phillyag
01-24 10:07 AM
610-955-8290
phillyag
phillyag
wallpaper cute short hair styles
tandy_sids
05-28 09:34 PM
I'm on H1b visa in my 6th year. Perm application has been filed and I hope to get it approved soon along with approved i-140 (fingers crossed).
From what I have read on this forum so far, H1b transfer to a new job after an approved I-140 seems to be possible even after 6 years on H1. My issue is that I currently work for a university (non-quota H1) so if I get a new job most likely it will be with a for profit company which would require me to get a new H1 (and not H1 transfer).
So, the question is whether it is possible to get a new H1 after 6 years on H1?
Thanks for any help.
From what I have read on this forum so far, H1b transfer to a new job after an approved I-140 seems to be possible even after 6 years on H1. My issue is that I currently work for a university (non-quota H1) so if I get a new job most likely it will be with a for profit company which would require me to get a new H1 (and not H1 transfer).
So, the question is whether it is possible to get a new H1 after 6 years on H1?
Thanks for any help.
Blog Feeds
01-07 08:10 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLzDCOz28B6p9piPbuyPJexGvTXckFTV8FT-IjaWm_Z0gcElvCHGZMggD9MCbDdJhhp7cEiGB9hBnzkP2_YtE-Ih7Tff__PkBhojaAYL1yTBC0JnE6Q8q8jtDBdvsRw8YnnBGVazHrD0VX/s320/NILC_logo_subpage.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLzDCOz28B6p9piPbuyPJexGvTXckFTV8FT-IjaWm_Z0gcElvCHGZMggD9MCbDdJhhp7cEiGB9hBnzkP2_YtE-Ih7Tff__PkBhojaAYL1yTBC0JnE6Q8q8jtDBdvsRw8YnnBGVazHrD0VX/s1600-h/NILC_logo_subpage.gif)
I blogged about Affidavits of Support here (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2009/03/faqs-on-affidavit-of-support.html) last year, and that blog post has received far more comments so far than any other post. I cannot answer specific questions via the blog , so I hope that last year's FAQs are a help. I recently found another great FAQ publication here (http://www.nilc.org/ce/nilc/sponsoredimms&bens-na-2009-08.pdf), from the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). The NILC article links to other useful resources from the government and from NILC itself. I hope you find this as informative as I did.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-1413344651087124473?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/more-on-affidavits-of-support.html)
I blogged about Affidavits of Support here (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2009/03/faqs-on-affidavit-of-support.html) last year, and that blog post has received far more comments so far than any other post. I cannot answer specific questions via the blog , so I hope that last year's FAQs are a help. I recently found another great FAQ publication here (http://www.nilc.org/ce/nilc/sponsoredimms&bens-na-2009-08.pdf), from the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). The NILC article links to other useful resources from the government and from NILC itself. I hope you find this as informative as I did.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-1413344651087124473?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/more-on-affidavits-of-support.html)
2011 Stylish Short Choppy Haircuts
Macaca
11-09 04:54 PM
A Failure to Lead (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010843) The Democratic Congress is more interested in acting out than in taking positive action BY KARL ROVE | Wall Street Journal, November 9, 2007
Mr. Rove is a former adviser to President George W. Bush.
This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.
The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.
Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.
Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.
After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.
After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.
Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.
Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.
The Democratic victory in 2006 was narrow. They won the House by 85,961 votes out of over 80 million cast and the Senate by a mere 3,562 out of over 62 million cast. A party that wins control by that narrow margin can quickly see its fortunes reversed when it fails to act responsibly, fails to fulfill its promises, and fails to lead.
Mr. Rove is a former adviser to President George W. Bush.
This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.
The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.
Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.
Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.
After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.
After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.
Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.
Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.
The Democratic victory in 2006 was narrow. They won the House by 85,961 votes out of over 80 million cast and the Senate by a mere 3,562 out of over 62 million cast. A party that wins control by that narrow margin can quickly see its fortunes reversed when it fails to act responsibly, fails to fulfill its promises, and fails to lead.
more...
ravi09
05-12 01:52 PM
Hello Folks,
My H1b is 2 and half years old. I transferred it once, i.e in 2007
My brother has got GC a year ago and started his own company. I am planning to transfer it to him.
I have these following questions.
1. What is the risk on transferring my H1 to a new/small company in this recession period, and the employee strength is just one (my brother).
2. Is it ok to transfer more than one time in short period(i.e in 2 years span)?
3. Also, is it acceptable to stay outside US for couple of months on H1 status with out payroll? Will that be a problem at POE when i return to US?
4) Right now i am out of the project (on bench), so will that be any risk of my H1 transfer getting denied ?
Please help!
Best Regards,
Ravi
My H1b is 2 and half years old. I transferred it once, i.e in 2007
My brother has got GC a year ago and started his own company. I am planning to transfer it to him.
I have these following questions.
1. What is the risk on transferring my H1 to a new/small company in this recession period, and the employee strength is just one (my brother).
2. Is it ok to transfer more than one time in short period(i.e in 2 years span)?
3. Also, is it acceptable to stay outside US for couple of months on H1 status with out payroll? Will that be a problem at POE when i return to US?
4) Right now i am out of the project (on bench), so will that be any risk of my H1 transfer getting denied ?
Please help!
Best Regards,
Ravi
smsthss
07-18 12:21 PM
Hi,
There is an article in AILA about VISA BULLETIN REVERSAL: NOW WHAT?. Does anybody have any access to that..
There is an article in AILA about VISA BULLETIN REVERSAL: NOW WHAT?. Does anybody have any access to that..
more...
brick2006
11-30 12:03 PM
hello...
I was on H1.. but i quit my job and i am currently enrolled as a Full time student.
I need to go to Mexico as part of my Study program....
I have received the change of status from USCIS..but i need to get my passport stamped..
I have not been successful in getting an appointment in Canada....
>> Can i go to mexico and get the visa stamped during my stay there..is it risky???
>> i cam here on F1-h1-now back to F1.... do i have to go to my country of origin to get my visa stamped.
inputs Pleaseeeee..
I was on H1.. but i quit my job and i am currently enrolled as a Full time student.
I need to go to Mexico as part of my Study program....
I have received the change of status from USCIS..but i need to get my passport stamped..
I have not been successful in getting an appointment in Canada....
>> Can i go to mexico and get the visa stamped during my stay there..is it risky???
>> i cam here on F1-h1-now back to F1.... do i have to go to my country of origin to get my visa stamped.
inputs Pleaseeeee..
2010 Short Hair Styles
milestogo
03-30 05:10 PM
Hello, could some one help to answer this question.
Can I work part time on EAD, while I-485 is pending, without loosing my status? What could be potential issues?
I want to go back to school and complete a master's degree.
Thanks
:)
Can I work part time on EAD, while I-485 is pending, without loosing my status? What could be potential issues?
I want to go back to school and complete a master's degree.
Thanks
:)
more...
cox
January 17th, 2005, 11:33 PM
Commented on a few...
hair Women Short Haircuts Picture
ashpoor
05-20 11:25 AM
Hi
I want to transfer my H1-b from a consultant company to a non-profilt organization which is offering me a full time job. I haven't resigned my job at consultant company yet. The LCA process is going on with new non-profilt organisation and then they are going to apply for H-1B petition soon. I am worried if the consultant company will cancel my visa as soon as I resign and that would cause issues for the H-1b transfer. Please advice when is it safe time to resign and start my new job.
I want to transfer my H1-b from a consultant company to a non-profilt organization which is offering me a full time job. I haven't resigned my job at consultant company yet. The LCA process is going on with new non-profilt organisation and then they are going to apply for H-1B petition soon. I am worried if the consultant company will cancel my visa as soon as I resign and that would cause issues for the H-1b transfer. Please advice when is it safe time to resign and start my new job.
more...
neel_gump
08-28 10:43 AM
we should assume as "no changes" from previous week ;)
hot Hairstyles for Short Hair
JunRN
05-14 08:00 PM
It depends. It may become 'U" but if your application is already 'pre-allocated a visa' during June, then you may still get some news in July.
But I do believe it will not become 'U' in July. Maybe in August and September it will become 'U'.
But I do believe it will not become 'U' in July. Maybe in August and September it will become 'U'.
more...
house on hair styles.
natrajs
09-05 03:19 PM
Good Find
tattoo Short Layered Haircuts
EkAurAaya
06-14 09:59 AM
ENJOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!
Everyone has 1 month file and forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
Uparwala deta hai to chappar faaad ke deta hai!
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html
Everyone has 1 month file and forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
Uparwala deta hai to chappar faaad ke deta hai!
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html
more...
pictures Hairstyles for short hair
immm
07-18 03:35 PM
This is purely my opinion and may not be the best legal advice. If I were in the same situation, I would go by the EB type (EB2 first) and then by the priority dates. Whichever one is higher, I would apply both in that classification. If both I-140's are EB3 and same priority dates, I would go with the one with better job security (stable employer and job) and keep the other I-140 as backup. In this day and age of corporate acquisitions, mergers and bankruptcies and USCIS backlogs, you want to use the option with the least risk.
dresses hair, Short Hairstyle,
tmonu
05-29 06:52 PM
I entered usa in H4 visa in july 2008 , while my H1 was applied from india in april 2008 ,and H1 got approved . now my employer is forcing me to do COS(H4 to H1) or go to india for stamping because he can't hold my H1 in a approved state so long . due to current market condition and so many rejections i am afraid to go for COS . He is asking $2800 only for regular COS processing !!!! thats too high , he is going to file fresh H1 petition I129 along with COS I539 .
my question is
instead of applying fresh H1 petition i.e I129 , since my H1 is already in approved state so can i apply only I539 for changing my status ?
my question is
instead of applying fresh H1 petition i.e I129 , since my H1 is already in approved state so can i apply only I539 for changing my status ?
more...
makeup short haircuts for women
maverick_joe
06-18 03:02 PM
are colored photocopies of i-94/passport bio pages, DL required for paper filing the EAD/AP extensions? My employer asks for colored copies!
girlfriend Pixie short hair always nice
siddar
12-09 01:19 PM
Are you really sure that your H1B is still valid? My understanding is, only one type of Visa will be issued to a country for an individual, they cancel previously valid visas.
hairstyles Post Title → Short Hairstyles
soms
11-18 01:55 PM
Hello,
I am on a H1B with company A. I've been offered a job with company B which is currently processing my H1 transfer paperwork. I had accepted the offer letter from company B and had submitted all my papers for H1B transfer.
The starting date in the company B is 20th Nov as per offer letter. Now I had decided to stay back with the company A (by 18th Nov) before joining the company B. Is there any issue by doing so?
I am on a H1B with company A. I've been offered a job with company B which is currently processing my H1 transfer paperwork. I had accepted the offer letter from company B and had submitted all my papers for H1B transfer.
The starting date in the company B is 20th Nov as per offer letter. Now I had decided to stay back with the company A (by 18th Nov) before joining the company B. Is there any issue by doing so?
tabletpc
07-30 12:59 PM
Can I change to different employer while the i140 is pending and also keep the PD. What i would like to do is..i want to change to a different employer and ask the present employer to keep the i-140 process as it is.
Is it ok if the i-140 gets approved while i no longer work for that company. I understand if i get any RFE, then employer need to respond accordingly.
Thanks in advacne for u r inputs....
Is it ok if the i-140 gets approved while i no longer work for that company. I understand if i get any RFE, then employer need to respond accordingly.
Thanks in advacne for u r inputs....
ivgclive
09-21 12:19 PM
D
No comments:
Post a Comment