Blog Feeds
07-23 11:40 AM
A Federal Judge has certified a nationwide class in a challenge to the USCIS's restrictive interpretation of the "automatic conversion" clause in the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) of 2002. This opens the way for children who have "aged-out" to be reunited with their parents. The USCIS has resisted implementing this important section of law for the past seven years. Just a few weeks ago, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), in Matter of Wang, adopted the government's restrictive interpretation of the automatic conversion clause. On July 16, Federal Judge James Selna (Central District, California), over government objections, made his...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/cspa-update.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/07/cspa-update.html)
wallpaper matter — irthday cards,
Globetrotter
04-01 05:04 PM
I have been reading a lot of late about troubles/Denials given to H1B visa holders at POE.
I have been in US for few years now on H1 working as Marketing Manager and traveled smoothly so far. Planning for a short vacation to Europe. Should I?
Any inputs will be appreciated.
Thank you.
I have been in US for few years now on H1 working as Marketing Manager and traveled smoothly so far. Planning for a short vacation to Europe. Should I?
Any inputs will be appreciated.
Thank you.
rs1518
07-18 10:09 AM
My company and lawyer refuse to talk to me or email me back.
I sent my completed package to the lawyer 2 weeks back, and I have not heard back from him.
The initial draft needs to be sent back by the lawyer for signatures and then the file can go out.
How do I hadle the situation?
I sent my completed package to the lawyer 2 weeks back, and I have not heard back from him.
The initial draft needs to be sent back by the lawyer for signatures and then the file can go out.
How do I hadle the situation?
2011 Birthday Cards Wishes.
kshitijnt
04-26 04:54 PM
This will slowly eliminate the need for arrogant CBP officers.
more...
netfood
07-13 07:36 PM
I had L1A from 10/2005 to 10/2008. My lawyer filed I-485 in 2008, but he did not file extension of L1A. My L1A is expired in 2008. In Jan. 2010, my I-485 was denied. We filed appeal in Feb.. Then, we filed L1A extension, which is denied in June 2010. I do not know what to do? I have been in here for five years. now my wife and child's L2 also expired. Can I file another L1A without leaving USA (I was told no, because I did not meet 1/3 requirement, one year abroad within three years of admission into the USA. I have to go back Jamaca for one year and refile there, but I would give up my I-485). Thanks.
code_monkey
09-13 08:58 PM
Hi folks,
Sorry if this is in the wrong forum.
My wife is MS Graduate with degree in Electrical Engg - wireless specialization.
She switched from F1 to H4 as she couldnot find a job.
Now that she can work from Oct, she is seeking suitable job.
If any of you folks know any consulting/full-time employer seeking candidates, please PM me.
I would greatly appreciate any help that I can get in this regard.
Sorry if this is in the wrong forum.
My wife is MS Graduate with degree in Electrical Engg - wireless specialization.
She switched from F1 to H4 as she couldnot find a job.
Now that she can work from Oct, she is seeking suitable job.
If any of you folks know any consulting/full-time employer seeking candidates, please PM me.
I would greatly appreciate any help that I can get in this regard.
more...
Macaca
06-12 07:33 AM
The System at Work (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061101859.html) By E. J. Dionne Jr. (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/e.+j.+dionne+jr./) (postchat@aol.com), Tuesday, June 12, 2007
We have become political hypochondriacs. We seem eager to declare that "the system" has come down with some dread disease, to proclaim that an ideological "center" blessed by the heavens no longer exists, and woe unto us. An imperfect immigration bill is pulled from the Senate floor, and you'd think the Capitol dome had caved in.
It's all nonsense, but it is not harmless nonsense. The tendency to blame the system is a convenient way of leaving no one accountable. Those who offer this argument can sound sage without having to grapple with the specifics of any piece of legislation. There is the unspoken assumption that wisdom always lies in the political middle, no matter how unsavory the recipe served up by a given group of self-proclaimed centrists might be.
