Munna Bhai
06-20 09:06 AM
Can I use salary.com instead of flcdatacenter to determine the prevailing wage? Will immigration officer accept this source? Thanks
No, salary.com is not the right source, infact it may be higher too. Flcdatacenter is the correct one for prevailing wage.
No, salary.com is not the right source, infact it may be higher too. Flcdatacenter is the correct one for prevailing wage.
wallpaper modern-warfare-2
bsbawa10
07-02 06:08 AM
What a chaos? We were so close, turned out to be mirage. When do you expect your GC? My PD is Feb 2006. I do not expect anything positive in 3 years. I doubt anything changed in our career in 2 years. Where do we stand?
Frankly speaking, I always thought that this is going to harm the people with older priority dates but I never vented out. It turned out to be true. They chose almost randomly among the ones who filed during that time and quite many with old priority dates were left out. I think had that fiasco not been there and had priority dates moved slowly, the things would have been more streamlined.
Frankly speaking, I always thought that this is going to harm the people with older priority dates but I never vented out. It turned out to be true. They chose almost randomly among the ones who filed during that time and quite many with old priority dates were left out. I think had that fiasco not been there and had priority dates moved slowly, the things would have been more streamlined.
gc_wisc
04-13 10:42 PM
I'm currently on H1B with a pending employment based I485 (EB3 category). I married my wife (USC) a year and an half ago and we decided to file a family based I1485 petition. We are currently preparing the forms and we have a few questions.
1. I485: Application Type Question: In my employment based I485, the option a. was selected for Application Type (An immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number that has been approved). What should we choose for this family based petition.
2. I765: (a) Applying For: When the company applied for employment based 485 few years ago, I got my EAD. I never used EAD as I always had my H1B. Hence, should I select "Permission to accept employment" or "Renewal of my permission to accept employment (attach previous employment authorization)"?
(b) Question 16: Eligibility under 8 CFR 274a.12 ( ) ( ) ( ). For my employment based application, it was (C) (9) ( ). What should it be for my family based application now?
Thanks in advance.
1. I485: Application Type Question: In my employment based I485, the option a. was selected for Application Type (An immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number that has been approved). What should we choose for this family based petition.
2. I765: (a) Applying For: When the company applied for employment based 485 few years ago, I got my EAD. I never used EAD as I always had my H1B. Hence, should I select "Permission to accept employment" or "Renewal of my permission to accept employment (attach previous employment authorization)"?
(b) Question 16: Eligibility under 8 CFR 274a.12 ( ) ( ) ( ). For my employment based application, it was (C) (9) ( ). What should it be for my family based application now?
Thanks in advance.
2011 of Duty: Modern Warfare 3,
vdlrao
02-24 05:23 PM
There are total of 24,692 companies got approved for H1B in 2008. The top 200 companies itself got 34,396 approvals.
more...
pani_6
03-25 02:10 PM
I had FP done way back in October 07..but there is no status change LUD on I-485..what to do??.:confused:..Do I take an appointment to talk to an officer or simply call USCIS ..
Macaca
06-22 06:55 AM
Senate Passes Energy Bill (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101026.html?hpid=topnews) Democrats Prevail; Mileage Standard Would Be Raised By Sholnn Freeman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/sholnn+freeman/) Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, June 22, 2007
The Senate passed a sweeping energy legislation package last night that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters.
After three days of intense debate and complex maneuvering, Democratic leaders won passage of the bill shortly before midnight by a 65 to 27 vote.
The package, which still must pass the House, would also require that the use of biofuels climb to 36 billion gallons by 2022, would set penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing. It would provide federal grants and loan guarantees to promote research into fuel-efficient vehicles and would support test projects to capture carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants to be stored underground.
Democratic leaders said they hoped the legislation will be a rallying point for voters concerned about national security, climate change and near-record gasoline prices.
"This bill starts America on a path toward reducing our reliance on oil by increasing the nation's use of renewable fuels and for the first time in decades significantly improving the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks," said Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader.
Final passage of the bill capped an otherwise rancorous week in which senators grappled over energy policy. Early yesterday, Democrats accused Republicans of obstruction after a $32 billion package of energy tax cuts was blocked on a procedural vote. But late in the day, a bipartisan group of senators came together to break an impasse on vehicle fuel-efficiency standards that would require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicle to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected additions to the bill that would have pumped billions of federal dollars into efforts to ramp up production of a coal-based fuel for cars and trucks, which proponents had called an important alternative to petroleum. Additionally, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) failed to win approval for a proposal to allow exploration for natural gas off the Virginia coast, and Republicans blocked an effort to require that more of the nation's electricity come for renewable sources.
The passage of fuel-efficiency measure was viewed as a major triumph for the Democrats, particularly the last-minute dealmaking that enabled passage of the comprehensive change to mileage standards.
The politics of fuel economy had gone virtually unchanged since Congress passed the first nationwide standards -- known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE -- in 1975. The last time the full Senate tried to boost fuel-economy standards was in 2002, and the effort was defeated handily.
The auto industry successfully argued that large increases in efficiency standards would force them to build smaller vehicles -- the kind American consumers won't buy. In recent years, however, low mileage standards left U.S. automakers with little market defense against higher-mileage Japanese cars, particularly at times when gas prices soar. As consumers have moved gradually from SUVs and pickup trucks to smaller vehicles, Detroit's Big Three automakers have gone through a painful restructuring period.
The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.
The fuel-efficiency language in the Senate energy package originally had coupled a 35 mile-per-gallon standard with a requirement of 4 percent annual increases for the decade after 2020. A group led by the two Michigan senators -- Democrats Carl M. Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) had sought instead to gain support for an amendment that would impose less-stringent standards while satisfying growing demands for change in the fuel-efficiency laws.
In the compromise-- shepherded principally by Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) -- lawmakers dropped a provision that would have mandated additional 4 percent annual increases in fuel efficiency between 2021 and 2030. They also softened a provision that would have required all automakers to build substantially more vehicles that can run on ethanol and other biofuels.
After the fuel-economy vote, Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), another architect of the compromise, said the nation's desire to be less dependent on foreign oil would be a "hopeless journey" without more efficient cars and trucks.
"Now, in our vehicles, we have better cup-holders, we have keyless entry, we have better music systems, we have heated seats," Dorgan said. "It is time that we expect more automobile efficiency."
Senators who had previously been friendly to the auto industry said they were changing their position after growing weary of the industry's position. "I listened and I listened, year after year," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. "And now, after 20 years, I firmly do believe it is time for a change."
In the end, Senate aides said, Levin's group did not have the votes.
Democratic leaders said the bipartisan backing of the compromise worked out in the Senate would help build support in the House when that chamber House begins debate on its energy package. Already, Rep. John D. Dingell, (D-Mich.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have battled over fuel economy.
In another Senate battle yesterday, Democrats lost a fight against oil companies when Republicans blocked a $32 billion tax package that would have poured money into alternative fuel projects by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.
President Bush, meanwhile, visited the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Athens, Ala., where he touted nuclear power as a clean, dependable and safe source of electricity and promised to streamline the federal regulatory process to ease the way for the construction of new plants.
"Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases," Bush said. "If you're interested in cleaning up the air you ought to be for nuclear power."
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher in Athens, Ala., contributed to this report.
The Senate passed a sweeping energy legislation package last night that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters.
After three days of intense debate and complex maneuvering, Democratic leaders won passage of the bill shortly before midnight by a 65 to 27 vote.
The package, which still must pass the House, would also require that the use of biofuels climb to 36 billion gallons by 2022, would set penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing. It would provide federal grants and loan guarantees to promote research into fuel-efficient vehicles and would support test projects to capture carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants to be stored underground.
Democratic leaders said they hoped the legislation will be a rallying point for voters concerned about national security, climate change and near-record gasoline prices.
"This bill starts America on a path toward reducing our reliance on oil by increasing the nation's use of renewable fuels and for the first time in decades significantly improving the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks," said Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader.
Final passage of the bill capped an otherwise rancorous week in which senators grappled over energy policy. Early yesterday, Democrats accused Republicans of obstruction after a $32 billion package of energy tax cuts was blocked on a procedural vote. But late in the day, a bipartisan group of senators came together to break an impasse on vehicle fuel-efficiency standards that would require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicle to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected additions to the bill that would have pumped billions of federal dollars into efforts to ramp up production of a coal-based fuel for cars and trucks, which proponents had called an important alternative to petroleum. Additionally, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) failed to win approval for a proposal to allow exploration for natural gas off the Virginia coast, and Republicans blocked an effort to require that more of the nation's electricity come for renewable sources.
The passage of fuel-efficiency measure was viewed as a major triumph for the Democrats, particularly the last-minute dealmaking that enabled passage of the comprehensive change to mileage standards.
The politics of fuel economy had gone virtually unchanged since Congress passed the first nationwide standards -- known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE -- in 1975. The last time the full Senate tried to boost fuel-economy standards was in 2002, and the effort was defeated handily.
The auto industry successfully argued that large increases in efficiency standards would force them to build smaller vehicles -- the kind American consumers won't buy. In recent years, however, low mileage standards left U.S. automakers with little market defense against higher-mileage Japanese cars, particularly at times when gas prices soar. As consumers have moved gradually from SUVs and pickup trucks to smaller vehicles, Detroit's Big Three automakers have gone through a painful restructuring period.
The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.
The fuel-efficiency language in the Senate energy package originally had coupled a 35 mile-per-gallon standard with a requirement of 4 percent annual increases for the decade after 2020. A group led by the two Michigan senators -- Democrats Carl M. Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) had sought instead to gain support for an amendment that would impose less-stringent standards while satisfying growing demands for change in the fuel-efficiency laws.
In the compromise-- shepherded principally by Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) -- lawmakers dropped a provision that would have mandated additional 4 percent annual increases in fuel efficiency between 2021 and 2030. They also softened a provision that would have required all automakers to build substantially more vehicles that can run on ethanol and other biofuels.
After the fuel-economy vote, Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), another architect of the compromise, said the nation's desire to be less dependent on foreign oil would be a "hopeless journey" without more efficient cars and trucks.
"Now, in our vehicles, we have better cup-holders, we have keyless entry, we have better music systems, we have heated seats," Dorgan said. "It is time that we expect more automobile efficiency."
Senators who had previously been friendly to the auto industry said they were changing their position after growing weary of the industry's position. "I listened and I listened, year after year," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. "And now, after 20 years, I firmly do believe it is time for a change."
In the end, Senate aides said, Levin's group did not have the votes.
Democratic leaders said the bipartisan backing of the compromise worked out in the Senate would help build support in the House when that chamber House begins debate on its energy package. Already, Rep. John D. Dingell, (D-Mich.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have battled over fuel economy.
In another Senate battle yesterday, Democrats lost a fight against oil companies when Republicans blocked a $32 billion tax package that would have poured money into alternative fuel projects by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.
President Bush, meanwhile, visited the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Athens, Ala., where he touted nuclear power as a clean, dependable and safe source of electricity and promised to streamline the federal regulatory process to ease the way for the construction of new plants.
"Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases," Bush said. "If you're interested in cleaning up the air you ought to be for nuclear power."
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher in Athens, Ala., contributed to this report.
more...
brahmam
05-16 11:11 PM
Thanks, Subba. :)
2010 cover of Modern Warfare 3
ramus
06-26 06:17 AM
Yes it will be cancelled.. If you go out of US and has to come on h4 then your h1B will cancel.
Check with attorney... Please think of contributing to fund drive.
Thanks.
hi,
My h1 is approved in this years quota but i have not received I797. During this period if my h4 is stamped will my h1 be cancelled. or can i go to US on
h4 and then change my status to h1 ?
Check with attorney... Please think of contributing to fund drive.
Thanks.
hi,
My h1 is approved in this years quota but i have not received I797. During this period if my h4 is stamped will my h1 be cancelled. or can i go to US on
h4 and then change my status to h1 ?
more...
godbless
06-20 12:03 PM
Folks, This thread is to track the I 485 approvals. Please mention your PD and RD for I 485 here. Mine is with a priority date of 4/3/2002 and RD of 12/29/2004. Still waiting while many others with a later PD have already got their GCs recently.
hair Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 3
helpmeExperts
02-06 01:43 PM
go to nvars.com & take US embassy apointment for visa stamping.
generally its filled 4 weeks ahead, so keep trying. first get a canadian visa from nearby canada embassy or by courier/mail
generally its filled 4 weeks ahead, so keep trying. first get a canadian visa from nearby canada embassy or by courier/mail
more...
Macaca
02-19 01:35 PM
Some paras from Almost Everyone Lies, Often Seeing It as a Kindness (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/18/AR2007021800915.html).
The perjury trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby goes to the jury this week. The case speaks to several issues -- how the Bush administration deals with critics of the war in Iraq, and the games that Washington's reporters and politicians play with each other. As far as the jury is concerned, however, the case is about only one thing: lying.
One particularly well-qualified witness on this subject was not called by either the prosecution or the defense, so today we cross-examine Robert Feldman ourselves. Feldman is a social psychologist at the University of Massachusetts who studies lying in everyday life, and his findings are just the kind of thing that Libby's lawyers could have pounced on.
Feldman's experiments show that stern-faced judicial proceedings about perjury are as remote from the realities of human behavior as President Bush is from the Nobel Peace Prize. For one thing, lying plays a more complex role in human relationships than the black-and-white legal view recognizes. It is also so commonplace in everyday life that putting people on trial for lying is somewhat like putting them on trial for breathing.
Experiments have found that ordinary people tell about two lies every 10 minutes, with some people getting in as many as a dozen falsehoods in that period. More interestingly -- and Libby might see this as the silver lining if he is found guilty -- Feldman also found that liars tend to be more popular than honest people. (Ever notice how popular politicians somehow change their minds on controversial issues such as the war in Iraq at the exact moment that public opinion on those issues changes?)
The perjury trial of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby goes to the jury this week. The case speaks to several issues -- how the Bush administration deals with critics of the war in Iraq, and the games that Washington's reporters and politicians play with each other. As far as the jury is concerned, however, the case is about only one thing: lying.
One particularly well-qualified witness on this subject was not called by either the prosecution or the defense, so today we cross-examine Robert Feldman ourselves. Feldman is a social psychologist at the University of Massachusetts who studies lying in everyday life, and his findings are just the kind of thing that Libby's lawyers could have pounced on.
Feldman's experiments show that stern-faced judicial proceedings about perjury are as remote from the realities of human behavior as President Bush is from the Nobel Peace Prize. For one thing, lying plays a more complex role in human relationships than the black-and-white legal view recognizes. It is also so commonplace in everyday life that putting people on trial for lying is somewhat like putting them on trial for breathing.
Experiments have found that ordinary people tell about two lies every 10 minutes, with some people getting in as many as a dozen falsehoods in that period. More interestingly -- and Libby might see this as the silver lining if he is found guilty -- Feldman also found that liars tend to be more popular than honest people. (Ever notice how popular politicians somehow change their minds on controversial issues such as the war in Iraq at the exact moment that public opinion on those issues changes?)
hot Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
Blog Feeds
11-25 08:50 AM
Stealth protectionism on the immigration front is surfacing again in Congress. Two odd bedfellows -- self-described socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (D.VT) and A+ anti-immigration lawmaker, Chuck Grassley (R. IA) -- are at it again. Earlier in the year, the duo inserted the Employ American Workers Act into the stimulus legislation (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) -- something I called "Protectionist Turducken" -- to prevent the hiring of H-1B workers by recipients of TARP and Federal Reserve funding. On Nov. 19, they proposed the "Employ America Act," a bill (S. 2804) which would require employers of over 100 workers who...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/11/immigration-commisars-in-congress-opt-for-protectionism.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/11/immigration-commisars-in-congress-opt-for-protectionism.html)
more...
house call of duty modern warfare 3
vivache
02-05 11:56 AM
Thanks !!
tattoo Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
eagerr2i
07-18 07:14 PM
Let the EAD expire, it makes more sense to use H1B when you enter the country. EAD and Advance Parole should be avoided and be used only as a last resort in extreme cases beacuse of the way immigration rules are carved.
more...
pictures Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
rolrblade
03-06 10:19 AM
Hi,
I am currently doing my MBA here on a H4 visa. I want to know if I would be eligible to apply for the H1 Visa ( in the 20,000 quota) without converting to
F1 status. Please advise.
Thanks in advance...
You woulkd be eligible provided you have completed your MBA. If you are still working on it then you would not be considered an advanced Degree HOLDER.
I am currently doing my MBA here on a H4 visa. I want to know if I would be eligible to apply for the H1 Visa ( in the 20,000 quota) without converting to
F1 status. Please advise.
Thanks in advance...
You woulkd be eligible provided you have completed your MBA. If you are still working on it then you would not be considered an advanced Degree HOLDER.
dresses Is ghost in modern warfare 3
prout02
02-09 03:20 PM
Do you need to submit copies of your approved LC or I-140 to support your stay beyond 6 years? I don't see it mentioned in the I-129 application.
And do you say yes or no to the following question (Q.5, Part C of H-1B Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement form)?
"Has the beneficiary of this petition been previously granted status as an H1-B nonimmigrant in the past 6 years and not left the United States for more than one year after attaining such status?"
This probably wishes to know whether you have a reason to stay here for more than 6 years. But I don't see anywhere to explain that. Any help is greatly appreciated.
And do you say yes or no to the following question (Q.5, Part C of H-1B Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement form)?
"Has the beneficiary of this petition been previously granted status as an H1-B nonimmigrant in the past 6 years and not left the United States for more than one year after attaining such status?"
This probably wishes to know whether you have a reason to stay here for more than 6 years. But I don't see anywhere to explain that. Any help is greatly appreciated.
more...
makeup call of duty modern warfare 3
ups
03-23 01:35 PM
I was on h1 then went on h4 for 6 months and then 10 days back applied for h1 in premium processing and got approval today. what is amendment process?
girlfriend call of duty modern warfare 3
.fee
07-11 11:48 AM
My entry, thought it'd be fun to have a go.
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/%5Burl=http://img29.imageshack.us/i/orangewallpaperlg.jpg/%5D%5Bimg=http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6295/orangewallpaperlg.th.jpg%5D%5B/url%5Dhttp://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6295/orangewallpaperlg.jpg
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/%5Burl=http://img29.imageshack.us/i/orangewallpaperlg.jpg/%5D%5Bimg=http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6295/orangewallpaperlg.th.jpg%5D%5B/url%5Dhttp://img29.imageshack.us/img29/6295/orangewallpaperlg.jpg
hairstyles Duty: Modern Warfare 3,
summitpointe
05-06 12:03 PM
I need the Texas service centre address for mailing the EAD reneval application form. I'm confused with lot of address. If I need to send by USPS which address and by FedEx or UPS which address.
nirmal301
03-23 12:12 AM
G'day Mates & Buddies,
Thanks for maintaining excellent site and answering all sorts of different complex questions.
Now my story.
I am going to apply in next H1B quota and was having below queries:
1. I am confuse about what kind of h1b interview questions will be ask by consulate officer
2. Will they ask my previous work experience letter.. because currently I am in Australia and my work experience was in India and there's no way I can have letter now.
3. How's the job market for Enterprise Oracle DBA
4. And Do I need to keep any extra precautions from start in order to be safe from all future legal problems being a consultant.
Thanks in advance for viewing and replying.
Cheers,
Nirmal
Go Desi's Go ;)
Thanks for maintaining excellent site and answering all sorts of different complex questions.
Now my story.
I am going to apply in next H1B quota and was having below queries:
1. I am confuse about what kind of h1b interview questions will be ask by consulate officer
2. Will they ask my previous work experience letter.. because currently I am in Australia and my work experience was in India and there's no way I can have letter now.
3. How's the job market for Enterprise Oracle DBA
4. And Do I need to keep any extra precautions from start in order to be safe from all future legal problems being a consultant.
Thanks in advance for viewing and replying.
Cheers,
Nirmal
Go Desi's Go ;)
Sudharani
06-28 12:45 AM
deleted.
Sudharani please update your profile and do not post such messages in future-- admin
Sudharani please update your profile and do not post such messages in future-- admin
No comments:
Post a Comment