Sandeep
01-18 05:24 PM
http://uscis.gov/graphics/services/tempbenefits/cap.htm
Now I hope the industry will get its act together
Now I hope the industry will get its act together
wallpaper Trendy Layered Hair
Blog Feeds
05-16 07:40 AM
Youth-led organization United We Dream issued a scathing letter criticizing President Obama for using his recent speech on immigration as the basis for a fundraising ad. This week, President Obama addressed a crowd in El Paso, Texas regarding immigration Reform. DREAMers from across the country watched, waiting, and hoping to see a concrete action plan that would complement the next day�s historic introduction of a bill that would bring relief to the more than 2 million Dreamers that would qualify for the DREAM Act. That same evening, President Obama sent out a fundraising email about his immigration speech. The Obama...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/dream-activists-slam-president-for-fundraising-ad.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/dream-activists-slam-president-for-fundraising-ad.html)
hlangmo
June 11th, 2005, 10:13 AM
Here are a few pics from a boat trip i had yesterday.
Hope you like them
Hope you like them
2011 Modern and layered trendy hair
birdwing
10-10 11:53 PM
this is hilarious :lol:
i know im late ... shuddup
i know im late ... shuddup
more...
newuser
08-11 08:13 AM
I think its official now...
Visa Bulletin for September 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5113.html)
Visa Bulletin for September 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5113.html)
Macaca
05-19 07:30 AM
A New Reality in Washington, but Can It Last? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19assess.html) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
more...
InTheMoment
06-18 07:57 PM
2 (a) is only if you have an approved I-140. In your case write "Concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 based on NIW"
2010 Perfect Layered Hairstyles for
eb3_2004
01-26 04:01 PM
Hi,
Find below my current visa status
1. H1B 6 years completing in Jul 2009. My firm will apply for extension in March time frame
2. I have applied for I-485 and have EAD + AP.
I am planning to travel to India for a week on AP sometime in May. I have the following Qs on this
1. Can I travel to India with AP when H1B extn is pending.
2. Will I face any issue while entering the US if my H1B is denied (or) there is an RFE on my appln?
Please answer these for me.
Thanks...
Find below my current visa status
1. H1B 6 years completing in Jul 2009. My firm will apply for extension in March time frame
2. I have applied for I-485 and have EAD + AP.
I am planning to travel to India for a week on AP sometime in May. I have the following Qs on this
1. Can I travel to India with AP when H1B extn is pending.
2. Will I face any issue while entering the US if my H1B is denied (or) there is an RFE on my appln?
Please answer these for me.
Thanks...
more...
krithi
02-04 07:07 PM
Anyone know good Immigration attorney near Dallas,Texas, I am looking to Change represenation of my case from my current attorney to new one.
Thanks,
Krithi
Thanks,
Krithi
hair Black Layered Hairstyles
Blog Feeds
01-15 11:20 AM
It's not official, but it sounds like the Obama Administration is getting ready to make some news. Secretary Clinton told CBS News today: �Well, we have, as you know, many Haitian Americans. Most are here legally. Some are not documented. And the Obama administration is taking steps to make sure that people are given some temporary status so that we don�t compound the problem that we face in Haiti.� That sounds like Temporary Protected Status or Deferred Enforced Departure.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/clinton-hints-that-white-house-will-grant-haitians-legal-status.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/clinton-hints-that-white-house-will-grant-haitians-legal-status.html)
more...
Bluejay
05-26 10:43 AM
I am working for a small company on H1B since October 2006. The company had originally filed for full time employment (LCA and I-129) but at the time of hiring offered part time employment. I worked part time till June 2008 and since then I have been working full time. The company however never filed for an amended LCA and/or I-129 and I worked part-time on a full-time LCA and I-129. My H1B approval was extended last October by another 3 years. I also work part-time for a University on a concurrent H1B.
Will I be deemed out of status for this? What are the implications of this on filing for GC under EB1 or EB2? Is there any way in which this situation may be legally rectified?
Please advise.
Will I be deemed out of status for this? What are the implications of this on filing for GC under EB1 or EB2? Is there any way in which this situation may be legally rectified?
Please advise.
hot Layered haircuts are
bhartigorkar
07-26 11:45 AM
I am not the art student.Just using online resources i was trying to build my skills.May be this is reflecting in my work now.So i have decided to quit from this competition.I am taking back all of my entries.
Thanks
Bharti
Thanks
Bharti
more...
house trendy layered haircut
pappu
07-02 07:25 AM
c, 0, 9
tattoo Hairstyles
vandanaverdia
11-14 08:05 PM
Have YOU made a difference?????
Stand up & be heard!!!
Stand up & be heard!!!
more...
pictures trendy layered hairstyles
rskanth
07-05 03:14 PM
Yes, the AP is valid for one year and for as many visits as you want. Same thing happened with me. You can travel again with the stamped AP.
dresses Trendy Short Layered Hairstyle
mkedesi
10-07 11:15 PM
One of my friend got their Fingerprinting letter and the last name is misspelled. What should they do go ahead and take it to the FP office or call USCIS and get it corrected.
Anyone in similar sitaution? Please advise.
Anyone in similar sitaution? Please advise.
more...
makeup trendy hairstyles
gc_freedom
10-07 05:20 PM
Delete.Looks like old info..
girlfriend Images for trendy layered hairstyles
vallabhu
08-07 09:33 AM
I know this is dumb question to ask as I should not lie on the application and hide my previous application details but the question really is what all documents should I furnish from my existing application.
hairstyles medium layered hairstyles
dixie
08-17 01:18 AM
I am on H1B 8th year extension, my priority date is September,2004. When I join new employer, Will I lose my current priority date as well as LC?
Depends on whether or not your I-140 is approved. If it is, and your old employer does not withdraw the petition then there is a possibility of carrying on with your old PD. I am no expert on this, but the issue has been discussed several times on this forum. Do a search for more info.
Depends on whether or not your I-140 is approved. If it is, and your old employer does not withdraw the petition then there is a possibility of carrying on with your old PD. I am no expert on this, but the issue has been discussed several times on this forum. Do a search for more info.
psnycgirl
10-16 11:02 AM
Hello all, my apologies if you find my question naiive. We got our fingerprinting appt. notice in the mail yesterday with an EAC application no. When I look that number online it says case has been transferred to Texas and notice of transfer sent. Fine. I am not anxious or anything just wondering if a receipt will be generated now at Texas or would one have been generated at Nebraska and sent to the lawyer? The reason I as is I have been holding back travel plans and wanted to start looking at flights etc. if I know the receipt is either on its way or at the lawyer's already.
Thanks!
BTW the application was sent to Nebraska on July 30 and I140 had already been approved from Nebraska earlier this year.
Thanks!
BTW the application was sent to Nebraska on July 30 and I140 had already been approved from Nebraska earlier this year.
Blog Feeds
01-12 07:40 AM
Another member of Popular Science's Brilliant 10 list for this year is German-born Andre Platzer from Carnegie Mellon University. Platzer has developed KeYmaera, software that assists computer-controlled safety systems in avoiding catastrophic errors. Platzer's software is being used to make airplane autopilot systems, high speed rail and automobile cruise controls safer.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/immigrant-of-the-day-andre-platzer-computer-scientist.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/immigrant-of-the-day-andre-platzer-computer-scientist.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment