dealsnet
09-08 11:22 AM
If you don't have free long distance phone, call to this number will be charged. If you are calling from cell phone, the minutes will be reduced. It is normal for using calling card. But this is free. No toll free number for calling.
On the website it says...
* Calls to Access numbers will be charge by local operator.
Any ideas what these charges are?
On the website it says...
* Calls to Access numbers will be charge by local operator.
Any ideas what these charges are?
wallpaper charlotte casiraghi of monaco.
peer123
04-03 07:20 PM
Thanks for your inputs,... I welcome others thoughts and experience on this topic
chanduv23
04-21 03:11 PM
Gurus,
I went to infopass today. Last time when I went infopass in Oct 08, I was told that my namecheck is pending. I wanted to see whether any progress has been made on that,so took an infopass. When I asked the IO about the status of my namecheck, I was told that one namecheck is clear but the other is pending. I specifically asked her to look by my A # as I thought she might be referring to dependants namecheck status. But she replied back stating that there could be multiple namechecks for an individual and it is not unusual for some individuals to have three, four namechecks. And in my case as one of them is clear, they probably will go with cleared one.
Now I am confused. Can there be multiple namechecks initiated at around the same timeframe? I was told both the namechecks were initiated in 07.
If you think the infopass was not very helpful and need more information - usually you can try going through your congressman's offiice. You can either visit them or call them and write a letter explaining your problem and confusion. Some of these offices will ask you to fill out a form that deals with privacy act. These offices can help give you exact status of your case.
Alternately, if you thhink IO at infopass was not being hepful, you may want to contact the Ombudsman's office, they also try to help in such cases.
I went to infopass today. Last time when I went infopass in Oct 08, I was told that my namecheck is pending. I wanted to see whether any progress has been made on that,so took an infopass. When I asked the IO about the status of my namecheck, I was told that one namecheck is clear but the other is pending. I specifically asked her to look by my A # as I thought she might be referring to dependants namecheck status. But she replied back stating that there could be multiple namechecks for an individual and it is not unusual for some individuals to have three, four namechecks. And in my case as one of them is clear, they probably will go with cleared one.
Now I am confused. Can there be multiple namechecks initiated at around the same timeframe? I was told both the namechecks were initiated in 07.
If you think the infopass was not very helpful and need more information - usually you can try going through your congressman's offiice. You can either visit them or call them and write a letter explaining your problem and confusion. Some of these offices will ask you to fill out a form that deals with privacy act. These offices can help give you exact status of your case.
Alternately, if you thhink IO at infopass was not being hepful, you may want to contact the Ombudsman's office, they also try to help in such cases.
2011 charlotte casiraghi 2010. Charlotte Casiraghi (March
fall2004us
09-14 03:50 PM
listening.......
great job IV....
great job IV....
more...
casinoroyale
03-10 12:23 AM
I don't understand in what cases consulate holds a person's passport. What if the applicant wants to return back home country instead of waiting in Canada?
minimalist
11-16 10:39 PM
Nope. That is not true. Either the company/lawyer is screwing your friend!
You can avoid the waiting period by using "Notice and Consider".
I had the same experience with FDBL lawyers, those guys were awful.
Luckily BAL took over, and they mentioned about "Notice and Consider" and did make use of that for labor filing.
Hope this helps.
You cannot file labor when there are lay-offs. Something to do with how can you hire some foreign labor when youbjusrt fired some.
Unlike belmontboy,I don't have first hand experience though. Hopefully other members will shed some more light.
You can avoid the waiting period by using "Notice and Consider".
I had the same experience with FDBL lawyers, those guys were awful.
Luckily BAL took over, and they mentioned about "Notice and Consider" and did make use of that for labor filing.
Hope this helps.
You cannot file labor when there are lay-offs. Something to do with how can you hire some foreign labor when youbjusrt fired some.
Unlike belmontboy,I don't have first hand experience though. Hopefully other members will shed some more light.
more...
[[C|-|E]]
April 17th, 2004, 09:06 AM
Wow ! I like these shoots :). I have in mind to do something similar, but I don�t have a macro-lens yet, so... I suposse I have to wait :). But, anyway, I really like your picks ! :).
2010 charlotte casiraghi caroline.
STAmisha
06-19 04:30 PM
please post your comments
more...
pcs
04-17 12:54 PM
Do it yourself & do not depend on your lawyer. Call them. I filed in Aug'05 & got it in 45 days. I used to call their IT guy in DC office & he was very prompt in fixing issues ( which could be IT related)
hair charlotte casiraghi 2010. Charlotte Casiraghi along with
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2LQw51ms7ZQo-1lYW_YUNlld6EY4wkSDG9zEsWJYf5436yHGb1WnNIsNtgj52AsW6LBfJs0Q0jnyNK9ofpNWklemx9LXx9gcHvESVlr_YHJOCHMntdEyMLI1Z6YPjYB9ouBrenMtJrkw/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2LQw51ms7ZQo-1lYW_YUNlld6EY4wkSDG9zEsWJYf5436yHGb1WnNIsNtgj52AsW6LBfJs0Q0jnyNK9ofpNWklemx9LXx9gcHvESVlr_YHJOCHMntdEyMLI1Z6YPjYB9ouBrenMtJrkw/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2LQw51ms7ZQo-1lYW_YUNlld6EY4wkSDG9zEsWJYf5436yHGb1WnNIsNtgj52AsW6LBfJs0Q0jnyNK9ofpNWklemx9LXx9gcHvESVlr_YHJOCHMntdEyMLI1Z6YPjYB9ouBrenMtJrkw/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2LQw51ms7ZQo-1lYW_YUNlld6EY4wkSDG9zEsWJYf5436yHGb1WnNIsNtgj52AsW6LBfJs0Q0jnyNK9ofpNWklemx9LXx9gcHvESVlr_YHJOCHMntdEyMLI1Z6YPjYB9ouBrenMtJrkw/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
more...
BharatPremi
03-17 02:33 PM
No
hot charlotte casiraghi 2010.
axp817
07-04 09:55 AM
Why would doing anything legal have implications on becoming a citizen?
And to answer your question, No, your owning a gun legally, has no implications whatsoever on getting your citizenship.
There are many legal gun owners who don't even have their green card yet, and no, they are not going to face any problems during 485 approval either.
Look through some of my old posts, and you'll find a thread with information on legal aliens owning guns in America, although a lot of the information on that thread pertains to non-immigrant aliens. You being a permanent resident, have it much easier. Go through that thread and if you still have questions, ask, and I'm sure you'll get an answer.
Good luck, be a safe, responsible, and proud gun owner.
And to answer your question, No, your owning a gun legally, has no implications whatsoever on getting your citizenship.
There are many legal gun owners who don't even have their green card yet, and no, they are not going to face any problems during 485 approval either.
Look through some of my old posts, and you'll find a thread with information on legal aliens owning guns in America, although a lot of the information on that thread pertains to non-immigrant aliens. You being a permanent resident, have it much easier. Go through that thread and if you still have questions, ask, and I'm sure you'll get an answer.
Good luck, be a safe, responsible, and proud gun owner.
more...
house 2010 Monte Carlo Rose Ball
gc_kaavaali
11-14 04:36 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^bump^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
who gave me red mark?
somebody gave red mark...what happened???
who gave me red mark?
somebody gave red mark...what happened???
tattoo Charlotte Casiraghi
pd_recapturing
06-01 06:39 PM
Yes. Chem2 is right. Your salary should be matching with your H1B LCA. GC LCA salary is supposed to be for future job. I also have the same issue and I confirmed it with my lawyer and Others too. Is your I-140 approved ?
more...
pictures CHARLOTTE CASİRAGHİ
lvaka
05-19 01:19 PM
Dear Desertfox: Can you please advice me on the below 2 questions while efile (756 - EAD)
1. Q 14 - Manner of Last Entry into the U.S.:
(Visitor, Student, etc.) - Which option has to select from List of Values. ( DA: ADVANCE PAROLE (DISTRICT AUTH)?.
2. What do I mention for this : For (c)(9) eligibility status only
Please select the location where your
I-485 is pending:
Please provide information concerning your eligibility status:
Thanks,
Hi,
1. I was been advised by my Lawyer to pick "PAR -Parolee" if we have used our AP. But if we have last entered using H1 B then we have to pick "H1 B"
2. We have to provide the following in this field
485 receipt number - xxxxxxx
140 receipt number - xxxxxxx (This is optional)
I would put the first line with the 485 receipt number
1. Q 14 - Manner of Last Entry into the U.S.:
(Visitor, Student, etc.) - Which option has to select from List of Values. ( DA: ADVANCE PAROLE (DISTRICT AUTH)?.
2. What do I mention for this : For (c)(9) eligibility status only
Please select the location where your
I-485 is pending:
Please provide information concerning your eligibility status:
Thanks,
Hi,
1. I was been advised by my Lawyer to pick "PAR -Parolee" if we have used our AP. But if we have last entered using H1 B then we have to pick "H1 B"
2. We have to provide the following in this field
485 receipt number - xxxxxxx
140 receipt number - xxxxxxx (This is optional)
I would put the first line with the 485 receipt number
dresses Charlotte Casiraghi
redgreen
06-21 07:28 PM
So much of misinformation by many 'legal advisors'!
Please note that:
1. Unemployment benefits is not a public charge.
2. For getting unemployment benefits one need not be a citizen/permanent resident.
3. You don't acquire illegal stay if you have a valid I-485 pending.
Please read relevant FAQs at the USCIS webpage.
Don't rely on advices from ignorants who try to scare people!
Please note that:
1. Unemployment benefits is not a public charge.
2. For getting unemployment benefits one need not be a citizen/permanent resident.
3. You don't acquire illegal stay if you have a valid I-485 pending.
Please read relevant FAQs at the USCIS webpage.
Don't rely on advices from ignorants who try to scare people!
more...
makeup charlotte casiraghi 2010. Charlotte Casiraghi 2010 Pics
fromnaija
09-26 08:11 PM
Well, I don't see a problem with that. If you can file 485 without clearing 140, why can't you file 485 without clearing labor?
We should stay modest? There are a lot of us who have waited 4+ years for labor. I think that's enough modesty and patience.
Hey, "modest request" in my post does not translate to modesty and patience. Just thought I'd point that out.
We should stay modest? There are a lot of us who have waited 4+ years for labor. I think that's enough modesty and patience.
Hey, "modest request" in my post does not translate to modesty and patience. Just thought I'd point that out.
girlfriend charlotte casiraghi 2010. Charlotte Casiraghi Vanity
sidbee
01-02 08:01 PM
I really wish , i could file my 485 in 2 years, If not i am moving to UK.
Another question , being a junior i have, How does IV use our donations to compel USCIS/DOS to do things in favour of LEGAL IMMIGRANTS?
Another question , being a junior i have, How does IV use our donations to compel USCIS/DOS to do things in favour of LEGAL IMMIGRANTS?
hairstyles Charlotte Casiraghi with
vxb2004
11-26 11:32 AM
This is my personal experience, I filed AC 21 with new G 28 form through a lawyer to update change of attorney on file plus change of employment notification. Later I called customer service several times after 2 months to see if USCIS updated my file, but turned out not updated. Fortunately in August 2008, my I 485 was approved without any RFE and the welcome notice meant for Attorney's was sent to new attorney, the old attorney did not receive it. Bottom line is USCIS is slow in updating your AC 21 request and definitely not update their computer system accessible to USCIS customer service about AC 21 request, however it looks like they add the document to your physical file. Now I am sure in my case USCIS have taken note of AC21 request during approval.
Good Luck
HTH
kris
Kris,
Thank you very much. Appreciate your input.
Good Luck
HTH
kris
Kris,
Thank you very much. Appreciate your input.
txh1b
08-18 02:48 PM
now this is weird... aside from the poster's main question: why does uscis want proof of *continuous employment* since the poster filed for 485? all they should care about is the future job... isnt that right? why do they want employment history?
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
It is not. It is very much relevant to the case as he has not added the spouse to the I485. If the person has not been continuously maintaining the non immigrant visa status, the spouse is out of status as the 485 has not been filed and is not eligible to hold H4 status.
Also, if the person has travelled on as a parolee, USCIS may be interested in that as well. You never know what the IO is getting into when they issue the RFE. Do not judge or give the OP a feeling that the RFE is irrelevant. It is, in many ways.
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
It is not. It is very much relevant to the case as he has not added the spouse to the I485. If the person has not been continuously maintaining the non immigrant visa status, the spouse is out of status as the 485 has not been filed and is not eligible to hold H4 status.
Also, if the person has travelled on as a parolee, USCIS may be interested in that as well. You never know what the IO is getting into when they issue the RFE. Do not judge or give the OP a feeling that the RFE is irrelevant. It is, in many ways.
waitin_toolong
03-29 01:22 PM
did you not send a copy of H1 extension receipts with H1 transfer request?
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét