skyman
08-30 11:05 PM
Hi friends,
I completed my Masters degree this May 08 and started working on opt for a company A. Meanwhile another company B filed for my H1 and it got approved. But i would now like to continue working for my current company A.
1. On what status would i be on October 1?
2. Could i continue working for Company A on my OPT even after October 1?
thanks
I completed my Masters degree this May 08 and started working on opt for a company A. Meanwhile another company B filed for my H1 and it got approved. But i would now like to continue working for my current company A.
1. On what status would i be on October 1?
2. Could i continue working for Company A on my OPT even after October 1?
thanks
wallpaper Long Curly Casual Haircuts
eilsoe
09-26 10:15 AM
umm, well most tut's on photoshop 6 also work in 7..
but try:
www.spoono.com
www.neofrog.com
www.thewebmachine.com (my fav)
www.deviantart.com
those are some of the good...
but try:
www.spoono.com
www.neofrog.com
www.thewebmachine.com (my fav)
www.deviantart.com
those are some of the good...
delhirocks
06-26 04:19 PM
Please use the search function, this topic has been discussed to death.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1243&page=4&highlight=birth+certificate
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1243&page=4&highlight=birth+certificate
2011 black women long curly hair
aachoo
02-16 10:01 PM
Hellow,
I have a quick question. My I140 got approved in sep'08. Should I have to wait till PD gets current or I can file for I485 and USCIS will process my application according to my PD?
Any responce will be highly appreciated.
Gaurav
I485 application can happen only when your PD is current.
-a
I have a quick question. My I140 got approved in sep'08. Should I have to wait till PD gets current or I can file for I485 and USCIS will process my application according to my PD?
Any responce will be highly appreciated.
Gaurav
I485 application can happen only when your PD is current.
-a
more...
kvranand
07-09 08:15 PM
You can apply for another 3Y extension as far as I know. :)
eb3_nepa
03-20 01:29 PM
me 2
more...
vinoddas
02-06 09:22 PM
Lets say, after getting EAD and AP and 6 months after filing for I-485, you want to switch jobs to another company but want to do an H1B transfer to a similar position. Do we still have to start the green card process from scratch to remain on H1B?
2010 long wavy hairstyle. wavy
augustus
05-01 08:50 PM
Dear Members,
Recently my husband had received an RFE on I-485 requesting information about his employment verification letter. He had sent all documents back to USCIS and today, I saw an update on my case. The message read that case processing resumed and there will be a decision or update made in 60 days.
Do you know what kind of decision they usually make? Is it normal to have such statements written up for a denial or approval?
Any words of comfort would help. My husband is the primary applicant.
Thanks a ton!
Augustus.
Recently my husband had received an RFE on I-485 requesting information about his employment verification letter. He had sent all documents back to USCIS and today, I saw an update on my case. The message read that case processing resumed and there will be a decision or update made in 60 days.
Do you know what kind of decision they usually make? Is it normal to have such statements written up for a denial or approval?
Any words of comfort would help. My husband is the primary applicant.
Thanks a ton!
Augustus.
more...
Macaca
12-13 06:23 PM
Intraparty Feuds Dog Democrats, Stall Congress (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119750838630225395.html) By David Rogers | Wall Street Journal, Dec 13, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Democrats took control of Congress last January promising a "new direction." A year later, the image that haunts them most is one symbolizing no direction at all: gridlock.
Unfinished work is piling up -- legislation to aid borrowers affected by the housing mess, rescue millions of middle-class families from a big tax increase and put stricter gas-mileage limits on the auto industry. Two months into the new fiscal year, Democrats are still scrambling just to keep the government open.
President Bush and Republicans are contributing to the impasse, but there's another factor: Intraparty squabbling between House Democrats and Senate Democrats is sometimes almost as fierce as the partisan battling.
A fracas between Democrats this week over a proposed $522 billion spending package is the latest example. The spending would keep the government running through the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2008, but it has opened party divisions over funding the Iraq war and lawmakers' home-state projects.
After enjoying an early rise, Congress's approval ratings have fallen since the spring amid the rancor. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, just 19% of respondents said they approved of the job Congress is doing, while 68% disapproved.
Democrats are hoping to get a boost by enacting the tougher auto- mileage standards before Christmas, but other matters, such as a farm bill to continue government price supports, are likely to wait for the new year.
Republicans suffered from the same House-Senate tensions in their 12 years of rule in Congress. But the situation is more acute now for Democrats, who must cope with both Mr. Bush's vetoes and the narrowest of margins in the Senate, leaving them vulnerable to Republican filibusters.
Democrats in the House interpret the 2006 elections as a mandate for change. They are more antiwar and more willing to shed old ways -- such as "earmarks" for legislators' pet projects -- to confront the White House. Senate Democrats, by comparison, remain more tied to tradition and institutional rules that demand consensus before taking action.
"The Senate and House are out of phase with one another," says Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There was a big change last year, a big change that affected the whole House and one-third of the Senate. That's the fundamental disconnect."
Rather than move to the center after 2006, President Bush has moved right to shore up his conservative base. He has also adopted a confrontational veto strategy calculated to disrupt the new Congress and reduce its effectiveness in challenging him on Iraq.
Just yesterday, the president issued his second veto of Democrat- backed legislation to expand government-provided health insurance for the children of working-class families. In his first six years as president, Mr. Bush issued only one veto. Since Democrats took over Congress, he has issued six vetoes, and threats of more hang over the budget talks now.
For Democrats, teamwork is vital to challenging the president, and it's not always forthcoming. A comment by Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, suggests the distant relationship between the two houses. "We have a constitutional responsibility to send legislation over there," said Rep. Rangel. "Quite frankly I don't give a damn what they feel."
Adds Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: "I can tell you when bills will move and you can tell me when the Senate will sell us out."
With 2008 an election year overseen by a lame-duck president, it's unlikely that Congress will be able to break out of its slump.
Sometimes the disputes resemble play-acting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has quietly invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) to blame the Senate if it suits her purpose to explain the slow pace of legislation, according to a person close to Sen. Reid.
At the same time, he can use her as his foil to fend off Republican demands in the Senate: "I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said last week in debate on an energy bill. "She is a strong independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand."
Still, the interchamber differences have real consequences, as seen in the fight over the budget.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd of West Virginia long argued against creating a big package that would combine all the main spending bills. He preferred to confront Mr. Bush with a series of targeted individual bills where he could gain some Republican support and maintain leverage over the president. But Mr. Byrd was undercut by his leadership's failure to allow more time for debate on the Senate floor. After Labor Day, the House began pressing for a single large package.
The $522 billion proposed bill ultimately emerged from weeks of talks that included moderate Republicans. The bill cut $10.6 billion from earlier spending proposals, moving closer to Mr. Bush, while giving him new money he wanted for the State Department as well as a border-security initiative.
No new money was provided specifically for Iraq but the bill gives the Pentagon an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan and body armor for troops in the field. The goal was to provide enough money for Army accounts so its funding would be adequate into April, when a fuller debate could be held on the U.S.'s plans in Iraq.
For Senate Democrats and Mr. Byrd, the effort was a gamble that a moderate center could be found to stand up to Mr. Bush. The more combative Mr. Obey, the House appropriations chairman, was never persuaded this could happen.
After the White House announced its opposition over the weekend, Mr. Obey said Monday that the budget proposal was dead unless changes were made. The effect was to divide Democrats again, instead of putting up a united front against the White House's resistance.
Mr. Obey suggested that lawmakers should be willing to strip out home-state projects, acceding to Mr. Bush's tight line on spending, if that's what it took to make a tough stand on Iraq.
"I am perfectly willing to lose every dollar on the domestic side of the ledger in order to avoid giving them money for the war without conditions," Mr. Obey said. His suggestion met strong resistance from Senate Democrats. At a party luncheon, senators were almost comic in their anger, said one colleague who was present, loudly complaining of being reduced to being "puppets" or "slaves."
On the Senate floor yesterday, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Democrats were showing signs of "attention deficit disorder." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, accused the new majority of being more interested in "finger pointing" and "headlines" than legislation. "It won't get bills signed into law," he said.
While Ms. Pelosi had personally supported Mr. Obey's approach, she instructed the House committee to preserve the projects as it began a second round of spending reductions yesterday, cutting an additional $6.9 billion from the $522 billion package.
The Senate committee's Democratic staff joined in the discussions by evening, but the White House denied reports that a deal had been reached at a spending ceiling above the president's initial request.
If agreement is not reached by the end of next week, lawmakers may have to resort again to a yearlong funding resolution that effectively freezes most agencies at their current levels. This would be a repeat of the collapse of the budget process last year under Republican rule -- not the "new direction" Democrats had hoped for.
Tied in Knots
The House and Senate are struggling to complete several matters before they head home this month.
Appropriations: Only the Pentagon budget is in place for the new fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The House and Senate are struggling to finish a bill covering the rest of the government.
Farm bill: The Senate still hopes to complete its version of a farm bill but negotiations with the House will wait until next year.
AMT relief: The House and Senate have passed legislation limiting the alternative minimum tax's hit on millions of middle-class taxpayers. But they differ about whether to offset the lost revenue.
Medicare: Doctors are set to see a cut in Medicare payments in 2008, which lawmakers want to prevent. The House acted, but Senate hasn't yet.
Housing: Several bills addressing the housing crisis have passed the House but are languishing in the Senate.
WASHINGTON -- Democrats took control of Congress last January promising a "new direction." A year later, the image that haunts them most is one symbolizing no direction at all: gridlock.
Unfinished work is piling up -- legislation to aid borrowers affected by the housing mess, rescue millions of middle-class families from a big tax increase and put stricter gas-mileage limits on the auto industry. Two months into the new fiscal year, Democrats are still scrambling just to keep the government open.
President Bush and Republicans are contributing to the impasse, but there's another factor: Intraparty squabbling between House Democrats and Senate Democrats is sometimes almost as fierce as the partisan battling.
A fracas between Democrats this week over a proposed $522 billion spending package is the latest example. The spending would keep the government running through the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2008, but it has opened party divisions over funding the Iraq war and lawmakers' home-state projects.
After enjoying an early rise, Congress's approval ratings have fallen since the spring amid the rancor. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, just 19% of respondents said they approved of the job Congress is doing, while 68% disapproved.
Democrats are hoping to get a boost by enacting the tougher auto- mileage standards before Christmas, but other matters, such as a farm bill to continue government price supports, are likely to wait for the new year.
Republicans suffered from the same House-Senate tensions in their 12 years of rule in Congress. But the situation is more acute now for Democrats, who must cope with both Mr. Bush's vetoes and the narrowest of margins in the Senate, leaving them vulnerable to Republican filibusters.
Democrats in the House interpret the 2006 elections as a mandate for change. They are more antiwar and more willing to shed old ways -- such as "earmarks" for legislators' pet projects -- to confront the White House. Senate Democrats, by comparison, remain more tied to tradition and institutional rules that demand consensus before taking action.
"The Senate and House are out of phase with one another," says Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There was a big change last year, a big change that affected the whole House and one-third of the Senate. That's the fundamental disconnect."
Rather than move to the center after 2006, President Bush has moved right to shore up his conservative base. He has also adopted a confrontational veto strategy calculated to disrupt the new Congress and reduce its effectiveness in challenging him on Iraq.
Just yesterday, the president issued his second veto of Democrat- backed legislation to expand government-provided health insurance for the children of working-class families. In his first six years as president, Mr. Bush issued only one veto. Since Democrats took over Congress, he has issued six vetoes, and threats of more hang over the budget talks now.
For Democrats, teamwork is vital to challenging the president, and it's not always forthcoming. A comment by Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, suggests the distant relationship between the two houses. "We have a constitutional responsibility to send legislation over there," said Rep. Rangel. "Quite frankly I don't give a damn what they feel."
Adds Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: "I can tell you when bills will move and you can tell me when the Senate will sell us out."
With 2008 an election year overseen by a lame-duck president, it's unlikely that Congress will be able to break out of its slump.
Sometimes the disputes resemble play-acting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has quietly invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) to blame the Senate if it suits her purpose to explain the slow pace of legislation, according to a person close to Sen. Reid.
At the same time, he can use her as his foil to fend off Republican demands in the Senate: "I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said last week in debate on an energy bill. "She is a strong independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand."
Still, the interchamber differences have real consequences, as seen in the fight over the budget.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd of West Virginia long argued against creating a big package that would combine all the main spending bills. He preferred to confront Mr. Bush with a series of targeted individual bills where he could gain some Republican support and maintain leverage over the president. But Mr. Byrd was undercut by his leadership's failure to allow more time for debate on the Senate floor. After Labor Day, the House began pressing for a single large package.
The $522 billion proposed bill ultimately emerged from weeks of talks that included moderate Republicans. The bill cut $10.6 billion from earlier spending proposals, moving closer to Mr. Bush, while giving him new money he wanted for the State Department as well as a border-security initiative.
No new money was provided specifically for Iraq but the bill gives the Pentagon an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan and body armor for troops in the field. The goal was to provide enough money for Army accounts so its funding would be adequate into April, when a fuller debate could be held on the U.S.'s plans in Iraq.
For Senate Democrats and Mr. Byrd, the effort was a gamble that a moderate center could be found to stand up to Mr. Bush. The more combative Mr. Obey, the House appropriations chairman, was never persuaded this could happen.
After the White House announced its opposition over the weekend, Mr. Obey said Monday that the budget proposal was dead unless changes were made. The effect was to divide Democrats again, instead of putting up a united front against the White House's resistance.
Mr. Obey suggested that lawmakers should be willing to strip out home-state projects, acceding to Mr. Bush's tight line on spending, if that's what it took to make a tough stand on Iraq.
"I am perfectly willing to lose every dollar on the domestic side of the ledger in order to avoid giving them money for the war without conditions," Mr. Obey said. His suggestion met strong resistance from Senate Democrats. At a party luncheon, senators were almost comic in their anger, said one colleague who was present, loudly complaining of being reduced to being "puppets" or "slaves."
On the Senate floor yesterday, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Democrats were showing signs of "attention deficit disorder." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, accused the new majority of being more interested in "finger pointing" and "headlines" than legislation. "It won't get bills signed into law," he said.
While Ms. Pelosi had personally supported Mr. Obey's approach, she instructed the House committee to preserve the projects as it began a second round of spending reductions yesterday, cutting an additional $6.9 billion from the $522 billion package.
The Senate committee's Democratic staff joined in the discussions by evening, but the White House denied reports that a deal had been reached at a spending ceiling above the president's initial request.
If agreement is not reached by the end of next week, lawmakers may have to resort again to a yearlong funding resolution that effectively freezes most agencies at their current levels. This would be a repeat of the collapse of the budget process last year under Republican rule -- not the "new direction" Democrats had hoped for.
Tied in Knots
The House and Senate are struggling to complete several matters before they head home this month.
Appropriations: Only the Pentagon budget is in place for the new fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The House and Senate are struggling to finish a bill covering the rest of the government.
Farm bill: The Senate still hopes to complete its version of a farm bill but negotiations with the House will wait until next year.
AMT relief: The House and Senate have passed legislation limiting the alternative minimum tax's hit on millions of middle-class taxpayers. But they differ about whether to offset the lost revenue.
Medicare: Doctors are set to see a cut in Medicare payments in 2008, which lawmakers want to prevent. The House acted, but Senate hasn't yet.
Housing: Several bills addressing the housing crisis have passed the House but are languishing in the Senate.
hair long wavy hairstyles
freddyCR
February 6th, 2005, 02:38 PM
You're absolutely right. When I saw it on the screen , I thought of making them pretty, but what the heck....that's how I saw them originally