And when Republicans and Democrats are battling each other with particular ferocity, there is always a call for the appearance of an above-the-battle savior who will seize the presidency as an independent. This messiah, it is said, will transcend such "petty" concerns as philosophy or ideology.
Finally, those who attack the system don't actually want to change it much. For example, there's a very good case for abolishing the U.S. Senate. It often distorts the popular will since senators representing 18 percent of the population can cast a majority of the Senate's votes. And as Sen. John McCain said over the weekend, "The Senate works in a way that relatively small numbers can block legislation."
But many of the system-blamers in fact love Senate rules that, in principle, push senators toward the middle in seeking solutions. So they actually like the system more than they let on.
As it happens, I wish the immigration bill's supporters had gotten it through -- not because I think this is great legislation but because some bill has to get out of the Senate so real discussions on a final proposal can begin.
Notice how tepid that paragraph is. The truth is that most supporters of this bill find a lot of things in it they don't like. The guest-worker program, in particular, strikes me as terribly flawed. The bill's opponents, on the other hand, absolutely hate it because they see it as an effective amnesty for 12 million illegal immigrants. And, boy, did those opponents mobilize. In well-functioning democracies, mobilized minorities often defeat unenthusiastic majorities.
And some "centrist" compromises are more coherent and politically salable than others. Neither side on the immigration issue has the popular support to get exactly what it wants. So a bill aimed at creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is full of grudging concessions to the anti-immigration side. These have the effect of demobilizing the very groups that support the underlying principles of this bill. That's not a system problem. It just happens that immigration is a hard issue that arouses real passion.
Typically, advocates of the system-breakdown theory move quickly from immigration to the failure of President Bush's Social Security proposals. Why, they ask, can't the system "fix" entitlements?
The simple truth is that a majority of Americans (I'm one of them) came to oppose Bush's privatization ideas. That reflected both a principled stand and a practical judgment. From our perspective, a proposal to cut benefits and create private accounts was radical, not centrist.
An authentically "centrist" solution to this problem would involve some modest benefit cuts and some modest tax increases. It will happen someday. But for now, conservatives don't want to support any tax increases. I think the conservatives are wrong, and they'd argue that they're principled. What we have here is a political disagreement, not a system problem. We have these things called elections to settle political disagreements.
Is Washington a mess? In many ways it is. The simplest explanation has to do with some bad choices made by President Bush. He started a misguided war that is now sapping his influence; he has treated Democrats as if they were infected with tuberculosis and Republicans in Congress as if they were his valets. No wonder he's having trouble pushing through a bill whose main opponents are his own ideological allies.
Maybe you would place blame elsewhere. But please identify some real people or real political forces and not just some faceless entity that you call the system. Please be specific, bearing in mind that when hypochondriacs misdiagnose vague ailments they don't have, they often miss the real ones.
We have become political hypochondriacs. We seem eager to declare that "the system" has come down with some dread disease, to proclaim that an ideological "center" blessed by the heavens no longer exists, and woe unto us. An imperfect immigration bill is pulled from the Senate floor, and you'd think the Capitol dome had caved in.
It's all nonsense, but it is not harmless nonsense. The tendency to blame the system is a convenient way of leaving no one accountable. Those who offer this argument can sound sage without having to grapple with the specifics of any piece of legislation. There is the unspoken assumption that wisdom always lies in the political middle, no matter how unsavory the recipe served up by a given group of self-proclaimed centrists might be.
And when Republicans and Democrats are battling each other with particular ferocity, there is always a call for the appearance of an above-the-battle savior who will seize the presidency as an independent. This messiah, it is said, will transcend such "petty" concerns as philosophy or ideology.
Finally, those who attack the system don't actually want to change it much. For example, there's a very good case for abolishing the U.S. Senate. It often distorts the popular will since senators representing 18 percent of the population can cast a majority of the Senate's votes. And as Sen. John McCain said over the weekend, "The Senate works in a way that relatively small numbers can block legislation."
But many of the system-blamers in fact love Senate rules that, in principle, push senators toward the middle in seeking solutions. So they actually like the system more than they let on.
As it happens, I wish the immigration bill's supporters had gotten it through -- not because I think this is great legislation but because some bill has to get out of the Senate so real discussions on a final proposal can begin.
Notice how tepid that paragraph is. The truth is that most supporters of this bill find a lot of things in it they don't like. The guest-worker program, in particular, strikes me as terribly flawed. The bill's opponents, on the other hand, absolutely hate it because they see it as an effective amnesty for 12 million illegal immigrants. And, boy, did those opponents mobilize. In well-functioning democracies, mobilized minorities often defeat unenthusiastic majorities.
And some "centrist" compromises are more coherent and politically salable than others. Neither side on the immigration issue has the popular support to get exactly what it wants. So a bill aimed at creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is full of grudging concessions to the anti-immigration side. These have the effect of demobilizing the very groups that support the underlying principles of this bill. That's not a system problem. It just happens that immigration is a hard issue that arouses real passion.
Typically, advocates of the system-breakdown theory move quickly from immigration to the failure of President Bush's Social Security proposals. Why, they ask, can't the system "fix" entitlements?
The simple truth is that a majority of Americans (I'm one of them) came to oppose Bush's privatization ideas. That reflected both a principled stand and a practical judgment. From our perspective, a proposal to cut benefits and create private accounts was radical, not centrist.
An authentically "centrist" solution to this problem would involve some modest benefit cuts and some modest tax increases. It will happen someday. But for now, conservatives don't want to support any tax increases. I think the conservatives are wrong, and they'd argue that they're principled. What we have here is a political disagreement, not a system problem. We have these things called elections to settle political disagreements.
Is Washington a mess? In many ways it is. The simplest explanation has to do with some bad choices made by President Bush. He started a misguided war that is now sapping his influence; he has treated Democrats as if they were infected with tuberculosis and Republicans in Congress as if they were his valets. No wonder he's having trouble pushing through a bill whose main opponents are his own ideological allies.
Maybe you would place blame elsewhere. But please identify some real people or real political forces and not just some faceless entity that you call the system. Please be specific, bearing in mind that when hypochondriacs misdiagnose vague ailments they don't have, they often miss the real ones.
2010 American Greetings cupcake taste irthday card
little_willy
10-10 12:06 AM
Your husband is ok. All he needs is the new H4 approval notice which he needs to show at the POE
more...
raysaikat
04-28 03:35 PM
What is the difference been EB2 Vs EB2 NIW and when does one qualify for NIW
National Interest Waiver means that you do not have to have a job to petition for EB-2 GC. Consequently, there is no labor certification requirement. NIW petition is your petition; not some employers.
National Interest Waiver means that you do not have to have a job to petition for EB-2 GC. Consequently, there is no labor certification requirement. NIW petition is your petition; not some employers.
hair Send as Greeting Card
kaisersose
07-17 05:25 PM
This incident opened my eyes and prodded me to move my fat ass to do something about this.
I just made my first contribution of $100 to IV.
Gandhi once said "Make your contribution, however insignificant you think it is. In reality, your contribution makes a huge difference".
Like he said, our little acts when combined become a formidable act and can accomplish a lot. I would suggest others make contributions too - especially now when everyone is excited - before you get back to the usual reticent state. let us not try to ride piggyback on some else's efforts.
-----------
Contributed $100 to begin with...More in future.
I just made my first contribution of $100 to IV.
Gandhi once said "Make your contribution, however insignificant you think it is. In reality, your contribution makes a huge difference".
Like he said, our little acts when combined become a formidable act and can accomplish a lot. I would suggest others make contributions too - especially now when everyone is excited - before you get back to the usual reticent state. let us not try to ride piggyback on some else's efforts.
-----------
Contributed $100 to begin with...More in future.
more...
pappu
12-12 09:03 AM
Pls change the title to the thread to be more descriptive.
hot Boss Card Birthday Wishes
darshan1226
08-03 06:26 PM
Thank you so much.
more...
house Greetings On A Loved One#39;s
Honda
05-15 11:23 AM
I went for Fingerprinting for I-485 case seond time on 9th May. When it is updated in your profile at uscis website. I see it is still showing up old dates as LUD.
Any idea ?
I gave my Fingerprints also. So far i did not see any LUD. I dont know what they are doing. Simply ignore it. There is nothing to do ourside.
Any idea ?
I gave my Fingerprints also. So far i did not see any LUD. I dont know what they are doing. Simply ignore it. There is nothing to do ourside.
tattoo Home gt; Me to You Bear Greeting
Macaca
10-29 07:57 AM
Maryland's Senator Fix-It (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/28/AR2007102801153.html) By Fred Hiatt (fredhiatt@washpost.com) | Washington Post, October 29, 2007
Against the prevailing dismay over partisanship and dysfunction in the U.S. Senate, consider the testimony of one happy senator.
Ben Cardin, freshman Democrat of Maryland, says he has been surprised since his election almost a year ago at how possible it is to make progress in the Senate. It is easier to form bipartisan alliances than it was in the House, he says. Senators who strike deals stick to them and will not be pulled away by pressure from party leaders. And, even despite the 60-vote barrier, real legislative accomplishments are within reach.
Cardin is part of an impressive Senate class of nine Democratic rookies (including Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats), others of whom have gotten more attention than he has during their first year. Virginia's Jim Webb, to name one, has proved more compelling to the national party and media, with his military past, literary achievements and quotable economic populism.
Consider, by contrast, the first sentence of the " About Ben" biography on Cardin's official Web site: "Benjamin L. Cardin has been a national leader on health care, retirement security and fiscal issues since coming to Congress in 1987." No wonder the Democrats chose Webb to respond to President Bush's State of the Union address in January.
No one would accuse Cardin of putting charisma over substance. A legislator's legislator, he served in the Maryland House of Delegates for 20 years, as speaker from 1979 to 1986, and then represented a part of Baltimore and surrounding suburbs in the House of Representatives for 20 more. Now he's delightedly burrowing into the Senate.
During a visit to The Post last week, he ticked off a series of what he called medium-level issues on which he believes something can be achieved: providing incentives for good teachers to work in the neediest schools, getting the Army Corps of Engineers involved in Chesapeake Bay cleanup, establishing a commission to chart a path to energy independence within 10 years and reauthorizing (for the first time in decades) the federal program that provides lawyers for those who can't afford them.
Cardin acknowledged that prospects for progress on the biggest issues are dimmer, but even there he's not discouraged. "Social Security is easy to solve," he says, and achieving energy independence within 10 years is quite doable; both just require more leadership from the White House, which he hopes a new (Democratic) president will provide. He's signed on to the Lieberman-Warner bill on climate change and thinks it could get 60 votes, too, with a little prodding from on high.
The failure of comprehensive immigration reform, he grants, was "an embarrassment." Senators were not prepared for the force and single-mindedness of the opposition to what was perceived as amnesty for illegal immigrants.
"It is an explosive issue," Cardin said. "It crippled our office's ability to get anything else done." The letters he received were well written, not part of an organized campaign, from all corners of the state -- and unequivocal. "They said, 'This is not America. America is the rule of law. How can you let people sneak into the country? If you vote for this, I'll never vote for you again' " -- an argument that tends to seize a politician's attention.
Cardin did not and still does not believe that the bill provided amnesty. It insisted that illegal immigrants atone in a number of ways, including anteing up back taxes, learning English and paying a fine. "If you go much further, people aren't going to come forward" and out of the shadows, he says. "I don't think it makes a lot of sense to be sending troops after them."
