gatsat
10-08 03:23 PM
No. Is there any way to get it delayed till my marriage ?
wallpaper est friend acrostic poems
cygent
06-10 07:44 PM
Hi diptam,
Don't forget, if you filed in PERM, your labor might be <365 days.
I'm confused - Everyone who has a 140 is supposed to have a Labor and very likely that will be more than 365 days old. So why do anyone need 140 approval in that sense ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19534
Don't forget, if you filed in PERM, your labor might be <365 days.
I'm confused - Everyone who has a 140 is supposed to have a Labor and very likely that will be more than 365 days old. So why do anyone need 140 approval in that sense ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19534
Hassan11
08-24 03:43 PM
Hi. I am sorry if I am posting this on the wrong thread but I am trying to get some help or suggestions.
I have a question regarding an appeal I did a year ago for a rejected LC.
I have an approved LC and I-140 on an entry level position (EB3) with my company. after I got a promotion to a senior position that requires a masters degree but with a smilar job description but more senior and supervisory responsabilities with the same company. after promotion, I filed for a new LC (EB2) but it got rejected because DOL thinks it is the same position as the already approved LC. my company and I wrote a letter as an appeal on Sep 2006 within 30 days from rejection of LC to BALCA explaining that new position requires a masters degree and it is a senior position with more supervisory duties. as of today, almost a year later, we haven't heard anything regarding DOL (BALCA) decision on my appeal. is anybody in the same situation?? what should I do next?? also I read somewhere that DOl might revoke the already approved LC EB3 after I filed a second LC for EB2 with the same employer. can DOL revoke the first LC EB3 after I have an approved I-140?? please help. Thanks
I have a question regarding an appeal I did a year ago for a rejected LC.
I have an approved LC and I-140 on an entry level position (EB3) with my company. after I got a promotion to a senior position that requires a masters degree but with a smilar job description but more senior and supervisory responsabilities with the same company. after promotion, I filed for a new LC (EB2) but it got rejected because DOL thinks it is the same position as the already approved LC. my company and I wrote a letter as an appeal on Sep 2006 within 30 days from rejection of LC to BALCA explaining that new position requires a masters degree and it is a senior position with more supervisory duties. as of today, almost a year later, we haven't heard anything regarding DOL (BALCA) decision on my appeal. is anybody in the same situation?? what should I do next?? also I read somewhere that DOl might revoke the already approved LC EB3 after I filed a second LC for EB2 with the same employer. can DOL revoke the first LC EB3 after I have an approved I-140?? please help. Thanks
2011 2010 poems for girls you like
InTheMoment
06-16 04:50 PM
I guess the initial question my miguy still remains unanswered.
His question was about the validity period of the card and the start date of that validity period that is printed on that card and not the date when you activate the EAD status.
any answers there ?
His question was about the validity period of the card and the start date of that validity period that is printed on that card and not the date when you activate the EAD status.
any answers there ?
more...
Alabaman
09-05 12:03 PM
For sure, things will be different after Nov Elections. However when it comes to immigration reforms or SKIL kind of bills, i think (i hate to say this) ambiguity still persists, no matter who controls the house
Well, there is a slightly increased chance in case of Dems control the houses
Do most of them (Congress) even know there is anything like the SKIL bill??
Well, there is a slightly increased chance in case of Dems control the houses
Do most of them (Congress) even know there is anything like the SKIL bill??
raj2007
02-18 07:12 PM
i did. different lawyers said different thing so i do not know who is right and who is wrong.
should i make an infopass appointment and idscusss it with them?
I will better wait for my I-485 approval than taking the risk. Infopass will not help much b/c everything will depend on Port of entry.
should i make an infopass appointment and idscusss it with them?
I will better wait for my I-485 approval than taking the risk. Infopass will not help much b/c everything will depend on Port of entry.
more...
tselva
06-02 06:53 PM
The points for to-do-list after GC by Samswas are great..Just a little comment as I talked to my attorney now...
