Dhundhun
11-24 01:36 AM
1. EAD six months, AP four months
2. SSN can be applied after getting EAD. Some times USCIS database is not updated and so it may take couple of weeks after you apply for getting SSN. Otherwise, it should come in 10 days.
2. SSN can be applied after getting EAD. Some times USCIS database is not updated and so it may take couple of weeks after you apply for getting SSN. Otherwise, it should come in 10 days.
wallpaper Review: Naruto Shippuden:
tnite
01-03 10:27 AM
We have received our EAD cards without having Finger Print done. We have received FP notice and scheduled for the next week but received our EAD cards.
EAD cards says "No Finger print available" on the right corner. Will this cause any problems?
Please advice.
Thank you.
You will not have issues. That's the way it is. Its fine.
EAD cards says "No Finger print available" on the right corner. Will this cause any problems?
Please advice.
Thank you.
You will not have issues. That's the way it is. Its fine.
sdeshpan
04-23 01:49 PM
I believe they promise a 15-day (business days, I assume) turnaround on Premium Proc applications. So it could take anywhere between 1 and 15 days, if not longer in certain cases.
Also, why is going to India dependent on receiving on an approval of I-140??
Also, why is going to India dependent on receiving on an approval of I-140??
2011 of Ninja Revolution 3 will
Macaca
12-02 09:18 AM
Business Lobby Presses Agenda Before �08 Vote (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/washington/02lobby.html?hp) By ROBERT PEAR | NY Times, December 2, 2007
WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 � Business lobbyists, nervously anticipating Democratic gains in next year�s elections, are racing to secure final approval for a wide range of health, safety, labor and economic rules, in the belief that they can get better deals from the Bush administration than from its successor.
Hoping to lock in policies backed by a pro-business administration, poultry farmers are seeking an exemption for the smelly fumes produced by tons of chicken manure. Businesses are lobbying the Bush administration to roll back rules that let employees take time off for family needs and medical problems. And electric power companies are pushing the government to relax pollution-control requirements.
�There�s a growing sense, a growing probability, that the next administration could be Democratic,� said Craig L. Fuller, executive vice president of Apco Worldwide, a lobbying and public relations firm, who was a White House official in the Reagan administration. �Corporate executives, trade associations and lobbying firms have begun to recalibrate their strategies.�
The Federal Register typically grows fat with regulations churned out in the final weeks of any administration. But the push for such rules has become unusually intense because of the possibility that Democrats in 2009 may consolidate control of the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives for the first time in 14 years.
Even as they try to shape pending regulations, business lobbies are also looking beyond President Bush. Corporations and trade associations are recruiting Democratic lobbyists. And lobbyists, expecting battles over taxes and health care in 2009, are pouring money into the campaigns of Democratic candidates for Congress and the White House.
Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the United States Chamber of Commerce, said, �I am beefing up my staff, putting more money aside for economic analysis of regulations that I foresee coming out of a possible new Democratic administration.�
At the Transportation Department, trucking companies are trying to get final approval for a rule increasing the maximum number of hours commercial truck drivers can work. And automakers are trying to persuade officials to set new standards for the strength of car roofs � standards far less stringent than what consumer advocates say is needed to protect riders in a rollover.
Business groups generally argue that federal regulations are onerous and needlessly add costs that are passed on to consumers, while their opponents accuse them of trying to whittle down regulations that are vital to safety and quality of life. Documents on file at several agencies show that business groups have stepped up lobbying in recent months, as they try to help the Bush administration finish work on rules that have been hotly debated and, in some cases, litigated for years.
At the Interior Department, coal companies are lobbying for a regulation that would allow them to dump rock and dirt from mountaintop mining operations into nearby streams and valleys. It would be prohibitively expensive to haul away the material, they say, and there are no waste sites in the area. Luke Popovich, a vice president of the National Mining Association, said that a Democratic president was more likely to side with �the greens.�
A coalition of environmental groups has condemned the proposed rule, saying it would accelerate �the destruction of mountains, forests and streams throughout Appalachia.�
A priority for many employers in 2008 is to secure changes in the rules for family and medical leave. Under a 1993 law, people who work for a company with 50 or more employees are generally entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for newborn children or sick relatives or to tend to medical problems of their own. The Labor Department has signaled its interest in changes by soliciting public comments.
The National Association of Manufacturers said the law had been widely abused and had caused �a staggering loss of work hours� as employees took unscheduled, intermittent time off for health conditions that could not be verified. The use of such leave time tends to rise sharply before holiday weekends, on the day after Super Bowl Sunday and on the first day of the local hunting season, employers said.
