vikki76
06-23 02:05 PM
needhelp, I just sent you a PM. Pl. Check
wallpaper Hello Kitty Rockstar
raju_abc
03-15 10:37 PM
Hi,
I got H1 in 2008.
I want to that till how much time is the petition valid , if I dont go for stamping.
Also , suppose my company withdraws the petition, so now till how much duration my cap number is valid?
I got H1 in 2008.
I want to that till how much time is the petition valid , if I dont go for stamping.
Also , suppose my company withdraws the petition, so now till how much duration my cap number is valid?
SunnySurya
08-04 08:04 PM
I want run a robot check on how many 485 were filed between July 2nd and Aug 16 07.
Can some one help me figure our what would be the first receipt name at SRC and LIN as on the end of July 29 '07.
Can some one help me figure our what would be the first receipt name at SRC and LIN as on the end of July 29 '07.
2011 Kelloggs Hello Kitty Loops
Macaca
04-05 08:23 AM
Some paras from Where There's a Cause, There's a Caucus (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040402757.html), By Zachary A. Goldfarb, Special to The Washington Post, Thursday, April 5, 2007
Every morning in Washington, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) rides his rusty red-orange Trek bicycle to work on Capitol Hill, a reminder of one of the first things he did when he came to Congress in 1996: create a bike caucus.
With 165 members, the bipartisan Congressional Bike Caucus promotes the use of bicycles as a substitute for cars -- a way to exercise, reduce fossil fuel emissions and improve travel patterns. The caucus shepherded $4 billion for trails, bike paths and pedestrian facilities in a big transportation spending bill in the last Congress.
The bike caucus is just one of the zany-sounding groups that lawmakers have created on Capitol Hill to advance niche interests in Congress. There's no trick to creating a caucus -- or "congressional member organization" -- in the House, where it takes just a letter to the Administration Committee. Nearly 300 have registered. The Senate has far fewer groups, and they don't register at all.
But some caucuses have come to play prominent roles on the front lines of Capitol Hill. The Republican Study Committee has worked to amplify the views of the more conservative wing of the GOP. Since Democrats took control of Congress in January, the Congressional Black Caucus has wielded unusual power, with five members serving as chairmen of House committees.
Every morning in Washington, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) rides his rusty red-orange Trek bicycle to work on Capitol Hill, a reminder of one of the first things he did when he came to Congress in 1996: create a bike caucus.
With 165 members, the bipartisan Congressional Bike Caucus promotes the use of bicycles as a substitute for cars -- a way to exercise, reduce fossil fuel emissions and improve travel patterns. The caucus shepherded $4 billion for trails, bike paths and pedestrian facilities in a big transportation spending bill in the last Congress.
The bike caucus is just one of the zany-sounding groups that lawmakers have created on Capitol Hill to advance niche interests in Congress. There's no trick to creating a caucus -- or "congressional member organization" -- in the House, where it takes just a letter to the Administration Committee. Nearly 300 have registered. The Senate has far fewer groups, and they don't register at all.
But some caucuses have come to play prominent roles on the front lines of Capitol Hill. The Republican Study Committee has worked to amplify the views of the more conservative wing of the GOP. Since Democrats took control of Congress in January, the Congressional Black Caucus has wielded unusual power, with five members serving as chairmen of House committees.
more...
Macaca
07-14 08:35 PM
AP Poll: Public Gives Congress Low Marks (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONGRESS_AP_POLL?SITE=MALOW&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT) By DARLENE SUPERVILLE Associated Press Writer, Jul 13
WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the eyes of the public, Congress is doing even worse than the president.
Public satisfaction with the job lawmakers are doing has fallen 11 points since May, to 24 percent, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll. That's lower than for President Bush, who hasn't fared well lately, either.
Bush has been taking heat over the Iraq war, his decision to spare a former top vice presidential aide from going to prison and his desire for an overhaul of immigration laws that critics said would give a free pass to illegal immigrants. His job approval rating in the AP-Ipsos survey remained virtually unchanged at 33 percent.
The 24 percent approval rating for Congress matched its previous low, which came in June 2006, five months before Democrats won control of the House and Senate due to public discontent with the job Republicans were doing.
Just two months ago, 35 percent of the public approved of Congress' work.
Poll respondents from both political parties say they're tired of the fighting between Congress and the White House, and want the two branches of government to work together on such issues as education, health care and the Iraq war.
"They don't approve of anything he does," Theresa Holsten, 55, a Republican and unemployed resident of Lawton, Okla., said of Congress. "He can't do anything right, according to what some people say. It irritates the living daylights out of me."
