ags123
07-26 12:40 PM
spoke to the lawyer and they said they have experience last month of filing a I485 similar to mine at Nebraska and had no issues.
So I guess I will have to trust them and see. She also mentioned 2 yrs is the time for follow to join not 180 days.
Fingers crossed
So I guess I will have to trust them and see. She also mentioned 2 yrs is the time for follow to join not 180 days.
Fingers crossed
wallpaper the heart attack burger.
jsb
03-27 09:31 AM
I agree about your comment on guest workers. But h1bs are also human beings. Rather than treating them like car imported from Japan treat them humane. Don't just think of h1bs as a number. There is a human being behind them. Its not easy to just uproot everything you have since last 10yrs and move back to where you came. This is not a treatment for a "guest".
Also how humane is this for a country touting horn of human rights all over the world (read Tibet/China)?
I agree and share your views on how someone should treat a guest, etc. But I just stated facts.
Regarding open letter to Obama mentioned above, I agree with it one hundred percent. Focus of the letter should be (i) workers are highly educated, (ii) they are legally working and paying taxes, (iii) they are approved for GC, and are simply waiting for completing work on adjustment of their status, (iv) administrative inefficiency. Remember when one files for AOS, a visa is supposed to be already available for you (although due to USCIS bungling that has not been the case).
Also how humane is this for a country touting horn of human rights all over the world (read Tibet/China)?
I agree and share your views on how someone should treat a guest, etc. But I just stated facts.
Regarding open letter to Obama mentioned above, I agree with it one hundred percent. Focus of the letter should be (i) workers are highly educated, (ii) they are legally working and paying taxes, (iii) they are approved for GC, and are simply waiting for completing work on adjustment of their status, (iv) administrative inefficiency. Remember when one files for AOS, a visa is supposed to be already available for you (although due to USCIS bungling that has not been the case).
Lisap
08-03 12:11 PM
Why is it that people who have filed after me have already received their notice and had checks cashed? I thought it is based on when the application is received is how they process- I am freaking out thinking that my application fell behind a desk somewhere....
2011 Heart Attack Grill, Chandler,
vin13
01-08 11:10 AM
LostInGC,
Why did you use AP if you had a valid H1-b?
Why did you use AP if you had a valid H1-b?
more...
tikka
05-31 02:23 PM
This is the least we can do...
thank you delhirocks. this was the first step.
Now you could you please take a few mins and send out web faxes. You can send it to all the states.
Thank you again
thank you delhirocks. this was the first step.
Now you could you please take a few mins and send out web faxes. You can send it to all the states.
Thank you again
fromnaija
07-23 02:38 PM
I remember reading somewhere on USCIS website and this forum that FP taken in late 2007 (probably for all July 2007 filers) will last for the duration of AOS application...
This must be for bad FP or for missing FP for self or any family member...
I posted the following at another forum on this topic:
USCIS is developing the Biometrics Storage System (BSS) w hich will allow the re-use of fingerprints and, if an application or petition has not been adjudicated within the fifteen month validity period, USCIS will be able to simply re-submit the stored fingerprints to the FBI, without any involvement of the applicant or petitioner. See 72 FR 17172 (Apr. 6, 2007) (establishing a new system of records).
It is from this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=c9aecd408423b3f800b01aa0c83db a52
Further research showed that the BSS (Biometrics Storage System) actually went into effect on May 7, 2007.
DATES: The established system of
records will be effective May 7, 2007
unless comments are received that
result in a contrary determination.
This is from FR 17172 which you can find at:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_register&position=all&page=17172
This must be for bad FP or for missing FP for self or any family member...
I posted the following at another forum on this topic:
USCIS is developing the Biometrics Storage System (BSS) w hich will allow the re-use of fingerprints and, if an application or petition has not been adjudicated within the fifteen month validity period, USCIS will be able to simply re-submit the stored fingerprints to the FBI, without any involvement of the applicant or petitioner. See 72 FR 17172 (Apr. 6, 2007) (establishing a new system of records).
It is from this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=c9aecd408423b3f800b01aa0c83db a52
Further research showed that the BSS (Biometrics Storage System) actually went into effect on May 7, 2007.
DATES: The established system of
records will be effective May 7, 2007
unless comments are received that
result in a contrary determination.
This is from FR 17172 which you can find at:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_register&position=all&page=17172
more...
theshiningsun
02-24 03:50 AM
this is what i know
since I-140 is approved and I-485 is pending for more than 6 months therefore employer withdrawing I-140 will hv no effect on GC process
u can get copy of I-140 approval by filing FOIA rqst but it takes about 4-5 months
again, this is what i know but i am not a lawyer, pls consult an attorney b4 any action
btw how does ur employer expect that u not go to another company if u r going to lose ur job with him?
since I-140 is approved and I-485 is pending for more than 6 months therefore employer withdrawing I-140 will hv no effect on GC process
u can get copy of I-140 approval by filing FOIA rqst but it takes about 4-5 months
again, this is what i know but i am not a lawyer, pls consult an attorney b4 any action
btw how does ur employer expect that u not go to another company if u r going to lose ur job with him?
