cygent
06-23 07:30 PM
Hi,
Can we apply for a new EAD/AP after they expire?
If so, what is the difference b/w applying for an extension vs. a new one in terms of fees/documents/photos/etc.?
The reason being I already spent $1000 for EAD/AP last yr. but never used it, and now I have bear all H1 (extension) expenses as well as employer sucked all my blood & is after my limbs after 8 years of slavery. On top of that has stopped paying salary since April.
Hence I am trying to cut corners whenever wherever possible. Any responses or help greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Can we apply for a new EAD/AP after they expire?
If so, what is the difference b/w applying for an extension vs. a new one in terms of fees/documents/photos/etc.?
The reason being I already spent $1000 for EAD/AP last yr. but never used it, and now I have bear all H1 (extension) expenses as well as employer sucked all my blood & is after my limbs after 8 years of slavery. On top of that has stopped paying salary since April.
Hence I am trying to cut corners whenever wherever possible. Any responses or help greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
wallpaper Casa Loma, a castle built
martinvisalaw
12-08 04:36 PM
[COLOR=Navy]1.Does it matter size of new company in terms of money or number employee
No.
2.In case of RFE, Will there be question on Ability to Pay on new small company?
CIS might ask for evidence that the new company is legitimate and financially viable.
No.
2.In case of RFE, Will there be question on Ability to Pay on new small company?
CIS might ask for evidence that the new company is legitimate and financially viable.
wewes
11-01 08:28 PM
hai
i'm new in this....
can i make object transparent in swift3D ???
thank you
i'm new in this....
can i make object transparent in swift3D ???
thank you
2011 Casa Loma Castle in Toronto,
bongugadu
10-29 04:50 PM
Hello All,
I have my H1B immigration interview in New delhi on NOV 4th. I am not sure if this is a problem or not. In 2009 (Nov - Jan) I worked for a small company for designing websites. That employer doesnt have any of my details except my name . But, he said I am on his payroll and issued me few company cheques( I am on OPT at that time). At Feb I need to apply for my OPT extension, that small company dint give me their e verified number so I quit that job and joined a consultancy and applied for OPT extension. I got a new job in March. Now consultancy people filed for my H1 and it got approved. Now I am flying to India and need to get my H1 stamped. Would there be any problem about my last job where they dont have any of my details except my name?
Thanks,
------
I have my H1B immigration interview in New delhi on NOV 4th. I am not sure if this is a problem or not. In 2009 (Nov - Jan) I worked for a small company for designing websites. That employer doesnt have any of my details except my name . But, he said I am on his payroll and issued me few company cheques( I am on OPT at that time). At Feb I need to apply for my OPT extension, that small company dint give me their e verified number so I quit that job and joined a consultancy and applied for OPT extension. I got a new job in March. Now consultancy people filed for my H1 and it got approved. Now I am flying to India and need to get my H1 stamped. Would there be any problem about my last job where they dont have any of my details except my name?
Thanks,
------
more...
gcpower1
01-28 02:28 PM
140 Approved + 485 Pending.................
Do what ever you want untill you get RFE for EVL.
Do what ever you want untill you get RFE for EVL.
Macaca
11-14 09:30 PM
Congress Needs Both Comity and Accomplishments (http://aei.org/publications/pubID.27104,filter.all/pub_detail.asp) By Norman J. Ornstein | Roll Call, November 14, 2007
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
more...
vallabhu
02-04 01:15 PM
Bump
2010 Casa Loma
rkgc
03-31 08:09 PM
Gurus,
Anything on this? this must be a easy answer for you guys. Please let me know.
Thanks,
RK
Anything on this? this must be a easy answer for you guys. Please let me know.
Thanks,
RK
more...
ISHM16
08-07 04:12 AM
I have H 1B VISA but never went to USA....
1) now if i want to go there... will there be any problem
2) if I want to apply for another VISA work or Tourist... will i get?
Thanks
Ish
1) now if i want to go there... will there be any problem
2) if I want to apply for another VISA work or Tourist... will i get?
Thanks
Ish
hair quot;CASA LOMA CASTLEquot;
gcformeornot
08-04 01:05 PM
but rememeber if you sin god (and should I say USCIS) is looking at you
Good luck
Good luck
more...
dollar500
11-07 08:42 PM
bump
hot Casa Loma is hosting this
pamposh
08-05 02:19 PM
I sent my application to vermont based on the USCIS answering system on June 30th that folks with approved I-140s should send 485 applications to the center where it was approved. Any ideas, if there is a problem with that and if the app gets transferred how much time it will take.
anyone else in the same boat?
anyone else in the same boat?
more...
house stables at Castle Loma are
manish217
09-17 12:21 PM
I got a labor substitution by Company A and filed I-140 and 485 through Company A in 2007. After I got EAD and my I-140 was approved and past 6 months I moved to company B in mid of 2008 and company B filed for AC-21, my role at company B is over and I have an offer for a lucrative job with Company C but the role is slightly different from the one listed in my labor petition. Company C is good but sceptical in filing AC-21 with the previous set of responsibilities. I have my EAD valid till early 2011. In case I move to Company C and company B revokes my application what is the situation that I can face? Will my EAD still be valid or will I loose status immediately? Can I continue working on my EAD with company C without filing AC-21?
Please advice ... I have my career at stake and need your help on this issue
Please advice ... I have my career at stake and need your help on this issue
tattoo Casa Loma Garden, looking west
MONCYS
02-25 02:30 PM
any response appreciated
more...
pictures Casa Loma Castle
userz
09-06 01:46 PM
look at a 3rd party software, such as ?
plz help <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"> )
plz help <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"> )
dresses Stock Photo titled: Casa Loma
.jpg "approaching Casa Loma on the")
chintainfogc
04-14 12:44 PM
Hi,
I guess you can work part-time or full-time wherever you want as long as you are not the primary applicant.
Please confirm with lawyer.
Thanks
I guess you can work part-time or full-time wherever you want as long as you are not the primary applicant.
Please confirm with lawyer.
Thanks
more...
makeup Toronto Photos :: Casa Loma :: Casa Loma Castle
krishmunn
06-22 01:35 PM
You can renew your passport upto 1 year before expiry date.
girlfriend Ask OntheRun5 about Casa Loma
immigration2007
06-14 02:51 PM
Hi,
Can anyone help me know of a process by which I can get my duplicate W2 form. The scenario is that I asked my employer to send me the W2 form and they say they did send it via post. But I did not receive it. Also my employer says they have not received it back. I need to file my taxes(Fortunately I had applied for extention) and don't have a W2 to attach with it. Can anybody help me with knowing the process
Thanks in advance.
Can anyone help me know of a process by which I can get my duplicate W2 form. The scenario is that I asked my employer to send me the W2 form and they say they did send it via post. But I did not receive it. Also my employer says they have not received it back. I need to file my taxes(Fortunately I had applied for extention) and don't have a W2 to attach with it. Can anybody help me with knowing the process
Thanks in advance.
hairstyles Casa Loma Castle
chanduv23
09-14 04:56 PM
Yes this is the chance
HalfDog
03-09 07:29 PM
Cinema 4D?
sashidhar_gundimeda
01-18 09:36 PM
Hello All,
I am new to this forum and this is my first post. I am not sure if I can even bring this topic up about PERM in this forum. So, if this is irrelavant, please let me know.
My employer will be submitting a PERM application for my L.C. in a day or two. All the requirements for the job are complete. My question is, on the applciation there is question (Q:12) which states about "business necessity" and my employe will be checking "NO" as the answer. I am not sure what impication this could have on my application. The job requirement is B.S. degree with 5 yrs experience. I have a M.S. degree with 5 Yrs experience.
Please let me know if we are going in the right direction.
Thanks!
I am new to this forum and this is my first post. I am not sure if I can even bring this topic up about PERM in this forum. So, if this is irrelavant, please let me know.
My employer will be submitting a PERM application for my L.C. in a day or two. All the requirements for the job are complete. My question is, on the applciation there is question (Q:12) which states about "business necessity" and my employe will be checking "NO" as the answer. I am not sure what impication this could have on my application. The job requirement is B.S. degree with 5 yrs experience. I have a M.S. degree with 5 Yrs experience.
Please let me know if we are going in the right direction.
Thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment