IneedAllGreen
02-26 11:59 AM
Two reason to go for Peoplesoft Softwares
1) Peoplesoft Enterprise ERP package is damn popular among HRMS software user world. Peoplesoft (before Oracle took over them) were earning major money/client on that package.
2) Peoplesoft Enterpriseone(This was JDEdwards earlier version of Oneworld ERP). Enterpriseone has strong Finance module which may helps you to grow in future in your professional career. You can be a functional consultant in finance or HRMS or both.
You can join any of several consulting company who are in Peoplesoft/ORacle/JDEdwards ERP business and for which they need MBA kind of background for their functional requirement at their client site. Trust me its not hard to learn functional part of these ERP packages. There are DEMO version of these software available to download and you can have guide for free from Oracle website. If you need more information then do send PM on my ID. May be I can send you more information.
Thanks
IneedAllGreen :)
I would like to ask the same question but a bit more specific.
For someone who is an MBA (Finance) with 7-8 yrs of Financial and HR benefits experience who wants to move to IT or IT related field what would you advice would be the best field to move to or best certification to take ?
Thanks
1) Peoplesoft Enterprise ERP package is damn popular among HRMS software user world. Peoplesoft (before Oracle took over them) were earning major money/client on that package.
2) Peoplesoft Enterpriseone(This was JDEdwards earlier version of Oneworld ERP). Enterpriseone has strong Finance module which may helps you to grow in future in your professional career. You can be a functional consultant in finance or HRMS or both.
You can join any of several consulting company who are in Peoplesoft/ORacle/JDEdwards ERP business and for which they need MBA kind of background for their functional requirement at their client site. Trust me its not hard to learn functional part of these ERP packages. There are DEMO version of these software available to download and you can have guide for free from Oracle website. If you need more information then do send PM on my ID. May be I can send you more information.
Thanks
IneedAllGreen :)
I would like to ask the same question but a bit more specific.
For someone who is an MBA (Finance) with 7-8 yrs of Financial and HR benefits experience who wants to move to IT or IT related field what would you advice would be the best field to move to or best certification to take ?
Thanks
wallpaper emo hairstyles for girls with
waitin_toolong
07-20 05:30 PM
http://www.insvisa.com/faq/department_state.htm#15
not an authoritative source but if both of you are in USA right now then you need to bring the kid now before GC approval on dependent visa
not an authoritative source but if both of you are in USA right now then you need to bring the kid now before GC approval on dependent visa
drona
07-08 08:00 PM
Can we please not insult anyone who is working for our cause. We need all the support we can get. Can we please be more productive in this forum.
Om Mathew is obviously a publicity freak, now he has his picture on his website. I think he wants people to look at his picture and admire him
Om Mathew is obviously a publicity freak, now he has his picture on his website. I think he wants people to look at his picture and admire him
2011 emo hairstyles for girls 2010.
raghuram
05-08 04:53 PM
What if you directly send a personal check?
That will take a long time to get cashed. And the Indian bank may charge some additional fees to deposit it there.
That will take a long time to get cashed. And the Indian bank may charge some additional fees to deposit it there.
more...
cyclone_p
06-21 09:10 AM
@sameer2730 : So when you made the mistake "Country Of Citizenship" on your EAD eFile, how did you get that corrected? Did you send in a "Request For Correction" along with your supporting documentation to USCIS? Did they send you an RFE or did they accept your docs and approved your EAD?
piperwarrior
08-14 02:44 PM
How did you come up with $745? I-485 application fees were $325 + $70 fee for biometrics. That makes it $395 per application or $790 for two applications. Maybe your lawyer gave you incorrect advice about the fees??
Just now my lawyer called to tell that she got all my receipts , filed on july 2nd but my wifes application was rejected for "insufficient filing fees", I had put in a single check for $745 , how can this be, it was both in the same fedex packet, she says it is some "mailroom error", so she sent back the application with a letter and my receipt copy to accept. My app also had a $745 check and that was receipted,
Has this happned to anyone, please respond , i am wondering if what my lawyer did was correct, pls share your experiences.