DON'T throw away, rather keep your I-94, as you never know, until you get citizenship, what documents you may need to show in which circumstances varifying legal status leading to GC... It is just a word of caution not to discard the I-94 but to archive safely, but he is right that we should not give it to airline official....
Best wishes to those who are waiting...
Can anyone please explain why we should not give current I-94 card to airline official (after getting GC) when you go out of the USA ?
DON'T throw away, rather keep your I-94, as you never know, until you get citizenship, what documents you may need to show in which circumstances varifying legal status leading to GC... It is just a word of caution not to discard the I-94 but to archive safely, but he is right that we should not give it to airline official....
Best wishes to those who are waiting...
Can anyone please explain why we should not give current I-94 card to airline official (after getting GC) when you go out of the USA ?
2010 Poems\\\\Quotes Best Friends
nixstor
08-30 12:59 PM
perm2gc,
Southwest, JetBlue, Airtran who are low fare carriers might have stopped doing that. A friend of mine flew on his in-laws frequent flier miles on Southwest a couple of years back. I am not sure what their policy is currently. I know Big airlines like American, United allow to transfer miles for charges varying between 5 to 25 dollars depending on the number of days left for travel. Also, not all seats are available for award travel on a given flight. It varies from the frequent flyer's status ( General, Premier, 1K ) what ever. I am sure the core people are looking into these considertations.
Southwest, JetBlue, Airtran who are low fare carriers might have stopped doing that. A friend of mine flew on his in-laws frequent flier miles on Southwest a couple of years back. I am not sure what their policy is currently. I know Big airlines like American, United allow to transfer miles for charges varying between 5 to 25 dollars depending on the number of days left for travel. Also, not all seats are available for award travel on a given flight. It varies from the frequent flyer's status ( General, Premier, 1K ) what ever. I am sure the core people are looking into these considertations.
more...
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
hair Friendship+poems+for+girls
camarasa
07-08 10:08 PM
Stueym I posted this response to your video.
Well you answered your question in your own video - your family are legal immigrants who by your own admission pay taxes (as you should do) � whereas illegal immigrants don�t pay taxes for fear of being caught. The government thinks it�s best to make them legal quicker so they feel safe to pay taxes like everyone else� go figure?
Well you answered your question in your own video - your family are legal immigrants who by your own admission pay taxes (as you should do) � whereas illegal immigrants don�t pay taxes for fear of being caught. The government thinks it�s best to make them legal quicker so they feel safe to pay taxes like everyone else� go figure?
more...
gemini23
07-27 03:21 PM
thanks for all the answers.
hot Forread est two girls best
alterego
03-13 12:27 AM
Congrats.
Apparently TSC is having some difficulty with their online system. My lawyer told me this this week.
Apparently TSC is having some difficulty with their online system. My lawyer told me this this week.
more...
house Best+friends+poems+for+
ashmeetk
07-12 03:21 PM
says you are exempt from cap if you held H1B status anytime in the last 6 year
Are you exempted from cap if you were on H1B in last 6 years or your received your H1 B in past 6 years?
I was on H1B from feb 2001 to Aug 2004 and then moved to F2 and then H4 Will I still be exempted from cap though my initial H1 has been more than 6 years old.
Thanks for help
Are you exempted from cap if you were on H1B in last 6 years or your received your H1 B in past 6 years?
I was on H1B from feb 2001 to Aug 2004 and then moved to F2 and then H4 Will I still be exempted from cap though my initial H1 has been more than 6 years old.
Thanks for help
tattoo Best+friends+poems+for+
thomachan72
09-29 02:31 PM
While leaving India is there any place we can declare saying this gold we are taking out of india.
This way when we enter back in india , we can show evidence that the gold was purchased in india itself and no hassels from customs.
Unfortunately NO. you cannot declare anything while leaving India.