Debra L. Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy group, said she was �very concerned that the Bush administration will issue new rules that cut back on family and medical leave for those who need it.�
That could be done, for example, by narrowing the definition of a �serious health condition� or by establishing stricter requirements for taking intermittent leave for chronic conditions that flare up unexpectedly.
The Chamber of Commerce is seeking such changes. �We want to get this done before the election,� Mr. Johnson said. �The next White House may be less hospitable to our position.�
Indeed, most of the Democratic candidates for president have offered proposals to expand the 1993 law, to provide paid leave and to cover millions of additional workers. Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut was a principal author of the law. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York says it has been �enormously successful.� And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois says that more generous family leave is an essential part of his plan to �reclaim the American dream.�
Susan E. Dudley, administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, said, �Research suggests that regulatory activity increases in the final year of an administration, regardless of party.�
Whoever becomes the next president, Democrat or Republican, will find that it is not so easy to make immediate and sweeping changes. The Supreme Court has held that a new president cannot arbitrarily revoke final regulations that already have the force of law. To undo such rules, a new administration must provide a compelling justification and go through a formal rule-making process, which can take months or years.
Within hours of taking office in 2001, Mr. Bush slammed the brakes on scores of regulations issued just before he took office, so his administration could review them. A study in the Wake Forest Law Review found that one-fifth of those �midnight regulations� were amended or repealed by the Bush administration, while four-fifths survived.
Some of the biggest battles now involve rules affecting the quality of air, water and soil.
The National Chicken Council and the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association have petitioned for an exemption from laws and rules that require them to report emissions of ammonia exceeding 100 pounds a day. They argue that �emissions from poultry houses pose little or no risk to public health� because the ammonia disperses quickly in the air.
Perdue Farms, one of the nation�s largest poultry producers, said that it was �essentially impossible to provide an accurate estimate of any ammonia releases,� and that a reporting requirement would place �an undue and useless burden� on farmers.
But environmental groups told the Bush administration that �ammonia emissions from poultry operations pose great risk to public health.� And, they noted, a federal judge in Kentucky has found that farmers discharge ammonia from their barns, into the environment, so it will not sicken or kill the chickens.
On another issue, the Environmental Protection Agency is drafting final rules that would allow utility companies to modify coal-fired power plants and increase their emissions without installing new pollution-control equipment.
The Edison Electric Institute, the lobby for power companies, said the companies needed regulatory relief to meet the growing demand for �safe, reliable and affordable electricity.�
But John D. Walke, director of the clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the rules would be �the Bush administration�s parting gift to the utility industry.�
If Democrats gain seats in Congress or win the White House, that could pose problems for all-Republican lobbying firms like Barbour, Griffith & Rogers, whose founders include Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Loren Monroe, chief operating officer of the Barbour firm, said: �If the right person came along, we might hire a Democrat. And it�s quite possible we could team up in an alliance with a Democratic firm.�
Two executive recruiters, Ivan H. Adler of the McCormick Group and Nels B. Olson of Korn/Ferry International, said they had seen a growing demand for Democratic lobbyists. �It�s a bull market for Democrats, especially those who have worked for the Congressional leadership� or a powerful committee, Mr. Adler said.
Few industries have more cause for concern than drug companies, which have been a favorite target of Democrats. Republicans run the Washington offices of most major drug companies, and a former Republican House member, Billy Tauzin, is president of their trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
The association has hired three Democrats this year, so its lobbying team is split evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
Loren B. Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a policy research organization, said: �Defense contractors have not only begun to prepare for the next administration. They have begun to shape it. They�ve met with Hillary Clinton and other candidates.�
WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 � Business lobbyists, nervously anticipating Democratic gains in next year�s elections, are racing to secure final approval for a wide range of health, safety, labor and economic rules, in the belief that they can get better deals from the Bush administration than from its successor.
Hoping to lock in policies backed by a pro-business administration, poultry farmers are seeking an exemption for the smelly fumes produced by tons of chicken manure. Businesses are lobbying the Bush administration to roll back rules that let employees take time off for family needs and medical problems. And electric power companies are pushing the government to relax pollution-control requirements.
�There�s a growing sense, a growing probability, that the next administration could be Democratic,� said Craig L. Fuller, executive vice president of Apco Worldwide, a lobbying and public relations firm, who was a White House official in the Reagan administration. �Corporate executives, trade associations and lobbying firms have begun to recalibrate their strategies.�
The Federal Register typically grows fat with regulations churned out in the final weeks of any administration. But the push for such rules has become unusually intense because of the possibility that Democrats in 2009 may consolidate control of the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives for the first time in 14 years.
Even as they try to shape pending regulations, business lobbies are also looking beyond President Bush. Corporations and trade associations are recruiting Democratic lobbyists. And lobbyists, expecting battles over taxes and health care in 2009, are pouring money into the campaigns of Democratic candidates for Congress and the White House.
Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the United States Chamber of Commerce, said, �I am beefing up my staff, putting more money aside for economic analysis of regulations that I foresee coming out of a possible new Democratic administration.�
At the Transportation Department, trucking companies are trying to get final approval for a rule increasing the maximum number of hours commercial truck drivers can work. And automakers are trying to persuade officials to set new standards for the strength of car roofs � standards far less stringent than what consumer advocates say is needed to protect riders in a rollover.
Business groups generally argue that federal regulations are onerous and needlessly add costs that are passed on to consumers, while their opponents accuse them of trying to whittle down regulations that are vital to safety and quality of life. Documents on file at several agencies show that business groups have stepped up lobbying in recent months, as they try to help the Bush administration finish work on rules that have been hotly debated and, in some cases, litigated for years.
At the Interior Department, coal companies are lobbying for a regulation that would allow them to dump rock and dirt from mountaintop mining operations into nearby streams and valleys. It would be prohibitively expensive to haul away the material, they say, and there are no waste sites in the area. Luke Popovich, a vice president of the National Mining Association, said that a Democratic president was more likely to side with �the greens.�
A coalition of environmental groups has condemned the proposed rule, saying it would accelerate �the destruction of mountains, forests and streams throughout Appalachia.�
A priority for many employers in 2008 is to secure changes in the rules for family and medical leave. Under a 1993 law, people who work for a company with 50 or more employees are generally entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for newborn children or sick relatives or to tend to medical problems of their own. The Labor Department has signaled its interest in changes by soliciting public comments.
The National Association of Manufacturers said the law had been widely abused and had caused �a staggering loss of work hours� as employees took unscheduled, intermittent time off for health conditions that could not be verified. The use of such leave time tends to rise sharply before holiday weekends, on the day after Super Bowl Sunday and on the first day of the local hunting season, employers said.
Debra L. Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy group, said she was �very concerned that the Bush administration will issue new rules that cut back on family and medical leave for those who need it.�
That could be done, for example, by narrowing the definition of a �serious health condition� or by establishing stricter requirements for taking intermittent leave for chronic conditions that flare up unexpectedly.
The Chamber of Commerce is seeking such changes. �We want to get this done before the election,� Mr. Johnson said. �The next White House may be less hospitable to our position.�
Indeed, most of the Democratic candidates for president have offered proposals to expand the 1993 law, to provide paid leave and to cover millions of additional workers. Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut was a principal author of the law. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York says it has been �enormously successful.� And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois says that more generous family leave is an essential part of his plan to �reclaim the American dream.�
Susan E. Dudley, administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, said, �Research suggests that regulatory activity increases in the final year of an administration, regardless of party.�
Whoever becomes the next president, Democrat or Republican, will find that it is not so easy to make immediate and sweeping changes. The Supreme Court has held that a new president cannot arbitrarily revoke final regulations that already have the force of law. To undo such rules, a new administration must provide a compelling justification and go through a formal rule-making process, which can take months or years.
Within hours of taking office in 2001, Mr. Bush slammed the brakes on scores of regulations issued just before he took office, so his administration could review them. A study in the Wake Forest Law Review found that one-fifth of those �midnight regulations� were amended or repealed by the Bush administration, while four-fifths survived.
Some of the biggest battles now involve rules affecting the quality of air, water and soil.
The National Chicken Council and the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association have petitioned for an exemption from laws and rules that require them to report emissions of ammonia exceeding 100 pounds a day. They argue that �emissions from poultry houses pose little or no risk to public health� because the ammonia disperses quickly in the air.
Perdue Farms, one of the nation�s largest poultry producers, said that it was �essentially impossible to provide an accurate estimate of any ammonia releases,� and that a reporting requirement would place �an undue and useless burden� on farmers.
But environmental groups told the Bush administration that �ammonia emissions from poultry operations pose great risk to public health.� And, they noted, a federal judge in Kentucky has found that farmers discharge ammonia from their barns, into the environment, so it will not sicken or kill the chickens.
On another issue, the Environmental Protection Agency is drafting final rules that would allow utility companies to modify coal-fired power plants and increase their emissions without installing new pollution-control equipment.
The Edison Electric Institute, the lobby for power companies, said the companies needed regulatory relief to meet the growing demand for �safe, reliable and affordable electricity.�
But John D. Walke, director of the clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the rules would be �the Bush administration�s parting gift to the utility industry.�
If Democrats gain seats in Congress or win the White House, that could pose problems for all-Republican lobbying firms like Barbour, Griffith & Rogers, whose founders include Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Loren Monroe, chief operating officer of the Barbour firm, said: �If the right person came along, we might hire a Democrat. And it�s quite possible we could team up in an alliance with a Democratic firm.�
Two executive recruiters, Ivan H. Adler of the McCormick Group and Nels B. Olson of Korn/Ferry International, said they had seen a growing demand for Democratic lobbyists. �It�s a bull market for Democrats, especially those who have worked for the Congressional leadership� or a powerful committee, Mr. Adler said.
Few industries have more cause for concern than drug companies, which have been a favorite target of Democrats. Republicans run the Washington offices of most major drug companies, and a former Republican House member, Billy Tauzin, is president of their trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
The association has hired three Democrats this year, so its lobbying team is split evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
Loren B. Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a policy research organization, said: �Defense contractors have not only begun to prepare for the next administration. They have begun to shape it. They�ve met with Hillary Clinton and other candidates.�
more...
vinoddas
02-06 09:22 PM
Lets say, after getting EAD and AP and 6 months after filing for I-485, you want to switch jobs to another company but want to do an H1B transfer to a similar position. Do we still have to start the green card process from scratch to remain on H1B?
WaitingUnlimited
05-08 02:56 AM
Repost. Same discussion is going on at below thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=339580#post339580
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=339580#post339580
more...
immigrantinwaiting
11-23 05:29 PM
Here is a question for one of my friend
He is a July 07 filer and has I 485 pending for more than 180 days, has EAD and AP.
All through the years he has been on H1. however there is a gap of 40 days between change of employer on H1. (The H1 is approved after this gap of 40days) Is he in the status during this gap of 40 days because he has pending 485 and has valid EAD/AP?
He is a July 07 filer and has I 485 pending for more than 180 days, has EAD and AP.
All through the years he has been on H1. however there is a gap of 40 days between change of employer on H1. (The H1 is approved after this gap of 40days) Is he in the status during this gap of 40 days because he has pending 485 and has valid EAD/AP?
2010 Naruto Shippuden: Clash Of
agc2005
12-13 08:35 AM
sinv:
There should be a option to modify the the Application. I guess you can't modify PassportNo, Name etc.. But you can modify education details.
There should be a option to modify the the Application. I guess you can't modify PassportNo, Name etc.. But you can modify education details.
more...
Blog Feeds
02-05 06:40 PM
One of the stumbling blocks in the behind the scenes negotiations to craft a bipartisan immigration reform bill that also has the support of business and labor unions has been a proposal to create a commission that would basically determine quotas for all employment-based immigration categories. The business community and many Republicans have expressed concerns that the commission would be politicized. Labor unions have not been compromising on this issue and that has caused delays in working out a final deal that will allow Senator Schumer to introduce his bill. According to journalist Jeffrey Kaye, however, a compromise may be...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/02/labor-appears-ready-to-compromise-on-commission-proposal.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/02/labor-appears-ready-to-compromise-on-commission-proposal.html)
hair (PSP) Naruto Shippuden
hsingh82
04-14 10:59 PM
check this out:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975190063718725.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
SoP
Nice article, slap on the face of anti-H1B fellows who introduced the provision against H1B hiring in TARP.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975190063718725.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
SoP
Nice article, slap on the face of anti-H1B fellows who introduced the provision against H1B hiring in TARP.
more...
pani_6
01-14 04:41 PM
I meant Papu..We have not yet heard from IV Core..I know funds may be an issue to do hard lobbying..can we use soft campigning like letter and Fax campign to turn attention to the legal issue..I thought it was time to pick up momentum now..
How about letter and Fax campaign to Key Congressmen..?. Papu?:)
How about letter and Fax campaign to Key Congressmen..?. Papu?:)
hot Naruto Shippuden Clash of
zombie
03-08 03:54 PM
My case is like this, my original labor application was filed in Dec '04 under EB3 and it has been approved in Feb '07. Is it possible for me to file i140 in EB2. My paralegal says you can but just wanted to gather more information.
Thanks in advance!
Thanks in advance!
more...
house NARUTO SHIPPUDEN: Clash of
njdude26
08-09 04:28 PM
Im currently in my 8th year H1 extension. I will file for my 9th year extension ( 1yr extension) and get it stamped in December. Then I will be outside the country for a year and will come back in next december'07. At that time can i file an extension and get a 3 year extension since i have been out of the country for a year ? If my labor gets approved and 140 gets approved then i know i will be able to do it but if the labor is still stuck....
tattoo NARUTO Shippuden: Clash of
kandhu
03-29 09:54 PM
The time spent in H4 does NOT count towards the 6 year H1 time. So in your case the H1 clock starts from Sep 2004.
more...
pictures Naruto Shippuden: Clash of
panks
06-30 01:20 PM
Hello All,
I am in my 10th year of H1B visa. (GC in process). Every other time I went to INDIA , I got my stamping in INDIA except in 2009 when I returned on Advanced Parole because of a lack of time. Now I need to go to INDIA again in July and I observed this condition for visa stamping at INDIAN consulates which is :
Have the same class of U.S. visa which is still valid or that has expired less than 12 months from the scheduled date of interview.
Wish to apply for the same visa class (e.g. had an H1 work visa, now applying again for an H1 work visa)
My question is whether my last entry to US on Advanced Parole will be interpreted as not having the same class of VISA. After I entered on AP , I did renew my H1 Visa and it is valid upto April'2011.
Thanks in advance
I am in my 10th year of H1B visa. (GC in process). Every other time I went to INDIA , I got my stamping in INDIA except in 2009 when I returned on Advanced Parole because of a lack of time. Now I need to go to INDIA again in July and I observed this condition for visa stamping at INDIAN consulates which is :
Have the same class of U.S. visa which is still valid or that has expired less than 12 months from the scheduled date of interview.
Wish to apply for the same visa class (e.g. had an H1 work visa, now applying again for an H1 work visa)
My question is whether my last entry to US on Advanced Parole will be interpreted as not having the same class of VISA. After I entered on AP , I did renew my H1 Visa and it is valid upto April'2011.
Thanks in advance
dresses The Clash of Ninja Revolution
jliechty
June 10th, 2004, 09:10 PM
Looks good to me, but I'm clueless about portraiture.
more...
makeup Naruto Shippuden Clash of
sss9i
09-27 02:44 AM
http://www.shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=23415
girlfriend Walmart.com: Naruto Shippuden:
STAmisha
02-19 12:12 PM
Hi
My wife is on H4 currently (came into USA on H4). We are planning to apply for her H1 in April. Once it is approved, we are planning to to CANADA for H1 stamping.Her current H4 visa expired in 2006. I-797 is valid till May 2007.
How easy is to get new H1 stamping (from H4) in CANADA?
What issues you face?
She has a US masters Degree?
Thanks
My wife is on H4 currently (came into USA on H4). We are planning to apply for her H1 in April. Once it is approved, we are planning to to CANADA for H1 stamping.Her current H4 visa expired in 2006. I-797 is valid till May 2007.
How easy is to get new H1 stamping (from H4) in CANADA?
What issues you face?
She has a US masters Degree?
Thanks
hairstyles Naruto Shippuden: Clash of
upconvert
11-19 10:07 AM
Employment based I485 is pending and priority date is not current, and wont be current until we have cars that fly. Have valid advance parole from EB I485. Plan to file a family based I485 next month and wait for receipt notice and then travel out of country.
Is it possible to return to US on the advance parole from EB I485 after filing FB I485? (Application for a second advance parole based on for the FB I485 will be pending as it takes ~3 months to process AP).
Thanks in advance.
Is it possible to return to US on the advance parole from EB I485 after filing FB I485? (Application for a second advance parole based on for the FB I485 will be pending as it takes ~3 months to process AP).
Thanks in advance.
May2002PD
01-26 12:31 PM
I am on 8th H1b extension with approved I140 and 3yr extension. Now I want to join a new company, who does my H1B and will get 3yr extension on that. If my parent employer revokes my I140, will my new H1B (with new employer) gets void ? or is it still valid for me to work with new employer for next 3 years. I dont want to apply for LC and I140 with the new employer as I will be R2I in August 2007.
Thanks
Thanks
Blog Feeds
05-25 08:20 AM
Just saw this story from a few days ago. Aside from being a hugely irresponsible way to spend a broke state's taxpayer funds, this idea also is probably unconstitutional. Does Arizona plan on having its own border control points? Will the state's wall interfere with Border Patrol activities? The federal government is supposed to control the national borders and not the states. Not that Arizona minds wasting the state's money to continue to losing that point.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/arizona-trying-to-raise-money-to-build-its-own-border-fence-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/arizona-trying-to-raise-money-to-build-its-own-border-fence-.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment