![Nicole Richie Eating Disorder. [New] Nicole Richie — Wow!](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_s_yaTOpnMnJEexZyeM0ymR0Xktfe8e1IcZQ4Crwi6IpRCUOI5VA9-0EkTL31PjKXiVDrUM2Arrn9i0viiZs1Cr-cOLXOqfjhS_KVy6Ks8EPCoB_Gh8TuHoZxWZW0_ZiWTK3zZ9GnQXU67Zk74qGlmYQJA6Yd38jPy2O1bug587tw=s0-d "[New] Nicole Richie — Wow!")
waiting4gc02
02-28 03:31 PM
Thanks for the suggestion.
But she has to travel to India in the next 2 weeks and also my I-797 will not be approved till another 2 months.
Anybody else has any other suggestions for the question above.
Thanks
But she has to travel to India in the next 2 weeks and also my I-797 will not be approved till another 2 months.
Anybody else has any other suggestions for the question above.
Thanks
wallpaper [New] Nicole Richie — Wow!
waitingnwaiting
11-15 09:39 AM
This is good news. Once Dream act for undocumented is out. Then they will take up bills for H1Bs.
Nagireddi
04-04 10:27 PM
You can start LLC or 'C' corp on EAD. No consequences. You cannot start 'S' corp on EAD. See this:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum72-ac21-portability-after-180-days-of-485-filing/13349-ead-can-you-register-a-llc-inc.html
1.) Yes, but you cannot work for it without filing H1 if you are on H1 status. You can even become a partner on EAD.
2.) Yes
3.) Depends on your state of registration. Contact Department of State in your state of residence. In Texas you have to pay $750/yr even if you are not doing any business in LLC.
I agree with greyhair.Though you can start LLC, you should still be able to pay taxes as for S corp. Contact you accountant.He will explain to you better.Good luck.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum72-ac21-portability-after-180-days-of-485-filing/13349-ead-can-you-register-a-llc-inc.html
1.) Yes, but you cannot work for it without filing H1 if you are on H1 status. You can even become a partner on EAD.
2.) Yes
3.) Depends on your state of registration. Contact Department of State in your state of residence. In Texas you have to pay $750/yr even if you are not doing any business in LLC.
I agree with greyhair.Though you can start LLC, you should still be able to pay taxes as for S corp. Contact you accountant.He will explain to you better.Good luck.
2011 You Can#39;t Hang Out With Nicole
sreekanth
09-18 01:04 PM
Thanks for the clarification. I will gladly pay you $5.(If and after I get my Greencard):D
more...
samuelt
02-24 10:49 AM
The steps that I followed are on the tutorial on your site: (link below)
http://www.kirupa.com/blend_silverlight/silverlight_website_projects_pg3.htm
1. Add an Empty Web Site
2. Go to Start Options...
3. Add the Silverlight Project on the Silverlight Applications tab.
I attach a screenshot of the file structure.
Thank you.
Samuel
http://www.kirupa.com/blend_silverlight/silverlight_website_projects_pg3.htm
1. Add an Empty Web Site
2. Go to Start Options...
3. Add the Silverlight Project on the Silverlight Applications tab.
I attach a screenshot of the file structure.
Thank you.
Samuel
zCool
04-23 12:21 PM
You will qualify.
Issue is getting to Canada and staying there long enough with the high taxes they have average canadian tax burden is 40% (30% tax + 10% additional sales tax on everything you buy) !
I know how meaningless this "Backup" is after paying almost 50K$ over past few yrs.!
Beware!
Issue is getting to Canada and staying there long enough with the high taxes they have average canadian tax burden is 40% (30% tax + 10% additional sales tax on everything you buy) !
I know how meaningless this "Backup" is after paying almost 50K$ over past few yrs.!
Beware!
more...
roseball
11-12 01:34 AM
The only impact will be that you will lose your earlier PD (if 140 gets approved).......Also, it could cause you issues with H1 extensions if you are in 6th year of your H1 and are re-starting the GC process....Note that your LC/I-140 must be filed or should be pending for 365 days or your I-140 must be approved in order to get H1 extensions beyond the 6 year term....
2010 Nicole Richie
razis123
05-28 01:48 PM
If you are actually using the EAD you cannot work in the interim though. Just an FYI
how will the uscis know that during the interim period my work is authorized and not mistake it saying the EAD is expired and does an RFE?
how will the uscis know that during the interim period my work is authorized and not mistake it saying the EAD is expired and does an RFE?
more...
susie
09-27 11:23 PM
Hi all,
I'm wondering if there are any successful cases where CSPA and the Patriot Act were combined to ensure that the child remains under 21? My son's name has been deleted from the derivative beneficiary's list, however, he can remain eligible under this F-4 petition if the Consular calculate his age with Patriot Act 45 days. In that case, he can benefit from CSPA. Our case details as below:
Priority Date: Oct. 16, 1996
Approval Date: Dec. 4, 1996
Days of Petition Pending: 49 days
Child's 21st Birthday: May 31, 2007
Child's age when visa became current: 21 years 62 days
Need your advices. Thanks!
In Adlac 2
It say if both the CSPA and Patriot apply then the better benefit should be accorded to the alien
If patriot act does apply add 45 days onto his birthday, but the visa number did not become concurrent till 62 days past birthday.
How did you get on with the attorney?
I'm wondering if there are any successful cases where CSPA and the Patriot Act were combined to ensure that the child remains under 21? My son's name has been deleted from the derivative beneficiary's list, however, he can remain eligible under this F-4 petition if the Consular calculate his age with Patriot Act 45 days. In that case, he can benefit from CSPA. Our case details as below:
Priority Date: Oct. 16, 1996
Approval Date: Dec. 4, 1996
Days of Petition Pending: 49 days
Child's 21st Birthday: May 31, 2007
Child's age when visa became current: 21 years 62 days
Need your advices. Thanks!
In Adlac 2
It say if both the CSPA and Patriot apply then the better benefit should be accorded to the alien
If patriot act does apply add 45 days onto his birthday, but the visa number did not become concurrent till 62 days past birthday.
How did you get on with the attorney?
hair You Can#39;t Hang Out With Nicole
akgind
11-11 06:41 PM
I can feel your concern, jk. Am in the same situation. We just got our GC along with our daughter, EB2, PD of Aug02. Our son, however, turned 21 in 2004 and missed the boat because labor was stuck in BEC till 2007.
The rule is that the child should be less than 21 at the time 485 is applied. The CSPA of 2001 gives credit for the time 140 was pending. In most cases this effectively means that the age is locked on the date of 140 application.
The CSPA does not give credit for the time labor is pending. Labor pending was not backlogged when CSPA was enacted, 140 was. Hence the law.
I do not know if there is any way out. I have heard that the aged-out child might be able to claim the PD of the parents if and when s/he applies for GC based on own employment. Nothing authentic, though.
The rule is that the child should be less than 21 at the time 485 is applied. The CSPA of 2001 gives credit for the time 140 was pending. In most cases this effectively means that the age is locked on the date of 140 application.
The CSPA does not give credit for the time labor is pending. Labor pending was not backlogged when CSPA was enacted, 140 was. Hence the law.
I do not know if there is any way out. I have heard that the aged-out child might be able to claim the PD of the parents if and when s/he applies for GC based on own employment. Nothing authentic, though.
more...
andy garcia
07-31 10:08 AM
Nobody knows a answer
He is referring to applications that do not need labor Certification(NIW or EB1).
He is referring to applications that do not need labor Certification(NIW or EB1).
hot Nicole Richie
lost_in_migration
06-22 09:38 PM
<today�s date>
US Department of Homeland Security
United States Citizenship and Immigration Service
<your USCIS Service Center address>
Re: Permanent Residence of <your name>
Dear Sir or Madam:
This letter is to confirm that <your name> will be employed with us on full time, permanent basis upon receiving approval of his permanent residence application. He will receive an annual salary of no less than <annual salary>. His job title will be <job title>, and he will be performing the following duties:
Develop full life-cycle object oriented software, including analysis, design of application's specifications, documentation of software user requirements, development of programming using C++ and/or Java languages, Windows NT, design of graphical user interfaces and Object-Oriented Databases(OODBMS) using OMT Methodology, testing and implementation.
Please feel free to contact us if your office should require any further information.
Sincerely,
<signature, name and designation of authorized person>
<company name>
Can someone post sample employment letter for filling I-485. I will need this letter to forward it to my employer.
Appreciate your help.
Thanks
INeedAllGreen
US Department of Homeland Security
United States Citizenship and Immigration Service
<your USCIS Service Center address>
Re: Permanent Residence of <your name>
Dear Sir or Madam:
This letter is to confirm that <your name> will be employed with us on full time, permanent basis upon receiving approval of his permanent residence application. He will receive an annual salary of no less than <annual salary>. His job title will be <job title>, and he will be performing the following duties:
Develop full life-cycle object oriented software, including analysis, design of application's specifications, documentation of software user requirements, development of programming using C++ and/or Java languages, Windows NT, design of graphical user interfaces and Object-Oriented Databases(OODBMS) using OMT Methodology, testing and implementation.
Please feel free to contact us if your office should require any further information.
Sincerely,
<signature, name and designation of authorized person>
<company name>
Can someone post sample employment letter for filling I-485. I will need this letter to forward it to my employer.
Appreciate your help.
Thanks
INeedAllGreen
more...
house Letquot;s focus on Nicole Richiequot;s
vanantwj
April 22nd, 2004, 10:51 PM
I recently made the move to digital by purchasing a D70. I'm interested in purchasing the Nikon SC-29 cord for use with a SB-800 on a Stroboframe quick-flip frame. I like the idea of the added flexibility that the SC-29 gives over the SC-28 because of the additional autofocus lamp.
However, after I ordered the SC-29 from Etronics.com (who listed this product as being in stock), they contacted me a day later to say that it was actually out of stock. Furthermore, they said that Nikon had discontinued the product, and that though they tried, they were not able to obtain one of these cables through another channel.
Has anyone heard about Nikon canceling the SC-29? That doesn't make any sense to me. I've seen these for sale on e-bay, but that is through a Japanese reseller, and the shipping takes a couple of weeks (not to mention, it's not an authorized Nikon USA dealer).
Any other information or input about the SC-29?
Thanks so much!
Jonathan Van Antwerp
However, after I ordered the SC-29 from Etronics.com (who listed this product as being in stock), they contacted me a day later to say that it was actually out of stock. Furthermore, they said that Nikon had discontinued the product, and that though they tried, they were not able to obtain one of these cables through another channel.
Has anyone heard about Nikon canceling the SC-29? That doesn't make any sense to me. I've seen these for sale on e-bay, but that is through a Japanese reseller, and the shipping takes a couple of weeks (not to mention, it's not an authorized Nikon USA dealer).
Any other information or input about the SC-29?
Thanks so much!
Jonathan Van Antwerp
tattoo Nicole Richie - skinny
txh1b
08-19 02:07 PM
Fedex is fine. Proof that USCIS got the application is enough to use H1b portability provided you were in valid status and were getting paid.
more...
pictures an eating disorder.
seanl
08-14 11:55 PM
I filed my I-102 to receive an I-94, ill update this when I hear back from them.
When I receive the receipt, could I use that for the RFE? I don't think i'll have my I-94 to give to them in the 80 days I have left?
Thanks, bump.
When I receive the receipt, could I use that for the RFE? I don't think i'll have my I-94 to give to them in the 80 days I have left?
Thanks, bump.
dresses Despite rumors of an eating
optimizer
03-22 11:42 AM
Short version: If GC is applied and it is close to 300 days only (and not mandatory 365), is it possible to get further H1B extensions after reaching maximum limit? If so, how?
I am in a unique situation. Here's my long story.
I have been on H1B since I landed in USA. My current H1B expires on 04/15/2012.
That would be close to 12 years on H1B. I know, very long.
After my first 6 years on H1B, I received further extensions based on my pending Green card application and approved I-140.
My most recent/current H1B extension was received with a different company, and I would like to stick with this one for a long time. The 3-year extension received in April 2009 was based on previous I-140.
The problem is, due to certain circumstances which are beyond my control, there is a possibility that the previous GC application and I-140 could be revoked. And this revocation could happen very soon.
Considering that I can get my further H1B extensions only with my current company's new green card application, I have very limited time now. Assuming the process gets completed only in the next 60-90 days, I will have only 300 days before my H1B expires.
I understand that to get H1B extension after maximum limit of 6 years ( in my case longer), the applied GC application should be older than 365 days.
Is there a legal way to extend my H1B next year under these circumstances? If so how?
Thanks in advance
I am in a unique situation. Here's my long story.
I have been on H1B since I landed in USA. My current H1B expires on 04/15/2012.
That would be close to 12 years on H1B. I know, very long.
After my first 6 years on H1B, I received further extensions based on my pending Green card application and approved I-140.
My most recent/current H1B extension was received with a different company, and I would like to stick with this one for a long time. The 3-year extension received in April 2009 was based on previous I-140.
The problem is, due to certain circumstances which are beyond my control, there is a possibility that the previous GC application and I-140 could be revoked. And this revocation could happen very soon.
Considering that I can get my further H1B extensions only with my current company's new green card application, I have very limited time now. Assuming the process gets completed only in the next 60-90 days, I will have only 300 days before my H1B expires.
I understand that to get H1B extension after maximum limit of 6 years ( in my case longer), the applied GC application should be older than 365 days.
Is there a legal way to extend my H1B next year under these circumstances? If so how?
Thanks in advance
more...
makeup Nicole Richie, left, and her
shivarajan
04-04 02:59 AM
is that spell mistake on purpose or on unavailability cause?
girlfriend Nicole Richie rushed to
ramb
09-30 06:11 PM
I'm going to Canada on vacation for 2 days. I've read that if yr I-94 is valid and even if yr visa is expired you can return to US (thru automcatic revalidation)
till
1. you have not applied for US visa in Canada
2. you dont belong to a country declared as sponsoring terrorism.
My question is if you surrender yr I-94 to a Canadian inspector while crossing in to Canada, what do you show US immigration people while coming back? Do they stamp something etc? Has anyone gone thru this or knows abt this?
Thanks
till
1. you have not applied for US visa in Canada
2. you dont belong to a country declared as sponsoring terrorism.
My question is if you surrender yr I-94 to a Canadian inspector while crossing in to Canada, what do you show US immigration people while coming back? Do they stamp something etc? Has anyone gone thru this or knows abt this?
Thanks
hairstyles Eating Disorder middot; Nicole
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
Senator Sessions cannot leave his hands off of E-Verify. Now in "stealth" mode, Senator Sessions has slyly introduced an E-Verify amendment (SB 1371) during today's full Senate vote on the DHS appropriations bill.
The Sessions amendment calls for a permanent reauthorization of the Basic Pilot/E-Verify program, and mandates its use for all federal contractors and subcontractors - including the verification of all existing employees. This amounts to a massive expansion of a program that is still not ready for prime-time.
We must call our Senators and tell them to oppose this sneak attack by Senator Sessions for the following reasons:
It would impose exorbitant costs on businesses at a time when our economy is most vulnerable:
An economic analysis commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
concluded that the net societal costs of the program would be $10 billion a year
� a cost that would be felt disproportionately by small businesses. It would make Basic Pilot/E-Verify permanent without addressing its well documented database inaccuracies:
A 2007 independent evaluation of the program commissioned by DHS found that
the Basic Pilot/E-Verify database �is still not sufficiently up to date� to meet
the requirements for �accurate verification.�
SSA has estimated that if Basic Pilot/E-Verify were to become mandatory and
the databases were not improved, SSA database errors alone could result in 3.6
million workers a year being misidentified as not authorized for employment.
This would result in 6 out of every 100 workers having to visit an SSA office to
correct their records or lose their job.
It would force workers and businesses to pay a high price for Basic Pilot/E-Verify's inaccuracies:
Queries submitted to Basic Pilot/E-Verify by Intel Corporation in 2008 resulted
in nearly 13 percent of all workers being initially flagged as unauthorized for
employment. All of these workers were cleared by Basic Pilot/E-Verify as
work-authorized, but only after �significant investment of time and money�
and �lost productivity.�We urge all AILA members to call their Congressman today and oppose the Sessions amendment (SB 1371). Don't let Senator Session's stealth tactics create a nationwide crisis for employers!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-5839069238864574507?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/there-he-goes-again-sessions-and-e.html)
Senator Sessions cannot leave his hands off of E-Verify. Now in "stealth" mode, Senator Sessions has slyly introduced an E-Verify amendment (SB 1371) during today's full Senate vote on the DHS appropriations bill.
The Sessions amendment calls for a permanent reauthorization of the Basic Pilot/E-Verify program, and mandates its use for all federal contractors and subcontractors - including the verification of all existing employees. This amounts to a massive expansion of a program that is still not ready for prime-time.
We must call our Senators and tell them to oppose this sneak attack by Senator Sessions for the following reasons:
It would impose exorbitant costs on businesses at a time when our economy is most vulnerable:
An economic analysis commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
concluded that the net societal costs of the program would be $10 billion a year
� a cost that would be felt disproportionately by small businesses. It would make Basic Pilot/E-Verify permanent without addressing its well documented database inaccuracies:
A 2007 independent evaluation of the program commissioned by DHS found that
the Basic Pilot/E-Verify database �is still not sufficiently up to date� to meet
the requirements for �accurate verification.�
SSA has estimated that if Basic Pilot/E-Verify were to become mandatory and
the databases were not improved, SSA database errors alone could result in 3.6
million workers a year being misidentified as not authorized for employment.
This would result in 6 out of every 100 workers having to visit an SSA office to
correct their records or lose their job.
It would force workers and businesses to pay a high price for Basic Pilot/E-Verify's inaccuracies:
Queries submitted to Basic Pilot/E-Verify by Intel Corporation in 2008 resulted
in nearly 13 percent of all workers being initially flagged as unauthorized for
employment. All of these workers were cleared by Basic Pilot/E-Verify as
work-authorized, but only after �significant investment of time and money�
and �lost productivity.�We urge all AILA members to call their Congressman today and oppose the Sessions amendment (SB 1371). Don't let Senator Session's stealth tactics create a nationwide crisis for employers!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-5839069238864574507?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/there-he-goes-again-sessions-and-e.html)
mbartosik
07-14 12:26 PM
I thought that the ideal time would be before applying for I485, and thus the dependant spouse would automatically get a gc with which ever spouse got the gc first. So I would think that both applying and getting married before either I485 is submitted, and who ever gets gc first their dependant spouse gets it too.
If the I485 is already filed I don't know if it can be amended.
I'm no attorney so you need to throughly research this.
If the I485 is already filed I don't know if it can be amended.
I'm no attorney so you need to throughly research this.
bigboy007
11-01 11:40 AM
Hello i am running in to issues of how to get address changed. To give you guys previews. We were residing in Chicago till July ending. In August we moved to CT as my wife got a new job there. But since my work location is in IL , I requested my employer whether its possible to work remotely and its ok by law. He said u can change ur residential address and there is no need to amend LCa/H1b as there is no change in work location in my case. Fine for now.
I recently visited CT DMV and requested for CT state license. They denied to me saying that i need a CT employer letter or My employer should issue letter to DMV stating my work location changed. Neither of these are going to happen. For now i have my license and Plate from IL itself. I can still continue to maintain but renewing Plates and Pollution test are pain being in CT any ideas please ?
I recently visited CT DMV and requested for CT state license. They denied to me saying that i need a CT employer letter or My employer should issue letter to DMV stating my work location changed. Neither of these are going to happen. For now i have my license and Plate from IL itself. I can still continue to maintain but renewing Plates and Pollution test are pain being in CT any ideas please ?
No comments:
Post a Comment