Just now my lawyer called to tell that she got all my receipts , filed on july 2nd but my wifes application was rejected for "insufficient filing fees", I had put in a single check for $745 , how can this be, it was both in the same fedex packet, she says it is some "mailroom error", so she sent back the application with a letter and my receipt copy to accept. My app also had a $745 check and that was receipted,
Has this happned to anyone, please respond , i am wondering if what my lawyer did was correct, pls share your experiences.
more...
jay21
07-19 10:10 PM
hi, can the spouse travel outside after applying for I-485 but before getting the AP? Suppose during her stay abroad if the primary applicant's GC is approved? Her H4 will not be valid in that case. but can she use the visa waiver to gain entry back into the country? Will the receipt of I-485 help in anyway? thanx.
2010 LONG EMO HAIRSTYLES 2010
corleone
03-19 11:19 AM
On the Senators,
We tried them twice - they are useless.
We tried them twice - they are useless.
more...
maddipati1
02-03 02:27 PM
thank you veni, that is very informative and solid reference.
looks like under 'advanced degree' category, just having a US Masters or foreign equivalent (4+2) is enough. lot of people are under the impression, its MS+3yrs. but the description in USCIS link states just an advanced degree (higher than baccalaureate) is enough. am i reading this right?
BS+5years is equivalent to having an Advanced degree.
But, I think its BS+5yrs, not BS Equivalent + 5 yrs.
I think it can be, but when the job requirement Bachelor Equivalent+ 5Year then it opens up for a wide range.
You can show BS equivalence by 3 yr degree+1 yr degree or 3yr degree + 2 yr degree.....etc
For additional info Please click here (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) or here (http://www.murthy.com/eb2.html)
looks like under 'advanced degree' category, just having a US Masters or foreign equivalent (4+2) is enough. lot of people are under the impression, its MS+3yrs. but the description in USCIS link states just an advanced degree (higher than baccalaureate) is enough. am i reading this right?
BS+5years is equivalent to having an Advanced degree.
But, I think its BS+5yrs, not BS Equivalent + 5 yrs.
I think it can be, but when the job requirement Bachelor Equivalent+ 5Year then it opens up for a wide range.
You can show BS equivalence by 3 yr degree+1 yr degree or 3yr degree + 2 yr degree.....etc
For additional info Please click here (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) or here (http://www.murthy.com/eb2.html)
hair long emo hairstyles for girls
willigetgc?
01-21 01:15 PM
To avoid being like the thread running a few days ago, I don't want to be responding to each response. However, I do want clear a few things:
I am not promoting one parenting technique over the other.
As I said, I agree with a few things and disagree with a few things the author talks about.
Having kids myself, I cannot think of a parent who would do harm to their own child. Each set of parents come with their own parenting skills that works for them and their children. I leave it at that.
I only posted this because my doc asked me of my opinion and I in turn asked the opinion of IV members. If this thread is going to turn ugly, lets stop it, that was not my intention.
I am not promoting one parenting technique over the other.
As I said, I agree with a few things and disagree with a few things the author talks about.
Having kids myself, I cannot think of a parent who would do harm to their own child. Each set of parents come with their own parenting skills that works for them and their children. I leave it at that.
I only posted this because my doc asked me of my opinion and I in turn asked the opinion of IV members. If this thread is going to turn ugly, lets stop it, that was not my intention.
more...
eb3_2004
11-09 12:57 PM
I finished this survey!!!
hot boys/women/girls Haircut
looneytunezez
04-08 04:17 PM
Employment-based: At this time the amount of demand being received in the Employment First preference is extremely low compared with that of recent years. Absent an immediate and dramatic increase in demand, this category will remain “Current” for all countries. It also appears unlikely that a Second preference cut-off date will be imposed for any countries other than China and India, where demand is extremely high. Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off date movement each month during the coming months are as follows:
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
Employment Second: Demand by applicants who are “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is very high, but the exact amount is not known. Such “upgrades” are in addition to the known demand already reported, and make it very difficult to predict ultimate demand based on forward movement of the China and India cut-off dates. While thousands of “otherwise unused” numbers will be available for potential use without regard to the China and India Employment Second preference per-country annual limits, it is not known how the “upgrades” will ultimately impact the cut-offs for those two countries. (The allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers is discussed below.)
China: none to three weeks expected through July. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
India: One or more weeks, possibly followed by additional movement if demand remains stable. No August or September estimate is possible at this time.
Employment Third:
Worldwide: three to six weeks
China: one to three weeks
India: none to two weeks
Mexico: although continued forward movement is expected, no specific projections are possible at this time.
Philippines: three to six weeks
Please be advised that the above ranges are estimates based upon the current demand patterns, and are subject to fluctuations during the coming months. The cut-off dates for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and no assumptions should be made until the formal dates are announced.
Allocation of “otherwise unused” numbers in accordance with Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 202(a)(5)
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand in a calendar quarter will be insufficient to use all available numbers in an Employment preference, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. Based on current levels of demand, there will be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment First and Second preferences. Such numbers may be allocated without regard to per-country limits, once a country has reached its preference annual limit. Since under INA Section 203(e) such numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability, greater number use by one country would indicate greater demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates. Based on amount and priority dates of pending demand and year-to-date number use, a different cut-off date could be applied to each oversubscribed country, for the purpose of assuring that the maximum amount of available numbers will be used. Note that a cut-off date imposed to control the use of “otherwise unused” numbers could be earlier than the cut-off date established to control number use under a quarterly or per-country annual limit. For example, at present the India Employment Second preference cut-off date governs the use of numbers under Section 202(a)(5), India having reached its Employment Second annual limit; the China Employment Second preference cut-off date governs number use under the quarterly limit, since China has not yet reached its Employment Second annual limit.
The rate of number use under Section 202(a)(5) is continually monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for the oversubscribed countries. This helps assure that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while insuring that numbers also remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
As mentioned earlier, the number of applicants who may be “upgrading” their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference is unknown. As a result, the cut-off date which governs use of Section 202(a)(5) numbers has been advanced more rapidly than normal, in an attempt to ascertain the amount of “upgrade” demand in the pipeline while at the same time administering use of the available numbers. This action risks a surge in demand that could adversely impact the cut-off date later in the fiscal year. However, it also limits the possibility that potential demand would not materialize and the annual limit would not be reached due to lack of cut-off date movement.
more...
house Emo Haircuts For Girls With
se_vnt3
02-24 03:41 PM
To whom it may concern, please, help us. Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
tattoo Emo Hairstyles for Girls:
abhijitp
02-14 07:02 PM
A friendly bump from NORCAL;)
more...
pictures 2011 Fall Emo Scene Hairstyles
wonderlust
10-04 11:50 PM
I believe it is random and chaotic. WORSE, we have been powerless to control or improve it. That is why we need to work together and make our voice heard!
Wonderlust
I am sure you are a latest filers...so just relax and forget abt it for many yrs to come unless there is a serious effort by the Govt. to reduce backlog...till then elax and dotn let your blood boil over it leading to deterioration in health and wealth....
NJOY !!!
Wonderlust
I am sure you are a latest filers...so just relax and forget abt it for many yrs to come unless there is a serious effort by the Govt. to reduce backlog...till then elax and dotn let your blood boil over it leading to deterioration in health and wealth....
NJOY !!!
dresses Emo Hairstyles
raghuram
05-08 04:53 PM
What if you directly send a personal check?
That will take a long time to get cashed. And the Indian bank may charge some additional fees to deposit it there.
That will take a long time to get cashed. And the Indian bank may charge some additional fees to deposit it there.
more...
makeup wallpaper emo hairstyles for
pbojja
03-24 05:47 PM
Great job Mark ,Appreciate your efforts
I think the last caller is a stupid and dont know the difference between the Highly skilled and Undocumented workers , he is refereing to workers in restaurent to the H1B workers .