My question is; Why do you really want to bring your jwellery here? Why not keep in some safety locker (bank) in India. Is it attractive to walk around with huge gold chains/bangles in the US? Also we have been hearing about burglaries in Indian households becuause of easy access to gold.
Buy gold and keep it in locker in India. Come here with some "duplicate gold" and live free.:D:D:D
This way when we enter back in india , we can show evidence that the gold was purchased in india itself and no hassels from customs.
Unfortunately NO. you cannot declare anything while leaving India.
My question is; Why do you really want to bring your jwellery here? Why not keep in some safety locker (bank) in India. Is it attractive to walk around with huge gold chains/bangles in the US? Also we have been hearing about burglaries in Indian households becuause of easy access to gold.
Buy gold and keep it in locker in India. Come here with some "duplicate gold" and live free.:D:D:D
more...
pictures friendship poems for girls.
jasmin45
08-08 04:49 PM
Employer not revoking your I-140 itself proves "employer intention" to hire him back on adjudication. You may have intention to work for sponsoring employer but if you are laid off its not in your control, right? Adjudicator always looks by law and there is no law which says if you are laid off within 180 days your I-485 can not be approved.
There you go now.. You are correct in saying that "laidoff" thing. If you decide to sit at home as you said earlier.. there are chances that you get doomed by IO during 485 adjudication. I already mentioned about employer initiated termination and protection under AC21 in my previous post.
There's already a thread for "laidoff" related issues.. if you have further questions or suggestions you may drop it in there. why do we have to have several thread for same issues?
There you go now.. You are correct in saying that "laidoff" thing. If you decide to sit at home as you said earlier.. there are chances that you get doomed by IO during 485 adjudication. I already mentioned about employer initiated termination and protection under AC21 in my previous post.
There's already a thread for "laidoff" related issues.. if you have further questions or suggestions you may drop it in there. why do we have to have several thread for same issues?
dresses a man Best+friend+sayings+
GreenCard4US
07-16 07:14 PM
I don't know where there is thread regarding this but this quite a serious matter, we should up the ante. They are sending millions of faxes to all Senators with this false information and guess who the Senators will believe. Can we sen counter faxes but will get lost in their faxes, maybe need to call them. Lets not forget this issue while waiting for the bulletin.
more...
makeup est girls friendship
thomachan72
03-31 03:29 PM
Congratulations!
You have a Oct 04 priority date. Your date was current for quite some time. What took them so long? Did you switch from Eb3 to Eb2?
Congrads. I have the same question. why so long? are there still people with 04 PD out there waiting? Why is it that we are seeing "card recieved" posts very rarely these days? Have they slowed issuing GC to those with PD current?
You have a Oct 04 priority date. Your date was current for quite some time. What took them so long? Did you switch from Eb3 to Eb2?
Congrads. I have the same question. why so long? are there still people with 04 PD out there waiting? Why is it that we are seeing "card recieved" posts very rarely these days? Have they slowed issuing GC to those with PD current?
girlfriend est friends forever poems and
glus
10-20 08:22 AM
Hello,
As EAD is not same like H1-B, you can not work if the old EAD expires and new one is not issued (see an attorney's reponse here (http://forum.freeadvice.com/immigration-9/ead-renewal-195657.html) and here (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=7161084702)). If EAD application is pending for more than 90 days, then you can open a service request and request expedited approval (there have been cases where such requests resulted in EAD approvals within a week). It is worth a try to approach the local USCIS and request a temporary EAD, but as far as I know, USCIS has stopped issuing such temporary cards.
It is important that you do not work in-between the expiry date of old EAD and start date of new EAD, so it is better to ask for unpaid leave for such time, though there is no need to quit the job. If the work demands are heavy, you may want to continue working as per 245k (but you will have to pay 1000 USD as fine), see the discussion here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/20566-new-245-k-memo-released-with-more-clarifications.html).
Good luck!
hi there,
There is no 245(k), $1000 fee. This fee applied to different law, 245(i), which does not apply here. If a person works during the gap between EADs, he/she will incur "unauthorized employment". However, this clock stops when a new EAD is approved. As long as an Employment-based 485 beneficiary or derivative beneficiary did not incur 180 days of unauthorized employment or more, as in this case, his/hers I485 can be approved due to the 245(k) protection.
Best Wishes,
As EAD is not same like H1-B, you can not work if the old EAD expires and new one is not issued (see an attorney's reponse here (http://forum.freeadvice.com/immigration-9/ead-renewal-195657.html) and here (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=7161084702)). If EAD application is pending for more than 90 days, then you can open a service request and request expedited approval (there have been cases where such requests resulted in EAD approvals within a week). It is worth a try to approach the local USCIS and request a temporary EAD, but as far as I know, USCIS has stopped issuing such temporary cards.
It is important that you do not work in-between the expiry date of old EAD and start date of new EAD, so it is better to ask for unpaid leave for such time, though there is no need to quit the job. If the work demands are heavy, you may want to continue working as per 245k (but you will have to pay 1000 USD as fine), see the discussion here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/20566-new-245-k-memo-released-with-more-clarifications.html).
Good luck!
hi there,
There is no 245(k), $1000 fee. This fee applied to different law, 245(i), which does not apply here. If a person works during the gap between EADs, he/she will incur "unauthorized employment". However, this clock stops when a new EAD is approved. As long as an Employment-based 485 beneficiary or derivative beneficiary did not incur 180 days of unauthorized employment or more, as in this case, his/hers I485 can be approved due to the 245(k) protection.
Best Wishes,
hairstyles friends friendship poems
freddyCR
January 6th, 2005, 10:01 AM
Lecter , the quality of your pics is first class...the sharpness which comes from very good optics is amazing.
Your subjects and locations, being so exotic to western eyes make for great portraits
The set you posted is great. This last one I like for the short DOF, the highly contrasted BW areas, the ripples on the water, and about the composition I like the geommetry of the photo, the intersecting diadonals of boat and pole, with the upright figure of the subject, and the way the sight is led to the boats in front.
(IMHO)
p.s. Hey .....I hear Thai girls are very beautiful...couldn't you show us some of those too ? :D
Your subjects and locations, being so exotic to western eyes make for great portraits
The set you posted is great. This last one I like for the short DOF, the highly contrasted BW areas, the ripples on the water, and about the composition I like the geommetry of the photo, the intersecting diadonals of boat and pole, with the upright figure of the subject, and the way the sight is led to the boats in front.
(IMHO)
p.s. Hey .....I hear Thai girls are very beautiful...couldn't you show us some of those too ? :D
sanprabhu
02-23 01:22 PM
Yes. And they get instate tuition rates too in many states.
ghost
12-10 02:31 PM
Just throw away your legal papers. change your name, show your photograph with the statue of liberty and declare yourself illegal in the country for last 5 years. go to school, enjoy a better in-state tuition and get a better job. Green Card Voila!!!!
Dream act just proves that nothing will be done for hard working non shitizens. Legals should work and wait or leave as they dont have any DREAM. And yes we got a spineless president on that.
Keep dreaming. DREAM act ain't going anywhere.
Oye chuck they fatte.
If DREAM act does not pass then we will not go anywhere for the next 2 years....and how do you intend to prove that you were brought into this country illegally before you turned 16? I guess you'll have to forge your high-school degree? voila...go for it!
Dream act just proves that nothing will be done for hard working non shitizens. Legals should work and wait or leave as they dont have any DREAM. And yes we got a spineless president on that.
Keep dreaming. DREAM act ain't going anywhere.
Oye chuck they fatte.
If DREAM act does not pass then we will not go anywhere for the next 2 years....and how do you intend to prove that you were brought into this country illegally before you turned 16? I guess you'll have to forge your high-school degree? voila...go for it!
No comments:
Post a Comment