But even here, he has faith that the Senate eventually can pass immigration reform. It was a mistake to craft the bill in closed meetings, he said; next time, open debate would create less anxiety. Reform advocates have to communicate better what requirements they're imposing in exchange for legalization. But ultimately, "you can't hide from what needs to be done. You have to deal with the 12 million, with border security and with the fairness issue" for immigrants and would-be immigrants who have played by the rules.
Cardin is not naive about the political obstacles to progress. But unusually for Washington, he seems less focused on blaming the other side for gridlock than on avoiding gridlock in the first place.
"Quite frankly, the solution on immigration is easy, even if it won't be easy to accomplish," he says cheerfully. "You just have to get a bipartisan coalition and get it done."
Against the prevailing dismay over partisanship and dysfunction in the U.S. Senate, consider the testimony of one happy senator.
Ben Cardin, freshman Democrat of Maryland, says he has been surprised since his election almost a year ago at how possible it is to make progress in the Senate. It is easier to form bipartisan alliances than it was in the House, he says. Senators who strike deals stick to them and will not be pulled away by pressure from party leaders. And, even despite the 60-vote barrier, real legislative accomplishments are within reach.
Cardin is part of an impressive Senate class of nine Democratic rookies (including Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats), others of whom have gotten more attention than he has during their first year. Virginia's Jim Webb, to name one, has proved more compelling to the national party and media, with his military past, literary achievements and quotable economic populism.
Consider, by contrast, the first sentence of the " About Ben" biography on Cardin's official Web site: "Benjamin L. Cardin has been a national leader on health care, retirement security and fiscal issues since coming to Congress in 1987." No wonder the Democrats chose Webb to respond to President Bush's State of the Union address in January.
No one would accuse Cardin of putting charisma over substance. A legislator's legislator, he served in the Maryland House of Delegates for 20 years, as speaker from 1979 to 1986, and then represented a part of Baltimore and surrounding suburbs in the House of Representatives for 20 more. Now he's delightedly burrowing into the Senate.
During a visit to The Post last week, he ticked off a series of what he called medium-level issues on which he believes something can be achieved: providing incentives for good teachers to work in the neediest schools, getting the Army Corps of Engineers involved in Chesapeake Bay cleanup, establishing a commission to chart a path to energy independence within 10 years and reauthorizing (for the first time in decades) the federal program that provides lawyers for those who can't afford them.
Cardin acknowledged that prospects for progress on the biggest issues are dimmer, but even there he's not discouraged. "Social Security is easy to solve," he says, and achieving energy independence within 10 years is quite doable; both just require more leadership from the White House, which he hopes a new (Democratic) president will provide. He's signed on to the Lieberman-Warner bill on climate change and thinks it could get 60 votes, too, with a little prodding from on high.
The failure of comprehensive immigration reform, he grants, was "an embarrassment." Senators were not prepared for the force and single-mindedness of the opposition to what was perceived as amnesty for illegal immigrants.
"It is an explosive issue," Cardin said. "It crippled our office's ability to get anything else done." The letters he received were well written, not part of an organized campaign, from all corners of the state -- and unequivocal. "They said, 'This is not America. America is the rule of law. How can you let people sneak into the country? If you vote for this, I'll never vote for you again' " -- an argument that tends to seize a politician's attention.
Cardin did not and still does not believe that the bill provided amnesty. It insisted that illegal immigrants atone in a number of ways, including anteing up back taxes, learning English and paying a fine. "If you go much further, people aren't going to come forward" and out of the shadows, he says. "I don't think it makes a lot of sense to be sending troops after them."
But even here, he has faith that the Senate eventually can pass immigration reform. It was a mistake to craft the bill in closed meetings, he said; next time, open debate would create less anxiety. Reform advocates have to communicate better what requirements they're imposing in exchange for legalization. But ultimately, "you can't hide from what needs to be done. You have to deal with the 12 million, with border security and with the fairness issue" for immigrants and would-be immigrants who have played by the rules.
Cardin is not naive about the political obstacles to progress. But unusually for Washington, he seems less focused on blaming the other side for gridlock than on avoiding gridlock in the first place.
"Quite frankly, the solution on immigration is easy, even if it won't be easy to accomplish," he says cheerfully. "You just have to get a bipartisan coalition and get it done."
more...
pictures Home gt; Me to You Bear Greeting
naushit
02-26 04:03 PM
If I have I140 approved and I have 3 year extention after my 6 years on H1B. Can I get H1B transferred to a new employer and then start my Labour all over again.
Yes, it can be done...and good news is you can preserve your Priority date too.
Yes, it can be done...and good news is you can preserve your Priority date too.
dresses irthday cards for children -3 for £5 by eggnogg greetings cards
nam_koh
05-23 11:14 AM
I am on H1 visa and I have a sister with citizenship.
I am wondering if I can file i-130 (family based immigration) now and file Employment based immigration later?
Is it OK to file 2 green cards applications? which one will take place then?
I am wondering if I can file i-130 (family based immigration) now and file Employment based immigration later?
Is it OK to file 2 green cards applications? which one will take place then?
more...
makeup unique irthday cards -3 for £5 by eggnogg greetings cards
ramus
01-27 09:42 AM
Please join our NC IV group and you will get all info from our NC members.
please reply!!!!
please reply!!!!
girlfriend irthday cards for children -3 for £5 by eggnogg greetings cards
af101010
02-01 12:18 PM
Hi
I have heard in the past from a lawyer that when in H1B status the filing of Green Card must be done and labor certification approved before the 5th anniversary of H1B status. In other words, one cannot start the process for a Green Card in the 6th year of H1B status.
Is this correct? Or is the lawyer being overly cautious?
If such a rule does exist can you please point me to the exact regulation?
Thanks!
I have heard in the past from a lawyer that when in H1B status the filing of Green Card must be done and labor certification approved before the 5th anniversary of H1B status. In other words, one cannot start the process for a Green Card in the 6th year of H1B status.
Is this correct? Or is the lawyer being overly cautious?
If such a rule does exist can you please point me to the exact regulation?
Thanks!
hairstyles unique irthday cards -3 for £5 by eggnogg greetings cards
pappu
07-02 07:25 AM
c, 0, 9
EJC
07-02 03:53 PM
I just registered but I have been reading the forums a long time.
This is bad news about July visa bulletin being changed. I'm sorry for everybody who had bad news.
I think maybe it is bad news for me too.
I was waiting for interview letter, my PD is March 2006 but I am going thru consular processing. I have I140 approved since February 2006.
I have 'case complete' and was waiting for packet 4.
I don't know what this all means for me now.
This is bad news about July visa bulletin being changed. I'm sorry for everybody who had bad news.
I think maybe it is bad news for me too.
I was waiting for interview letter, my PD is March 2006 but I am going thru consular processing. I have I140 approved since February 2006.
I have 'case complete' and was waiting for packet 4.
I don't know what this all means for me now.
gccovet
05-09 12:15 PM
Hello
Is there a time limit within which one has to enter US after he/she gets a tourist visa (B2)
any help is appreciated
thanks
Depends on the validity of the VISA. For example, if a person has 10 year multi entry (M) VISA, that person can enter whenever he/she wants.
For limited time frame, say 6 months validity, there should be a validity on the VISA itself, person needs to enter in that particular time frame.
GCCovet
Is there a time limit within which one has to enter US after he/she gets a tourist visa (B2)
any help is appreciated
thanks
Depends on the validity of the VISA. For example, if a person has 10 year multi entry (M) VISA, that person can enter whenever he/she wants.
For limited time frame, say 6 months validity, there should be a validity on the VISA itself, person needs to enter in that particular time frame.
GCCovet
No comments:
Post a Comment