2010 Heart Attack Grill
manja
06-29 03:16 PM
To add my wife I'll need to pay 500+ per month which is pretty expensive. That's why I was looking for outside options. I found some on ehealthinsurance but none of them cover pregnancy.
more...
HelloWorld2007
09-11 11:54 AM
Can anyone pls tell me what is the procedure for postponing one's fingerprinting appt. I am planning to travel outside US once I receive my receipt notice. Also, for how much time can the appt be maximum delayed..
thanks
thanks
hair The Heart Attack Grill Girls
delhirocks
12-18 06:45 PM
When I took a cruise last year (Carnival) one of my stops was Cozumel. We were there for around 12 hours. We did not have a mexican visa, did not have to go through Mexican immigration.
I spoke to Mexican consulate official, and he conforimed that I do not need a Mexican visa (as long as I have a valid American non-b1/b2 visa) if I am staying in Mexico for less than 72 hours. Carnival also did not require a visa.
They do that for some other stops.
I spoke to Mexican consulate official, and he conforimed that I do not need a Mexican visa (as long as I have a valid American non-b1/b2 visa) if I am staying in Mexico for less than 72 hours. Carnival also did not require a visa.
They do that for some other stops.
more...
das0
06-16 09:50 PM
InTheMoment,
Thanks for your thoughts.
H1B is dual status.
Currently my wife is on H4 but will be on H1B status on Oct 1 2007. Her H1b and H4 status is just non-immigrant status while her I-485 (though me) is pending.
Question is:
If EAD is used for 1 month only (Sept, 07) , will that make her H1B null and void?
I thought EAD (though I-485) and H1b are independent ?
Pls advise
Thanks for your thoughts.
H1B is dual status.
Currently my wife is on H4 but will be on H1B status on Oct 1 2007. Her H1b and H4 status is just non-immigrant status while her I-485 (though me) is pending.
Question is:
If EAD is used for 1 month only (Sept, 07) , will that make her H1B null and void?
I thought EAD (though I-485) and H1b are independent ?
Pls advise
hot The owner of the Heart Attack
tinamatthew
07-20 11:59 PM
Let's assume Two people A and B entered into US on Jan 1st 2004 with Visa stamping Valid till June 2006.
A is without payslips for 2 years , that is until Dec 2005(730 days).A travels out side US and re enters into US in jan 2006 , after that he'll get the payslips and stays legal , then applies for his 485 in March 2006.Then he is maintaining
100% legal status as he is having continious payslips after his re entry.
B doesn't have payslips for period of 185 days(aggregate) in his whole stay in US , rest of the time he maintains legal status , but he never travels outside US and applies for his 485 in March 2006.
In this case B is under risk of illegal status for more than 180 days , as he never travelled outside US.How come this is fair law??This thought bugging me since coupe of days.Guys please share your ideas.
Ignorance is not an excuse! If you speed and you are stopped will you tell the police man that you didnt know the speed limit on that street? I believe all immigrants should educate themselves with the law of the country and how it will affect them. I think it is a fair law that gives some people a fresh start and is very welcome for us as immigrants.
A is without payslips for 2 years , that is until Dec 2005(730 days).A travels out side US and re enters into US in jan 2006 , after that he'll get the payslips and stays legal , then applies for his 485 in March 2006.Then he is maintaining
100% legal status as he is having continious payslips after his re entry.
B doesn't have payslips for period of 185 days(aggregate) in his whole stay in US , rest of the time he maintains legal status , but he never travels outside US and applies for his 485 in March 2006.
In this case B is under risk of illegal status for more than 180 days , as he never travelled outside US.How come this is fair law??This thought bugging me since coupe of days.Guys please share your ideas.
Ignorance is not an excuse! If you speed and you are stopped will you tell the police man that you didnt know the speed limit on that street? I believe all immigrants should educate themselves with the law of the country and how it will affect them. I think it is a fair law that gives some people a fresh start and is very welcome for us as immigrants.
more...
house Heart Attack Grill- Tempe,
Dhundhun
11-24 01:20 AM
I write this letter to verify that Mr. XXXX XXXXX worked at YYYY YYYYY from Aug 1998 until December 2004. During this period he worked 40 Hours per week.
I think, individual can not possibly give "worked in company from... to..." and "number of hours". Only company representative can can sign that. The ex-coworker can certify only that "YYYY YYYYY worked with me from... to ...".
Mr. XXXX XXXXX rendered these services with the highest degree of responsibility and professionalism.
Ex-coworker can say that "While working with me Mr. XXXX XXXXX has shown responsibility and professionalism".
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the scope of ex-coworker giving experience certificate is limited to "working together". For example, some one behaving good with you might not be good with someone else. In company records, he might not have good records due to that.
My lawyer strongly asked me that ex-coworker must write only on the basis of his own experience. He must not start representing company and start mentioning things like joining date (unless the person hired you), salary, etc.
Well, in any case, your lawyer should be your guide.
