perm2gc
11-13 09:37 AM
hi guys,
during stage 3, they require a birth certificate. what if I dont have a birth certificate? do they accept an affidavit from my parents with a domicile cerrtificate or not? i dont even have a school leaving certificate. please give me advices.
Thank You
Yogesh
Please Search the Forum.We have discussed your issue and was addressed..
during stage 3, they require a birth certificate. what if I dont have a birth certificate? do they accept an affidavit from my parents with a domicile cerrtificate or not? i dont even have a school leaving certificate. please give me advices.
Thank You
Yogesh
Please Search the Forum.We have discussed your issue and was addressed..
wallpaper It takes so long to grow long
pappu
10-19 10:00 AM
I am looking for a good immigration lawyer based out of chicago. I had some questions and thought I will call and talk to a lawyer. If anybody knows of any lawyer who is not expensive and is good, please let me know
Thanks is advance
Sandeej
You can join our Free attorney conference calls held on Thursdays. You can ask your question for free to Attorneys during the call. Check the thread on this call on the forum.
Thanks is advance
Sandeej
You can join our Free attorney conference calls held on Thursdays. You can ask your question for free to Attorneys during the call. Check the thread on this call on the forum.
lecter
November 21st, 2004, 11:34 PM
wow, great option for someone wanting to get into the MP race, but cannot go a 1Ds or a Mark II of any name
2011 Brown hair
gccovet
12-15 04:55 PM
All- Before you start giving me RED's, I have posted this under "Interesting topic" thread. So cut me some slack.
Hats off to this awesome bhai from India (Gujarati but Indian first), you can see his love for his country as well. He will go long ways, so young and brilliant.
Check this out:
Pranav Mistry: The thrilling potential of 'SixthSense' technology-TV-Economic Times (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tv/TED-India-Pranav-Mistry/videoshow_ted/5231080.cms)
Highlight on future world, tech and all....Pranav mentioned that he was going to share work with all (open source) and give out his code so people can come out with their own "sixth sense" .
More on Pranav: (checkout his impressive CV)
Pranav Mistry (http://www.pranavmistry.com)
Hats off to this awesome bhai from India (Gujarati but Indian first), you can see his love for his country as well. He will go long ways, so young and brilliant.
Check this out:
Pranav Mistry: The thrilling potential of 'SixthSense' technology-TV-Economic Times (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tv/TED-India-Pranav-Mistry/videoshow_ted/5231080.cms)
Highlight on future world, tech and all....Pranav mentioned that he was going to share work with all (open source) and give out his code so people can come out with their own "sixth sense" .
More on Pranav: (checkout his impressive CV)
Pranav Mistry (http://www.pranavmistry.com)
more...
GCard_Dream
04-30 02:26 PM
For those of you who either are residents (Citizens or PRs) or Canada or have been thinking about becoming residents of Canada but working in US, please share your experience in terms of:
1. How you maintain your residency (or non-residency) in both countries.
2. What are the tax implications if you maintain residency in both countries,
specially if you own property in Canada.
I have heard stories about tax implications in Canada if you own property there even if you permanently live an work in the US. Is that true? Would you be considered a resident in Canada for tax purposes just because you own property (such as vacation homes) but live permanently in US.
I currently own a property in Canada but have been living and working in US for past 8 years and really worried about any tax implications in Canada because of the property. Any help would be very much appreciated.
1. How you maintain your residency (or non-residency) in both countries.
2. What are the tax implications if you maintain residency in both countries,
specially if you own property in Canada.
I have heard stories about tax implications in Canada if you own property there even if you permanently live an work in the US. Is that true? Would you be considered a resident in Canada for tax purposes just because you own property (such as vacation homes) but live permanently in US.
I currently own a property in Canada but have been living and working in US for past 8 years and really worried about any tax implications in Canada because of the property. Any help would be very much appreciated.
dionysus
03-25 11:15 AM
I guess that should be OK. Only H1B rules require one to be continuously earning. On EAD, if you have a potential employer who is willing to hire you after your GC is approved, you can remain without regular paychecks.
I know of the guys, who actually availed unemployment benefits on EAD, and yet got their GCs. At least sitting without regular paychecks is better than that.
I know of the guys, who actually availed unemployment benefits on EAD, and yet got their GCs. At least sitting without regular paychecks is better than that.
more...
kondur_007
10-15 03:11 PM
Hello All,
I recently filed a labor and got A# and would like to know the options to check the status.
My employer is not willing to give the user id and password of the secured sire through which they filed the labor.
I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thanks
rk
Status of PERM can only be checked by your employer (with their user id and password of the secured site). Unfortunately there is no other way to check the status.
Good Luck.
I recently filed a labor and got A# and would like to know the options to check the status.
My employer is not willing to give the user id and password of the secured sire through which they filed the labor.
I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thanks
rk
Status of PERM can only be checked by your employer (with their user id and password of the secured site). Unfortunately there is no other way to check the status.
Good Luck.
2010 Modern short bob haircuts
wishdutt
07-11 10:26 AM
Friends,
My friend just forwarded me this link and it shows 1-jun-2006 priority date for EB2. For EB3 it still shows Unavailable. However US State website still shows old dates.
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
If this is not a mistake, then its a very good news.
My friend just forwarded me this link and it shows 1-jun-2006 priority date for EB2. For EB3 it still shows Unavailable. However US State website still shows old dates.
