xgr3
05-14 08:40 PM
What does this status message means?
Current Status: This case has been sent to another office for processing because it has jurisdiction over the case.
Transferred to Texas from Nebraska.
Filing info
-------------------
Category : EB3
PD : July 2006
Labor and 140 Approved.
I-485 filed on Jul 2007
LUD - 03/30/2009
Current Status: This case has been sent to another office for processing because it has jurisdiction over the case.
Transferred to Texas from Nebraska.
Filing info
-------------------
Category : EB3
PD : July 2006
Labor and 140 Approved.
I-485 filed on Jul 2007
LUD - 03/30/2009
wallpaper Ranbir
WillIBLucky
11-22 01:59 PM
Hello Gurus,
Can we change company based upon approved I140 and get a 3 H1B.
what happens if my previous employer cancels I140.
:confused: Well you should see "Enough is Enough" thread. YOu may find some answers. :)
Can we change company based upon approved I140 and get a 3 H1B.
what happens if my previous employer cancels I140.
:confused: Well you should see "Enough is Enough" thread. YOu may find some answers. :)
kiranraheja
10-29 05:48 AM
I recently got my I797 approved (on Oct 19) but, the USCIS denied my extension of stay, and I need to go for stamping in Chennai (as per I797). My question:
1. Can I attend the interview in Canada/Hyderabad consulate instead of Chennai. Company attorney said that should be ok and filing I824 for change of consulate would take long.
In case you wanted to know more details about my case:
-Possess I797 from Employer A until Nov13, 2009.
-Filed for H1b extension with Employer B in Feb, denied in Jun15. payroll with Emp B Feb onwards.
-Re-filed for extn with Emp B in Aug4 finally approved on Oct19 but denied extn of stay.
1. Can I attend the interview in Canada/Hyderabad consulate instead of Chennai. Company attorney said that should be ok and filing I824 for change of consulate would take long.
In case you wanted to know more details about my case:
-Possess I797 from Employer A until Nov13, 2009.
-Filed for H1b extension with Employer B in Feb, denied in Jun15. payroll with Emp B Feb onwards.
-Re-filed for extn with Emp B in Aug4 finally approved on Oct19 but denied extn of stay.
2011 ranbir kapoor and katrina
martinvisalaw
09-24 01:17 PM
You should bring evidence of your strong ties to the country where you live now - evidence of a job, family, house, club memberships, bank accounts, etc. Anything you can think of that would show an immigration officer that you really intend to return home at the end of this trip.
more...
csvinay
06-10 02:50 PM
Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhEl6HdfqWM&feature=dir
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhEl6HdfqWM&feature=dir
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
The Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the Immigration Subcommittee Chairman, told the AP yesterday that he plans on introducing a comprehensive immigration reform bill before Labor Day and then hopes to have a debate on the bill in the fall. Schumer hinted that advocates for highly skilled immigrants are likely to be happier with the bill than those pushing for guest worker reforms for lesser skilled workers and that business and the unions have yet to reach a compromise. [Hat tip to reader LAFR for this link].
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/schumer-promises-to-introduce-immigration-bill-by-labor-day.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/schumer-promises-to-introduce-immigration-bill-by-labor-day.html)
more...
ram2nag
03-14 09:09 PM
Hello:
I am on L1A at present and my full 7 year term is expiring in DEC-2012. My company could not file EB1-Int'l Executive or manager due to ownership changes etc. But they are considering EB2 and I was told that it will be risky as I would be required to convert to H1B before that and I would lose one year of stay.
Can someone advise whether my company can apply for extension of my L1A beyond the 7 years, if it files for EB2 and would be pending for approval, instead of going through the issue of converting to H1B?
Thanks
Raman
I am on L1A at present and my full 7 year term is expiring in DEC-2012. My company could not file EB1-Int'l Executive or manager due to ownership changes etc. But they are considering EB2 and I was told that it will be risky as I would be required to convert to H1B before that and I would lose one year of stay.
Can someone advise whether my company can apply for extension of my L1A beyond the 7 years, if it files for EB2 and would be pending for approval, instead of going through the issue of converting to H1B?
Thanks
Raman
2010 Katrina Kaif and Ranbir Kapoor
bijualex29
09-13 03:43 PM
I do not think, we need to break our head against House repulican, they are so bias in their thinking and approch.
I think, senate version will have some chance of incorporating SKILL bill, since they are usually broad minded and willing to listern.
I think, senate version will have some chance of incorporating SKILL bill, since they are usually broad minded and willing to listern.
more...
LondonTown
02-14 05:14 PM
"Green cards will go out, background check or not" -- Please read this (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5533508.html) and this. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/washington/12checks.html?hp)
hair ranbir kapoor and katrina
kalyan65
01-07 12:33 PM
My current H1 expired on 7/9, I applied h1 extension (with approved I140) on 6/30/10 with client letter (with no end date) and other documents. I got approval last week, they approved my petition from 11/18/2010 - 11/17/2011. 10th year extension.
1. What is my status between 7/10/10 - 11/17/2010?.
2. Do i need to inform USCIS?
3. I expected 3 years, but I got only one year.
Is anybody faced similar situation or any suggestion.
Here is my details
First Labor (EB3) : Filed : Apr'03, Approval : Jan'07
First I-140 : Filed : Feb'07 Denied : May'07 Appeal : AAO, Approved : May'10 with one RFE
Second Labor(EB3) : Filed EB3, Oct'07, Approval : Mar'08
Second I-140 : Jun'08, Approved : Apr'0
1. What is my status between 7/10/10 - 11/17/2010?.
2. Do i need to inform USCIS?
3. I expected 3 years, but I got only one year.
Is anybody faced similar situation or any suggestion.
Here is my details
First Labor (EB3) : Filed : Apr'03, Approval : Jan'07
First I-140 : Filed : Feb'07 Denied : May'07 Appeal : AAO, Approved : May'10 with one RFE
Second Labor(EB3) : Filed EB3, Oct'07, Approval : Mar'08
Second I-140 : Jun'08, Approved : Apr'0
more...
Blog Feeds
05-01 04:30 PM
Very shortly, Congress will consider legislation that could allow 60,000 foreign nurses to come to the US. We face a shortage that will approach a million by the end of the next decade. On a daily basis, the lack of nurses is a serious problem, but not so noticeable to the typical American. But what happens if we have a pandemic and all of a sudden hospitals around the country are called on to deal with hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - of sick patients at the same time? We're getting a little preview of that right now with...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/are-we-playing-with-fire-when-it-comes-to-nursing-immigration.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/are-we-playing-with-fire-when-it-comes-to-nursing-immigration.html)
hot ranbir kapoor and katrina
.jpg "Katrina Kaif Ranbir Kapoor")
sab
07-27 09:46 AM
bump up
more...
house ranbir-kapoor-and-katrina-kaif
chandanmonu
08-14 01:16 AM
I have B1 visa and and right now I am in US on client support.
I want to get into a College for further studies for which I am unaware of the legal formalities to be completed.
I already have a letter of internship with a US company and the college is giving me a letter for change of status i-20.
As far as the immigration goes for change of status of visa, it says that I need to go out of the country and then come back, with stamped as 'intent to study'. So is it really required?
However still it is confusing for me as to what other formalities are to be completed regarding the same.
I want to get into a College for further studies for which I am unaware of the legal formalities to be completed.
I already have a letter of internship with a US company and the college is giving me a letter for change of status i-20.
As far as the immigration goes for change of status of visa, it says that I need to go out of the country and then come back, with stamped as 'intent to study'. So is it really required?
However still it is confusing for me as to what other formalities are to be completed regarding the same.
tattoo Ranbir Kapoor
rajkumari
05-17 01:55 PM
I was on F1 visa and applied for my GC / I485 thru my spouse few years back. Unfortunately while coming back from India 3 years back, I used my stamped F1 visa instead of AP. My lawyer told me that due to this, I have abondoned my AOS and he has to withdraw my 485 and refile it when it will be current. Few days back spouse became current and attorney was preparing to apply for 485 again but in USCIS the status of my application was still shown pending not withdrawn. To our surprise, we saw 2 GC in the mail and the online status was shown approved. But the attorney is saying that we should re-file the 485 since USCIS did not withdraw my application and approved it. They says that I might have issues if my absence is detected when I will apply for citizenship later. Please suggest. I am so puzzled and tensed..
more...
pictures Kapur and deepika padukone has
xlxoel
07-15 12:54 PM
Hey everybody,
I need to FEDEX something to the SERVICE TEXAS CENTER but can't not find the fedex address, should I send it to the same P.O. Box or is there a different address for FEDEX?
I need to FEDEX something to the SERVICE TEXAS CENTER but can't not find the fedex address, should I send it to the same P.O. Box or is there a different address for FEDEX?
dresses Katrina Kaif Ranbir Kapoor
nixstor
03-11 12:36 PM
If you are from the state of Vermont and would like to participate in the FOIA campaign, please contact me immediately via PM.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
makeup ranbir kapoor wallpapers
chanduv23
06-14 09:03 AM
If an Americcan citizen wants to marry a immigrant, then their marriage is in a limbo
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/13/homeland.wedding.delays.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/13/homeland.wedding.delays.ap/index.html
girlfriend Katrina has finally spoken on
Macaca
08-05 08:12 AM
A Bad Deal Gets Worse (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/opinion/05sun2.html) August 5, 2007
President Bush is understandably desperate for some kind of foreign policy success. But that cannot justify sacrificing his principled stand against weapons proliferation to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with India. The agreement could end up benefiting New Delhi�s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power.
The deal was deeply flawed from the start. And it has been made even worse by a newly negotiated companion agreement that lays out the technical details for nuclear commerce. Congress should reject the agreement and demand that the administration, or its successor, negotiate a new one that does not undermine efforts to restrain the spread of nuclear weapons.
Any agreement needs to honor the principle Mr. Bush set forth in 2004: that countries do not need to make their own nuclear fuel, or reprocess their spent fuel, to operate effective nuclear energy programs. The technology can be all too easily diverted to make fuel for a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Bush�s accord with India jettisoned that essential principle. Washington capitulated to India�s nuclear establishment and endorsed continued reprocessing. And while United States law calls for nuclear cooperation to end if India detonates another weapon, the agreement makes no explicit mention of that requirement � while it promises that Washington will acquiesce, if not assist, in India�s efforts to find other fuel suppliers.
Bringing India � which never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty � in from the cold is not a bad idea. It is the world�s most populous democracy, with a dynamic economy. And its record on nonproliferation � aside from its own diversion of civilian technology to its once-secret weapons program � is pretty good. The problem is that the United States got very little back. No promise to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing.
The message of all this is unmistakable: When it comes to nuclear proliferation, Washington�s only real policy is to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Suspicion of America�s motives around the world are high enough. America cannot afford another such blow to its credibility, especially when it is trying to rally international pressure against nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
The administration will argue that altering this agreement now would be a slap at India. But there is no good in compounding a bad deal. And there are better ways to deepen political and economic ties.
Congress accepted the administration�s arguments far too uncritically when it approved the first India-related nuclear legislation last December. It must now take a stand against the even more damaging companion agreement. At a time when far too many governments are re-examining their decision to forswear nuclear weapons, the United States should be shoring up the nuclear rules, not shredding them.
President Bush is understandably desperate for some kind of foreign policy success. But that cannot justify sacrificing his principled stand against weapons proliferation to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with India. The agreement could end up benefiting New Delhi�s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power.
The deal was deeply flawed from the start. And it has been made even worse by a newly negotiated companion agreement that lays out the technical details for nuclear commerce. Congress should reject the agreement and demand that the administration, or its successor, negotiate a new one that does not undermine efforts to restrain the spread of nuclear weapons.
Any agreement needs to honor the principle Mr. Bush set forth in 2004: that countries do not need to make their own nuclear fuel, or reprocess their spent fuel, to operate effective nuclear energy programs. The technology can be all too easily diverted to make fuel for a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Bush�s accord with India jettisoned that essential principle. Washington capitulated to India�s nuclear establishment and endorsed continued reprocessing. And while United States law calls for nuclear cooperation to end if India detonates another weapon, the agreement makes no explicit mention of that requirement � while it promises that Washington will acquiesce, if not assist, in India�s efforts to find other fuel suppliers.
Bringing India � which never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty � in from the cold is not a bad idea. It is the world�s most populous democracy, with a dynamic economy. And its record on nonproliferation � aside from its own diversion of civilian technology to its once-secret weapons program � is pretty good. The problem is that the United States got very little back. No promise to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing.
The message of all this is unmistakable: When it comes to nuclear proliferation, Washington�s only real policy is to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Suspicion of America�s motives around the world are high enough. America cannot afford another such blow to its credibility, especially when it is trying to rally international pressure against nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
The administration will argue that altering this agreement now would be a slap at India. But there is no good in compounding a bad deal. And there are better ways to deepen political and economic ties.
Congress accepted the administration�s arguments far too uncritically when it approved the first India-related nuclear legislation last December. It must now take a stand against the even more damaging companion agreement. At a time when far too many governments are re-examining their decision to forswear nuclear weapons, the United States should be shoring up the nuclear rules, not shredding them.
hairstyles Ranbir kapoor dating Katrina
khanx66
05-06 09:20 AM
Hi,
I am not sure if I am posting this question to the wrong thread, so sorry if that's so....
I was told by the lawyer that I needed I-140 approved in order to ask for 3 years instead of 1 year for my H1B extension. They filed the extension asking for 1 year, and a week later we have the I-140 approved. My current H1B expiration date is in June 2009.
Now,
1) is there a way to ask H1B extension for 3 years at this point?
2) If so, does that mean a new application, or an amendment/correction to the old one?
3) Is it worth the hassle to ask for 3 Year extension if it's possible?
Thanks in advance for sharing your knowledge/experience/thoughts...
I am not sure if I am posting this question to the wrong thread, so sorry if that's so....
I was told by the lawyer that I needed I-140 approved in order to ask for 3 years instead of 1 year for my H1B extension. They filed the extension asking for 1 year, and a week later we have the I-140 approved. My current H1B expiration date is in June 2009.
Now,
1) is there a way to ask H1B extension for 3 years at this point?
2) If so, does that mean a new application, or an amendment/correction to the old one?
3) Is it worth the hassle to ask for 3 Year extension if it's possible?
Thanks in advance for sharing your knowledge/experience/thoughts...
Administrator2
10-16 07:35 PM
,
Desertfox
03-25 03:40 PM
Sent you a PM with my attorney's info...
No comments:
Post a Comment