I think, individual can not possibly give "worked in company from... to..." and "number of hours". Only company representative can can sign that. The ex-coworker can certify only that "YYYY YYYYY worked with me from... to ...".
Mr. XXXX XXXXX rendered these services with the highest degree of responsibility and professionalism.
Ex-coworker can say that "While working with me Mr. XXXX XXXXX has shown responsibility and professionalism".
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the scope of ex-coworker giving experience certificate is limited to "working together". For example, some one behaving good with you might not be good with someone else. In company records, he might not have good records due to that.
My lawyer strongly asked me that ex-coworker must write only on the basis of his own experience. He must not start representing company and start mentioning things like joining date (unless the person hired you), salary, etc.
Well, in any case, your lawyer should be your guide.
tattoo Dr. Jon of the Heart Attack
imneedy
02-04 10:27 AM
Today is the 22nd calendar day.
Shahuja,
Is this your first time application for H1 or is it a renewal?
Its been over 3 weeks since my wife have H4 interview and the passport is still under "admin processing".
Raju,
Is this your wife's first time application for H4 or is it a renewal?
Shahuja,
Is this your first time application for H1 or is it a renewal?
Its been over 3 weeks since my wife have H4 interview and the passport is still under "admin processing".
Raju,
Is this your wife's first time application for H4 or is it a renewal?
more...
pictures heart attack grill dallas.
raydhan
05-09 04:47 PM
can this event me scheduled to someother day, preferably a weekend ?
Also, May 15th is mine and my daughter's birthday, so I would have to be at home in the evening ?
asdqwe2k,
Actually this event is being held to celebrate your's and your daughter's birthday if you didn't know. :-)
Happy birthday to both of you in advance. Enjoy.
Also, May 15th is mine and my daughter's birthday, so I would have to be at home in the evening ?
asdqwe2k,
Actually this event is being held to celebrate your's and your daughter's birthday if you didn't know. :-)
Happy birthday to both of you in advance. Enjoy.
dresses heart attack grill girls
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
makeup Heart Attack Grill#39;s trademark
tnite
08-15 04:45 PM
On exploring this topic further, I found that, at times, DOL conducts an audit to check if the employer paid the proffered wage to the beneficiary after GC approval. In case of a violation, DOL bans the employer from processing further H1�s or GC�s.
On rare occasions, USCIS revokes previously approved GC�s in case of fraud.
Also during naturalization, USCIS checks the duration of employment with the GC position after I-485 approval. Naturalization might be denied if the duration of employment is very short.
Two of my friends got a letter from DOL to answer a questionnaire about the pay, paystub gaps and all those stuff.They work for different companies.
DOL is cranking up the pressure
On rare occasions, USCIS revokes previously approved GC�s in case of fraud.
Also during naturalization, USCIS checks the duration of employment with the GC position after I-485 approval. Naturalization might be denied if the duration of employment is very short.
Two of my friends got a letter from DOL to answer a questionnaire about the pay, paystub gaps and all those stuff.They work for different companies.
DOL is cranking up the pressure
girlfriend “Heart Attack Grill” Dies!
cinqsit
10-31 12:26 PM
Can someone please give me the website link to book a visa appointment?
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
http://www.vfs-usa.co.in/ Yes its same for all consulates
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
http://www.vfs-usa.co.in/ Yes its same for all consulates
hairstyles Heart Attack Grill
rjgleason
June 4th, 2004, 08:43 PM
Who remembers "The Prisoner"?
"Knowledge is not Wisdom!"
"Knowledge is not Wisdom!"
Carlau
01-08 12:58 PM
It is not a rule, but it depends on how the approval is given by USCIS. If you get a extended I94 along with the H1 approval then you are all set, if you get an approval with no I94 then you need to get a stamping before starting work. Consult lawyers they will explain it better.
My wife went through the H4 - H1 Conversion which got approved last week, we are still wating to see the approval document.
I have a question, I am on H-4 too (never on H-1B) as I understand, if I find a job I need to wait until April 2007 to file for H-1B and would be able to start working in October 2007.
How did your wife get now in 2007 an H-4 to H-1B conversion when all the H-1Bs were granted & last quota met in October 2006? Am I missing something here? If I found an employer, could I just start working without waiting the employer to file the H-1 in april and getting the permit for oct 2007? THanks!
My wife went through the H4 - H1 Conversion which got approved last week, we are still wating to see the approval document.
I have a question, I am on H-4 too (never on H-1B) as I understand, if I find a job I need to wait until April 2007 to file for H-1B and would be able to start working in October 2007.
How did your wife get now in 2007 an H-4 to H-1B conversion when all the H-1Bs were granted & last quota met in October 2006? Am I missing something here? If I found an employer, could I just start working without waiting the employer to file the H-1 in april and getting the permit for oct 2007? THanks!
gcnotfiledyet
06-23 02:54 PM
White House Says Immigration Reform Unlikely in �09 - Roll Call (http://www.rollcall.com/news/36115-1.html)
Still unlikely I would not take a word from Gibbs. He never knows anything.
Still unlikely I would not take a word from Gibbs. He never knows anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment