me the bull, of we are working, you want our support, we want clarity and real action.
However, I agree that donor forum proved to be disastrous and driving people away from IV. Someone in core team should do analysis on how much it helped the IV cause and whether it should exist going forward. Lack of transparency is clearly hurting IV cause.
IV needs to OPEN ITS BOOKS
And show DONORS where their money is going? Where is the sponsors money going? and what is this ORGANIZATION planning to do. IF not, one these days they will find themselves in a audit and public scrutiny.
Any yes people who says open your eyes? Have you got your GC? EAD is only a means and not the destination
PAPU, you need to explain to all IV members and disclose the books and what you are doing as IV head, and dont give me the bull, of we are working, you want our support, we want clarity and real action.
optimystic
03-18 08:35 PM
Urgh.. Here come the red squares...Why do I even bother posting comments!
2011 The hair color 2010 excellence
Abhinaym
09-10 10:50 AM
How many posts are required to access chat feature?
50, it said on the log in screen.
50, it said on the log in screen.
more...
rockstart
07-12 11:32 AM
Simple EB2 takes more priority over EB3 so EB2 ROW flow first to EB2 India & China and if there are more they will go to EB3
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
dagabaaj
02-12 04:23 PM
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/12/change-immigration-policy-in-light-of-job-losses/
more...
Canadianindian
04-01 11:01 AM
This is Sanjay Sood from NJ. I am also stuck in the retrogression process, and can be reached at hppdelhi@gmail.com. Sanjay
2010 2010 Hair Color Trends I Love
alisa
01-23 08:49 PM
And hoping that some more data, some more pointers, and some more information comes out of this thread, before it dies.
Data and estimates and links to websites needed for estimating when a PD would become current.
Data and estimates and links to websites needed for estimating when a PD would become current.
more...
coopheal
03-20 08:43 AM
I agree with you man. These screwed up desi consulting firms sell LCs like it is walmart. And people who work for them don't care about the position offered or their qualifications. They just want to have multiple LCs and I-140s and then cut the line when it is convenient.
Don�t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don�t listen to people like these. It�s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over its same mentality which opposes EB reforms. Grow up��
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.
Don�t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don�t listen to people like these. It�s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over its same mentality which opposes EB reforms. Grow up��
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.
hair Red Hair Color Ideas
piperwarrior
07-16 09:55 PM
The point is not about changing NumbersUSA supporters (that will not happen). The idea is to discredit this organization in the same publications that have profiled them (i.e., NY Times and LA Times) and show that their arguments don't hold water.
We all know that people on H1 status pay federal,state and social security tax. So I checked IRS site and searched for H1B. They have couple of links that shows H1b should pay tax. My point is everyone knows IRS and they know how much they go after people who are not paying taxes. If we can point to IRS which itself states by way examples that H1B should pay tax then at least the fence sitters will not jump on their side. I doubt if hardcore NumberUSA supporter will believe this anyway but we need turn the fence sitters around which may be the majority.
Here is the first one:
I have an H-1B Visa and my husband has an F-1 Visa. We both lived in the United States all of last year and had income. What kind of form should we file? Do we file separate returns or a joint return?
Assuming both of you had these visas for all of last year, you are a resident alien. Your husband is a nonresident alien if he has not been in the United States as a student for more than 5 years. You and your husband can file a joint tax return on Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ if he makes the choice to be treated as a resident for the entire year. See Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident in chapter 1. If your husband does not make this choice, you must file a separate return on Form 1040 or Form 1040A. Your husband must file Form 1040NR or 1040NR-EZ.
Here is an example where they use person on H1b as an example. I'm giving the link as the explanation is long. Just look at example 10
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=129428,00.html
Example 8.
Mr. Gerhard Schwarz was a citizen and resident of Germany just prior to his arrival in the United States. He arrived in the United States on 08-15-99 as a professor of physics on an H-1b visa. He intends to remain in the United States for two academic years, and does not intend to change his immigration status during that period before returning home. Determine his residency starting date.
What kind of federal income tax returns will he file for 1999 and 2000?
We all know that people on H1 status pay federal,state and social security tax. So I checked IRS site and searched for H1B. They have couple of links that shows H1b should pay tax. My point is everyone knows IRS and they know how much they go after people who are not paying taxes. If we can point to IRS which itself states by way examples that H1B should pay tax then at least the fence sitters will not jump on their side. I doubt if hardcore NumberUSA supporter will believe this anyway but we need turn the fence sitters around which may be the majority.
Here is the first one:
I have an H-1B Visa and my husband has an F-1 Visa. We both lived in the United States all of last year and had income. What kind of form should we file? Do we file separate returns or a joint return?
Assuming both of you had these visas for all of last year, you are a resident alien. Your husband is a nonresident alien if he has not been in the United States as a student for more than 5 years. You and your husband can file a joint tax return on Form 1040, 1040A, or 1040EZ if he makes the choice to be treated as a resident for the entire year. See Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident in chapter 1. If your husband does not make this choice, you must file a separate return on Form 1040 or Form 1040A. Your husband must file Form 1040NR or 1040NR-EZ.