Tammy Lambirth, 42, a data researcher from San Antonio, disapproves of "all the fighting that they do all the time."
The latest tussle involves Bush's refusal to hand over documents and let former White House aides answer questions from the Democratic-controlled Congress about the firing of U.S. attorneys. The dispute could end up in federal court.
"The Republicans are just stonewalling everything, and the Democrats are just not stepping up and making them do what they need to do, especially about Iraq," said Lambirth, a Democrat. "They need to make our troops get out of Iraq."
While the public's approval of Congress has dropped 11 points since May, the percentage of Democrats who are turning up their noses at Congress - like Lambirth - nearly doubled. Among Republicans, though, not so much.
Approval among Democrats fell 21 points, from 48 percent in May to 27 percent.
It remained low among Republicans, at 20 percent, and has not changed significantly in the past two months.
Democrats won control of Congress on the strength of their promises to end the Iraq war, but so far have failed to do it. Bush vetoed one spending bill that included a deadline for ending the war, and Democrats don't have the votes to override him.
An increase in the federal minimum wage became law, but much of the Democratic agenda has cleared the House only to become bottled up in the Senate, where the party has a much narrower working majority.
Democrats need to be mindful of the public's satisfaction with Congress' productivity, especially as the party campaigns to win back the White House in elections next year, said political science professor Kenneth Sherrill.
"If you manage to persuade a very large number of voters, including an increasing percentage of people who associate with your own party that you're not capable of governing, you're in real trouble," said Sherrill, who teaches at Hunter College in New York City. "That is not a good message to send."
Among other survey findings:
Bush's marks on his handling of the economy and domestic issues like health care, education and the environment, held steady, at 37 percent on the economy and 33 percent on domestic matters. Last month, Bush was at 37 percent approval for his stewardship of the economy, and 32 percent on domestic issues.
On handling of foreign policy, including terrorism, 38 percent approved, compared with 35 percent last month.
On handling the Iraq war, 31 percent approved, compared with 28 percent last month.
One-fourth of the people, or 26 percent, said the country is headed in the right direction. Last month, 21 percent said the country was on the right track.
The telephone survey of 1,004 adults was conducted July 9-11 in English and Spanish by Ipsos, an international public opinion research company. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the eyes of the public, Congress is doing even worse than the president.
Public satisfaction with the job lawmakers are doing has fallen 11 points since May, to 24 percent, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll. That's lower than for President Bush, who hasn't fared well lately, either.
Bush has been taking heat over the Iraq war, his decision to spare a former top vice presidential aide from going to prison and his desire for an overhaul of immigration laws that critics said would give a free pass to illegal immigrants. His job approval rating in the AP-Ipsos survey remained virtually unchanged at 33 percent.
The 24 percent approval rating for Congress matched its previous low, which came in June 2006, five months before Democrats won control of the House and Senate due to public discontent with the job Republicans were doing.
Just two months ago, 35 percent of the public approved of Congress' work.
Poll respondents from both political parties say they're tired of the fighting between Congress and the White House, and want the two branches of government to work together on such issues as education, health care and the Iraq war.
"They don't approve of anything he does," Theresa Holsten, 55, a Republican and unemployed resident of Lawton, Okla., said of Congress. "He can't do anything right, according to what some people say. It irritates the living daylights out of me."
Tammy Lambirth, 42, a data researcher from San Antonio, disapproves of "all the fighting that they do all the time."
The latest tussle involves Bush's refusal to hand over documents and let former White House aides answer questions from the Democratic-controlled Congress about the firing of U.S. attorneys. The dispute could end up in federal court.
"The Republicans are just stonewalling everything, and the Democrats are just not stepping up and making them do what they need to do, especially about Iraq," said Lambirth, a Democrat. "They need to make our troops get out of Iraq."
While the public's approval of Congress has dropped 11 points since May, the percentage of Democrats who are turning up their noses at Congress - like Lambirth - nearly doubled. Among Republicans, though, not so much.
Approval among Democrats fell 21 points, from 48 percent in May to 27 percent.
It remained low among Republicans, at 20 percent, and has not changed significantly in the past two months.
Democrats won control of Congress on the strength of their promises to end the Iraq war, but so far have failed to do it. Bush vetoed one spending bill that included a deadline for ending the war, and Democrats don't have the votes to override him.
An increase in the federal minimum wage became law, but much of the Democratic agenda has cleared the House only to become bottled up in the Senate, where the party has a much narrower working majority.