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
If this is not a mistake, then its a very good news.
more...
mchatrvd
09-17 10:54 AM
/
hair (front is long and ack is
kittu1991
03-30 03:34 PM
One of my friend who is an accountant's H1 visa was sponsopred by a non-accounting firm who needed an accountant who is familiar with accounting pratices here is USA and India. Now that the firm who initially hired him and sponsored his visa doesn't have a full time accountant requirement and he is finding it difficult to find an accounting firm to sponsor his visa. But the firm who originally hired him is willing and has an opening to place him in an accounting firm as accountant. But since the firm who originally hired him is not an accounting firm is there any legal issue in doing so. If it is legal, what should the either of the firms and/or he should do as far as paperworks are concerned.
more...
Blog Feeds
01-22 03:00 PM
Vows to Move Fast for Haitian Immigrants in U.S. - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/us/21immig.html?sms_ss=blogger)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-1733329813943632350?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/vows-to-move-fast-for-haitian.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-1733329813943632350?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/vows-to-move-fast-for-haitian.html)
hot hair short in ack long in
Blog Feeds
10-16 04:50 PM
I'm glad to see Immigration Voice weighing in on this one. Under some of the versions of health care reform proposals being considered by Congress, legal immigrants could be excluded for five years before they can access the Medicaid and insurance subsidies despite the fact that they pay taxes, are abiding by all of our laws and are often making critical contributions to the success of this country.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
more...
house front. short
beibei2929
01-30 01:23 PM
Hi, guys:
I am with H-1 visa. Recently, I help another company finish one project, then I received a stipend of $8K. They will send me 1099 misc form for tax purpose. Does it affect my H-1 status and green card application? Thank you.
I am with H-1 visa. Recently, I help another company finish one project, then I received a stipend of $8K. They will send me 1099 misc form for tax purpose. Does it affect my H-1 status and green card application? Thank you.
tattoo short hair back long hair
GC_SUCK
09-11 03:24 PM
October Visa Bulletin Is Out
more...
pictures Short hair
immigrationvoice1
03-14 03:53 PM
You are probably in the wrong forum. Most of us here are Employment Based categories. Please field your question in an appropriate website/forum.
dresses blonde very short boy cut hair
gcformeornot
04-09 08:37 AM
I filled 'AOS' in that field
Did you get your EAD?
Did you get your EAD?
more...
makeup The front is pulled ack
LostInGCProcess
11-03 03:29 PM
If we are on H1 and able to file I-485(AOS) and continue to be on H1 until it expires. Then are we automatically on AOS after the expiry of H1? Or do we have to inform USCIS our intent to switch to AOS?
The reason I am asking this question is: I saw a case, although not similar, where the individual was on H1 and applied I-485 (inJuly 2007), he continued on H1 until it expired and decided to stay on h1 and so his employer applied for extension of H1 in 2009. At that time he received an RFE, the employer did not respond to the RFE. So, eventually the H1 Extension was denied.
After that USCIS denied his I-485 also. Reason give was: "Since the H1B EOS (Extension of Status) request was denied, it did not grant, or have the effect of granting, a lawful status during its pendency."
Please have your thoughts on this. Cause I am sure many of us have started using EAD, but did we transition the right way from H1 to EAD?
The reason I am asking this question is: I saw a case, although not similar, where the individual was on H1 and applied I-485 (inJuly 2007), he continued on H1 until it expired and decided to stay on h1 and so his employer applied for extension of H1 in 2009. At that time he received an RFE, the employer did not respond to the RFE. So, eventually the H1 Extension was denied.
After that USCIS denied his I-485 also. Reason give was: "Since the H1B EOS (Extension of Status) request was denied, it did not grant, or have the effect of granting, a lawful status during its pendency."
Please have your thoughts on this. Cause I am sure many of us have started using EAD, but did we transition the right way from H1 to EAD?
girlfriend in front short Long Hair
Canadian_Dream
01-11 01:29 PM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Disenfranchised_Indians_take_to_the_streets_agains t_HSMP/articleshow/1142198.cms
Can this event set a precedent for Western Immigration programs to treat people fairly ?
A similar thing had happened in the past when Canadian Immigration Agency increased the eligibility pass mark. Six months later a court ruled that they have to accomodate those who are already in the system.
I wonder if this open a judicial precedent for unjust affect of 245(i) on all of us. Interesting enough, UK skilled immigrants also have something similar to immigration voice.
http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
Can this event set a precedent for Western Immigration programs to treat people fairly ?
A similar thing had happened in the past when Canadian Immigration Agency increased the eligibility pass mark. Six months later a court ruled that they have to accomodate those who are already in the system.
I wonder if this open a judicial precedent for unjust affect of 245(i) on all of us. Interesting enough, UK skilled immigrants also have something similar to immigration voice.
http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
hairstyles This shorter-in-ack style
excogitator
10-20 06:38 AM
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/1169/firstalien.png
Yesss. We all know who the first man on the moon was.
Did you ever know the Alien who reached there first though.
It was meeee!! :te:
I learnt to speak English on the World Wide Web
Yesss. We all know who the first man on the moon was.
Did you ever know the Alien who reached there first though.
It was meeee!! :te:
I learnt to speak English on the World Wide Web
srini1976
09-23 05:12 PM
EB 485 Numbers in Excel for easy reading and calculations
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Agsah2P-Kr24dFM1dk9zOUVaVzR6RTFHMzlMSHpLLUE&hl=en
Thanks tempgc
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Agsah2P-Kr24dFM1dk9zOUVaVzR6RTFHMzlMSHpLLUE&hl=en
Thanks tempgc
Macaca
07-29 06:03 PM
Bet on India (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/28/AR2007072800999.html) The Bush administration presses forward with a nuclear agreement -- and hopes for a strategic partnership. July 29, 2007
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
No comments:
Post a Comment