Here is an example where they use person on H1b as an example. I'm giving the link as the explanation is long. Just look at example 10
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=129428,00.html
Example 8.
Mr. Gerhard Schwarz was a citizen and resident of Germany just prior to his arrival in the United States. He arrived in the United States on 08-15-99 as a professor of physics on an H-1b visa. He intends to remain in the United States for two academic years, and does not intend to change his immigration status during that period before returning home. Determine his residency starting date.
What kind of federal income tax returns will he file for 1999 and 2000?
more...
h1techSlave
02-08 02:44 PM
sts_seeker, We are perfectly happy to wait "before everyone who filed earlier." If you as a Nepali had a PD in 2001 and my PD is in 2002, I have no problems in you getting your GC before me. In this situation, you have filed before me, so it is fair that you should get your GC before me.
But today with the Country quota in place, your PD could be in 2007 and my PD could be in 2002. Guess, who would GC first?
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
But today with the Country quota in place, your PD could be in 2007 and my PD could be in 2002. Guess, who would GC first?
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
hot 2010 Hair Color Trends I Love
BlueSunD
03-07 10:57 PM
Hi Sparky! Well a quick google search turned some results, hope you find them usefull,
Some video tutoriasl, from begginer, to more advanced: http://www.ibiblio.org/bvidtute/
These seem nice, some of the basics of modeling are shown:
http://www.vrotvrot.com/xoom/tutorials.html
And these are introductory tutoriasl to Blender from Blender.org, those look really nice and easy to follow along:
http://www.blender3d.org/Education/index_old.php?sub=
and another one... almost the same
http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Using_Blender.80.0.html
Some video tutoriasl, from begginer, to more advanced: http://www.ibiblio.org/bvidtute/
These seem nice, some of the basics of modeling are shown:
http://www.vrotvrot.com/xoom/tutorials.html
And these are introductory tutoriasl to Blender from Blender.org, those look really nice and easy to follow along:
http://www.blender3d.org/Education/index_old.php?sub=
and another one... almost the same
http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Using_Blender.80.0.html
more...
house Hair Cuts And Color Trends For
GC_sufferer
07-04 10:58 PM
nixstor,
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Ramba, is that mean they might use less than 140K visas in 2007, because the name check may not be cleared for all 20K applictions in 3 months.
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Ramba, is that mean they might use less than 140K visas in 2007, because the name check may not be cleared for all 20K applictions in 3 months.
tattoo 2010 Hair trends and tips
wc_user
02-20 06:16 PM
Don't worry man! Your coast is near ... I think the EB3 India movement will atleast go to Sept - Oct 2001 . Someone had posted the Labor PD count from May 01 to Dec 01 . (524 in total) . Obviously the unknown which came out of the BEC backlogs makes this situation worse.
Does anyone want to make a guess of when EB3 India 2002 will become current ? I am thinking of changing the case to EB2.. Should I change my case or should I wait for EB3 to be current ?
Does anyone want to make a guess of when EB3 India 2002 will become current ? I am thinking of changing the case to EB2.. Should I change my case or should I wait for EB3 to be current ?
more...
pictures Best Crazy Hair Trends New
wIeRdLiFe
02-18 07:03 PM
Hello,
Is it true if you are in US for more than 5 years you get GC? It is too good to be true.
Any way which part of this bill says so? I am sorry for my ignorance.
Is it valid even if you came on F1 and started working ....
thanks in advance for answers.
Is it true if you are in US for more than 5 years you get GC? It is too good to be true.
Any way which part of this bill says so? I am sorry for my ignorance.
Is it valid even if you came on F1 and started working ....
thanks in advance for answers.
dresses red-hair-color Red: Hair color
prioritydate
12-20 08:59 PM
That's just another proof. A person who accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presense is inadmissible into the US (at least for 3 years).
Wow! I would have gotten a shock of my life!!
Wow! I would have gotten a shock of my life!!
more...
makeup Penelope Cruz Fall 2009 Hair
GCapplicant
07-02 11:32 AM
Let's try this.
girlfriend 2010-2011 Haircolor Trend
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
hairstyles hair color trends 2010. for
rajkr
06-11 11:48 AM
Everyone is again talking about ifs and buts. Guys why do not you put your hard work on what is more important than what is never ever going to happen. People with a GC, if this Bill passes, they are not going to renew your GC also. How's about that? People with a US citizenship, with previous GC status, they will not renew the USA passport, if this Bill passes. How's about that?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
rb_248
04-09 07:26 PM
No change. Wohi purani kahaani. Old wine in new bottle.
Old wine tastes good. Does this VB tastes good to you?
Old wine tastes good. Does this VB tastes good to you?
sunty
11-10 11:27 PM
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
No comments:
Post a Comment