Democrats need to be mindful of the public's satisfaction with Congress' productivity, especially as the party campaigns to win back the White House in elections next year, said political science professor Kenneth Sherrill.
"If you manage to persuade a very large number of voters, including an increasing percentage of people who associate with your own party that you're not capable of governing, you're in real trouble," said Sherrill, who teaches at Hunter College in New York City. "That is not a good message to send."
Among other survey findings:
Bush's marks on his handling of the economy and domestic issues like health care, education and the environment, held steady, at 37 percent on the economy and 33 percent on domestic matters. Last month, Bush was at 37 percent approval for his stewardship of the economy, and 32 percent on domestic issues.
On handling of foreign policy, including terrorism, 38 percent approved, compared with 35 percent last month.
On handling the Iraq war, 31 percent approved, compared with 28 percent last month.
One-fourth of the people, or 26 percent, said the country is headed in the right direction. Last month, 21 percent said the country was on the right track.
The telephone survey of 1,004 adults was conducted July 9-11 in English and Spanish by Ipsos, an international public opinion research company. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
aspireus
05-19 03:54 PM
I got my I 140 approved under Eb3 if i get another job and transfer my I 140 can i use my old PD if my new employer applies in EB2 ?
more...
Blog Feeds
06-01 01:00 PM
The National Foundation for American Policy has put out a number of excellent reports on the state of American immigration and now they have two more. Family Immigration: The Long Wait to Immigrate Family immigration quotas are inadequate and result in separation and long waits for Americans, lawful permanent residents and close family members. Approximately 4 million people are waiting in family immigration backlogs, according to data obtained from the U.S. Department of State and Department of Homeland Security. The wait time for a U.S. citizen petitioning for a brother or sister from the Philippines exceeds 20 years. A U.S....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/new-reports-from-nfap.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/new-reports-from-nfap.html)
2010 Hello Kitty Rockstar
reshma
01-27 05:15 PM
could any body please let me know which time is the best time for checking/taking interview appointment from VFS site as from 3 to 4 days onwards i am checking for the availabity dstes in VFS site for scheduling appointment but there is no dates available for our language.
I read somewhere regarding the partiicular time(as soon as after updating the available dates in that site) , at that time if we check the VFS site if any appointments are available for that day it will show else no dates in that full day. thank you for all .
I read somewhere regarding the partiicular time(as soon as after updating the available dates in that site) , at that time if we check the VFS site if any appointments are available for that day it will show else no dates in that full day. thank you for all .
more...
gvenkat
10-17 10:52 AM
I know this issue is still a grey area and certainly no one seems to know a concrete answer to this.
If i have my H-1 Visa and EAD as well. Can i continue to Work on my H1-visa for the primary employer and take up a part-time job with the EAD.
I have hear ppl say that H1 becomes void once EAD is used. Is there any kind of document advocating this? I have not seen any. Lawyers have conflicting opinoin. Has anyone thought about this. I have decided to take an infopass appointment and ask the IO to show me a document that states that H1-becomes void or The other way around.
Can anyone shed more light in to this. Thanks
If i have my H-1 Visa and EAD as well. Can i continue to Work on my H1-visa for the primary employer and take up a part-time job with the EAD.
I have hear ppl say that H1 becomes void once EAD is used. Is there any kind of document advocating this? I have not seen any. Lawyers have conflicting opinoin. Has anyone thought about this. I have decided to take an infopass appointment and ask the IO to show me a document that states that H1-becomes void or The other way around.
Can anyone shed more light in to this. Thanks
hair Hello Kitty Rockstar Birthday
laddu0
04-06 09:35 AM
Hi Guys:
My wife is out of country from October 2010. She was working on H1B. After birth of our son, she went to India for 6 month vacation. Will there be any issues if she re-enters US using H1B as she is having a job to continue with her employer.
What are all the documents I need to take.
Please advice.
Thanks
LADDU
My wife is out of country from October 2010. She was working on H1B. After birth of our son, she went to India for 6 month vacation. Will there be any issues if she re-enters US using H1B as she is having a job to continue with her employer.
What are all the documents I need to take.
Please advice.
Thanks
LADDU
more...