I think the last caller is a stupid and dont know the difference between the Highly skilled and Undocumented workers , he is refereing to workers in restaurent to the H1B workers .
girlfriend 2010 emo hairstyles for girls
shaikhshehzadali
07-16 07:16 PM
Lets not count the chickens before they are hatched. Its entirely plausible that if anything favourable comes up, its due to combined efforts. Lets not fight out yet, as if we havent seen anything concrete yet.
cheers
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
cheers
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
hairstyles 2010 Emo Hair
Rakson
02-28 11:12 AM
Can anybody please help in answering below questions on my case? I really appreciate your help. This is urgent for me.
#1: I am working for Company A (current company). My GC processing details (with current company):
1. Labor Approved.
2. I-140 Approved with priority date of Aug 2006 (Category -EB2)
3. I-485 - NOT filed
#2: I am on 6th year of H1-B. My current H1-B is valid till Jan 29, 2011 (less than 365 days from today).
I want to change job and join Company B (new company) for excellent offer and life long stability.
As per my understanding, for continuous H1-B extension & GC approval on existing priority date, I must stay with existing company(A). But attorney of new company(B) is saying he will be able to handle my H1-B extension and may be able to save my priority date also by filing new PERM & I-140. I am not sure whether attorney of new company(B) is correct or not. Can anybody please help in answering below questions?
Ques : If new company(B) transfers H1-B and USCIS will grant H1-B for 3 years based on approved I-140 with current company(A):
A. Can USCIS revokes extended period ( after Jan 29, 2011) if current company(A) revokes their approved I-140 before new company(B) gets approval of new PERM and I-140?
B. Can new company (B) start new PERM application during my extension period (after Jan 29, 2011)?
C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?
#1: I am working for Company A (current company). My GC processing details (with current company):
1. Labor Approved.
2. I-140 Approved with priority date of Aug 2006 (Category -EB2)
3. I-485 - NOT filed
#2: I am on 6th year of H1-B. My current H1-B is valid till Jan 29, 2011 (less than 365 days from today).
I want to change job and join Company B (new company) for excellent offer and life long stability.
As per my understanding, for continuous H1-B extension & GC approval on existing priority date, I must stay with existing company(A). But attorney of new company(B) is saying he will be able to handle my H1-B extension and may be able to save my priority date also by filing new PERM & I-140. I am not sure whether attorney of new company(B) is correct or not. Can anybody please help in answering below questions?
Ques : If new company(B) transfers H1-B and USCIS will grant H1-B for 3 years based on approved I-140 with current company(A):
A. Can USCIS revokes extended period ( after Jan 29, 2011) if current company(A) revokes their approved I-140 before new company(B) gets approval of new PERM and I-140?
B. Can new company (B) start new PERM application during my extension period (after Jan 29, 2011)?
C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?
meridiani.planum
08-12 05:40 PM
if your applications are pending for over 6 months (approvable and your PD isc urrent for this long), file a writ of mandamus. Thats the only thing I have seen that moves USCIS to approve such old applications that are hiding behind the 'under background check' flag. Note that FBI namecheck is also now required to be completed within 180 days, so there is no excuse for an application to remain approvable but not approved beyond those timelines. talk to a good lawyer and pursue your case aggressively.
snowshoe
11-15 08:28 AM
We (3 of us from the PA state chapter) had a meeting with Congressman Joe Sastak's office staff in Media, PA.
The staff member was completely unaware of our issues (other than, FBI name check takes long time and USCIS processing is slow). However, she was eager to understand our problems.
She recommended that we should meet the office staff in DC since they handle issues related to legislations.
The staff member was completely unaware of our issues (other than, FBI name check takes long time and USCIS processing is slow). However, she was eager to understand our problems.
She recommended that we should meet the office staff in DC since they handle issues related to legislations.
No comments:
Post a Comment