Blog Feeds
06-06 12:50 PM
If you care about America's ability to compete in the years to come, you know that having a robust, well-functioning talent worker visa system is critical. One group with a great track record for work on creating such a system is Immigration Voice. They're sponsoring Immigration Voice Advocacy Days June 7th and 8th in Washington and I urge all readers able to participate to please do so. IV has nearly 400 meetings scheduled with members of Congress and the Obama Administration and this is a great opportunity to have your opinions heard by people who can make a major difference...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/join-immigration-voice-for-capitol-hill-visits-monday-and-tuesday.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/06/join-immigration-voice-for-capitol-hill-visits-monday-and-tuesday.html)
hot a Hello Kitty rock star
waitin_toolong
07-30 01:32 PM
yes you can if the intent is to go back to the sponsoring employer.
the gc is for future job not current.
the gc is for future job not current.
more...
house Hello Kitty Birthday Party
abhay
12-26 11:16 AM
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa
Click on Change of Address, on the left nav menu, Do this only if you have Receipt numbers, first it asks you to fill Electronic AR-11 for DOS then updates address on USCIS System.
Click on Change of Address, on the left nav menu, Do this only if you have Receipt numbers, first it asks you to fill Electronic AR-11 for DOS then updates address on USCIS System.
tattoo Re: partscaster pickguard
desi3933
06-18 03:17 PM
Hi,
If the labor from BEC gets approved and subsequent I140 as well, is it possible to request only the priority date change for the I485?
Not refering to replace the I140. IS IT POSSIBLE TO JUST REQUEST THE PRIORITY DATE?
Yes.
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
If the labor from BEC gets approved and subsequent I140 as well, is it possible to request only the priority date change for the I485?
Not refering to replace the I140. IS IT POSSIBLE TO JUST REQUEST THE PRIORITY DATE?
Yes.
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
more...
pictures I guess if it#39;s Hello Kitty,
Blog Feeds
07-16 04:50 PM
[Y]ou have to be prepared at any moment to face difficulties and even dangers by knowing what to do and how to do it. Agnes and Robert Baden-Powell, How Girls Can Help to Build Up the Empire Be Prepared in [m]ind . . . by having thought out beforehand any . . . situation that might occur, so that you know the right thing to do at the right moment, and are willing to do it. Robert Baden-Powell, Scouting for Boys - Campfire Yarn No. 3 - Becoming a Scout Excerpts from the Scout Motto: "Be Prepared." When immigration-beat writers...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/07/my-entry.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/07/my-entry.html)
dresses domo and hello kitty layouts.
kkartikeya
06-21 03:43 PM
Hi,
I have an EB2 I-140 approved with priority date of July 2006, but also recently got EB3 I-140 approved with priority date of May 2003.
Even though the dates are current, but it may retrograte in coming months, so Can I file I-485 using my approved EB2 with the priority date of EB3.
Please advice.
Thanks
KK
I have an EB2 I-140 approved with priority date of July 2006, but also recently got EB3 I-140 approved with priority date of May 2003.
Even though the dates are current, but it may retrograte in coming months, so Can I file I-485 using my approved EB2 with the priority date of EB3.
Please advice.
Thanks
KK
more...
makeup hello kitty layout tiny
imbond707
02-09 04:08 PM
I am unable to upload FOIA documents to this site. Please send me an email at imbond707@yahoo.com and I will reply with required documents.
girlfriend Hello Kitty Rockstar Birthday
bigboy007
08-24 03:56 PM
When one applies for AP in Multiple entry category they will be given 2 AP dox. lets say if one has used both on travelling like both has stamp of POE can they reuse the same for future travel with in the one year period of validity ?
hairstyles Squier by Fender Hello Kitty
Blog Feeds
02-08 06:10 PM
In a time when the country is facing a $1.5 trillion deficit and the antis are calling for massive increases in spending on immigration enforcement, it's nice to see someone calling out the immigration prosecutors for what is a huge waste of taxpayer dollars. From the Austin American-Statesman: In an order filed Friday, a federal judge in Austin questioned U.S. prosecutors for seeking criminal convictions in court against some illegal immigrants, writing that the practice "presents a cost to the American taxpayer ... that is neither meritorious nor reasonable." The order by U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks comes as his...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/02/judge-stop-wasting-taxpayer-money-prosecuting-immigration-offenses.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/02/judge-stop-wasting-taxpayer-money-prosecuting-immigration-offenses.html)
bijualex29
09-12 09:40 AM
Can a Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions have the power to pass any kind of immigration bills.
Macaca
07-29 06:03 PM
Bet on India (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/28/AR2007072800999.html) The Bush administration presses forward with a nuclear agreement -- and hopes for a strategic partnership. July 29, 2007
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
No comments:
Post a Comment