imh1b
07-15 12:59 PM
I saw Immigration Voice name on
Members | CompeteAmerica (http://competeamerica.org/about/2010-members)
It should give us more lobbying power?
Members | CompeteAmerica (http://competeamerica.org/about/2010-members)
It should give us more lobbying power?
wallpaper Leia Pictures amp; Graphics
psychman
02-08 08:49 PM
Hello. I am playing around with making a little app that allows me to draw a polygon shape and then determine how many rectangles can fit inside that shape. The rectangles only have two widths, but can be as long as needed.
It occurred to me that I might somehow be able to have that polygon shape act like a wrap panel and the rectangles inside would self-adjust based on the space provided. Two questions:
1) Is it possible to make a wrap panel with custom borders (not just rectangular)?
2) Is there an equivalent component, to the wrap panel, in Flash? If so, can that component have custom borders?
Thanks very much!
It occurred to me that I might somehow be able to have that polygon shape act like a wrap panel and the rectangles inside would self-adjust based on the space provided. Two questions:
1) Is it possible to make a wrap panel with custom borders (not just rectangular)?
2) Is there an equivalent component, to the wrap panel, in Flash? If so, can that component have custom borders?
Thanks very much!
maddipati1
12-09 04:20 PM
one of my friend worked here on L1 for couple of years for employer A.
then he got a H1 approved effective from Oct'07, with employer B.
but, he did not actually start working under employer B on H1 (payroll) until Mar'08.
he continued working under employer A on L1 ( has paystubs without any break) until Mar'08 and then worked with employer B on H1.
now he did a cap-exmpt H1 transfer to employer C, got H1 apporved and they are filing for GC labor PERM petition.
question is, while providing his previous employers info in the PERM petition,
can he say that he worked with employer A on L1 until Mar'08, even though his H1 with employer B is effective from oct'07?
appreciate any advice
then he got a H1 approved effective from Oct'07, with employer B.
but, he did not actually start working under employer B on H1 (payroll) until Mar'08.
he continued working under employer A on L1 ( has paystubs without any break) until Mar'08 and then worked with employer B on H1.
now he did a cap-exmpt H1 transfer to employer C, got H1 apporved and they are filing for GC labor PERM petition.
question is, while providing his previous employers info in the PERM petition,
can he say that he worked with employer A on L1 until Mar'08, even though his H1 with employer B is effective from oct'07?
appreciate any advice
2011 princess leia slave cosplay.
dealsnet
08-26 03:46 PM
My friend approved PERM in EB2 have qualification 3 year B.SC + 1 Year B.Ed + 2 year MSc. total 6 years of college, filed I-140 and was denied because of education. The labor is for Masters with 0-1 year experience. But they want 4 year degree prior to masters, citing EDGE database. Now the appeal is with AAO.
My question:
1. Do he can apply with the same labor for EB3 ?. What is the chance with two I-140 with same labor ?
( He filed I-140 for EB2 with that labor before 6 months of PERM certification. The PERM certified on April 2009 )
2. Or he need to do a fresh PERM with EB3 as a backup till the AAO verdict ? (takes 22 months)
My question:
1. Do he can apply with the same labor for EB3 ?. What is the chance with two I-140 with same labor ?
( He filed I-140 for EB2 with that labor before 6 months of PERM certification. The PERM certified on April 2009 )
2. Or he need to do a fresh PERM with EB3 as a backup till the AAO verdict ? (takes 22 months)
more...
pappu
09-14 04:40 PM
Please visit the forums this weekend
We may have more info, updates or announcements. So visit IV site frequently. We know we will post some information on Sunday.
We may have more info, updates or announcements. So visit IV site frequently. We know we will post some information on Sunday.
nkhari
01-11 03:50 PM
EB2 is unavailable and will be so until end of september when new visas will be released (according to Murthy)
Sit back, relax and enjoy (sorry)
Thanks,
Hari
Sit back, relax and enjoy (sorry)
Thanks,
Hari
more...
glus
10-18 10:32 AM
Yes, it can be transferred. Fees will include a fee for I-129 ($320) and a fraud prevention fee, which is $500. The employer fee is waived if the non-for-profit company qualifies as non-profit under the U.S. immigration laws.
2010 Hot Nerd Girl - Star Wars
samuel5028
03-21 02:06 AM
Maybe few visas might get rejected because they would have tried to stay in USA permanently. Yes, you may apply for L1 visa extension using Form I-129, and L Supplement. Extensions of two years at a time may be allowed until you have been in the U.S. for a total of seven years if you are a manager or executive.
more...
iad2ead
02-10 09:07 AM
Avoid EAD if possible. Move using H1B transfer.
good luck
Iad
good luck
Iad
hair hot Princess Leia Slave Bikini
test101
07-19 10:28 AM
there are gazillion bazillion threads for july filers. Can we have one thread only.
thanks
thanks
more...
MunnaBhai
01-08 11:53 PM
I have been using his services since 2003. Very Professional, intelligent and resonable fees. Turnaround time is very quick
http://www.habbulaw.com
http://www.habbulaw.com
hot star wars princess leia hair.
gezzus234
04-01 02:11 AM
is there a way wit the extrusion or lathe option so actually bend a shape such as a cylinder
or is it much easier wit 3d max?
or is it much easier wit 3d max?
more...
house Star Wars Lovely Leia Paper
rkp27
10-28 11:15 AM
I was cited under open container law in state of NJ newark pennstation.will this impact on my immigration status . I am a july 2007 filer waiting for the GC and working on EAD
tattoo Star Wars Princess Leia Slave
kirupa
08-07 11:54 AM
The competition was finished ages ago, but new stamps can still be added :)
more...
pictures hairstyles star wars princess
Blog Feeds
07-15 03:01 PM
Israeli-born Gadi Amit heads up New Deal Design, a design firm that has collaborated with many of America's best known companies to bring products that are not only memorable for their functions, but also for their look. His latest creation is the Fitbit, a fitness product that is like a pedometer on steroids. He was also responsible for the memorable look of the Slingbox. Browse around on the New Deal Design web site if you want to see some very cool looking products. Amit is also a blogger for Fast Company Magazine, a publication I read regularly. You can read...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/immigrant-of-the-day-gadi-amit-product-designer.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/immigrant-of-the-day-gadi-amit-product-designer.html)
dresses Star Wars Secrets: Leia#39;s
dreamworld
06-30 12:02 AM
if i were you, at this stage of GC drama. hold on another week and see how the GC drama continues. Then plan on your career. We have already messed our career with GC drama. So wait for a week before making any employer change...
more...
makeup Baby Girl Princess Leia Star
sent4dc
05-08 02:38 AM
Hi everyone:
Can someone suggest if I'm in a hot water over this issue. My company applied for the labor certification back in Dec. 2002. In the Labor Certification form they quoted 40 for the "Total hours per week". The LC was approved back in July of 2007. Later in Sept. of 2007 we filed I-140 and I-485 concurrently.
In April of this year my company received an RFE for the I-140, where USCIS requested some additional translations and my W-2 forms for all the years of my employment. We've responded to it.
So here's my question. Since 2002 my working schedule changed and now I work 32 hours per week, that is different than 40, which was included in the LC. It doesn't say anywhere in my W-2's, but one can easily see that I'm being paid less by doing some simple math.
Do you think this would pose a problem and if so, what shall I do at this point?
Thank you in advance!
Can someone suggest if I'm in a hot water over this issue. My company applied for the labor certification back in Dec. 2002. In the Labor Certification form they quoted 40 for the "Total hours per week". The LC was approved back in July of 2007. Later in Sept. of 2007 we filed I-140 and I-485 concurrently.
In April of this year my company received an RFE for the I-140, where USCIS requested some additional translations and my W-2 forms for all the years of my employment. We've responded to it.
So here's my question. Since 2002 my working schedule changed and now I work 32 hours per week, that is different than 40, which was included in the LC. It doesn't say anywhere in my W-2's, but one can easily see that I'm being paid less by doing some simple math.
Do you think this would pose a problem and if so, what shall I do at this point?
Thank you in advance!
girlfriend star wars princess leia slave
rajeshiv
06-21 03:16 PM
Hi,
The doctor I went for Medical exam, he is not placing the 693 and supplement to 693 in the sealed cover. He is using his own form that I filled when I first went there and placing that form in the sealed cover.
Please suggest will INS accept any form other then 693?
I want to make sure what are the forms that need to be in sealed cover before I argue with the doctor.
I appreciate for your inputs.
Sorry to start a new thread.
Thanks
Raj..
The doctor I went for Medical exam, he is not placing the 693 and supplement to 693 in the sealed cover. He is using his own form that I filled when I first went there and placing that form in the sealed cover.
Please suggest will INS accept any form other then 693?
I want to make sure what are the forms that need to be in sealed cover before I argue with the doctor.
I appreciate for your inputs.
Sorry to start a new thread.
Thanks
Raj..
hairstyles Mouseover the photos. Star
Macaca
05-15 10:07 AM
Congress's Start (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/12/AR2007051201099.html) -- It's time to begin recording concrete achievements, Sunday, May 13, 2007
FOUR MONTHS into the 110th Congress is too early to assign grades to the new Democratic majority -- but not too soon to remind lawmakers that most of their self-assigned tasks remain undone; that progress in the next few months on immigration, trade and lobbying reform is critical; and that this Congress will be judged on what it accomplished -- and on where it punted.
The biggest punt thus far concerns entitlement spending, an issue on which the administration, chiefly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., has been seeking to jump-start discussions. This is an auspicious moment that Democrats seem determined to squander. First, the Democratic Congress has a lame-duck Republican president who could take, or at least share, the blame for cuts that will have to be part of any solution. Second, as members of Congress well know, the longer they wait to take on Medicare and, particularly, Social Security, the harder the problem they will face.
Democrats have seized on Vice President Cheney's comments to Fox News in January about raising payroll taxes -- "This president has been very, very clear on his position on taxes, and nothing's changed" -- as a rationale for why they can't risk bargaining with the administration. But this is an excuse, not a legitimate basis for inaction. After all, Mr. Cheney also said there would be "no preconditions."
Meanwhile, lawmakers for the most part have used their oversight powers usefully, though we wish more energy were spent examining torture policies, for instance, and less on subpoenaing the secretary of state. Although the budget process has yet to play itself out, the adoption of tough pay-as-you-go rules to constrain new mandatory spending has had a surprisingly beneficial effect in restraining demands for new programs. The Senate's passage of a measure to strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers is an important step.
Still unanswered is whether Democrats will deliver on their campaign promises and whether both sides will find ways to forge consensus on issues of common concern. House Democrats' "Six for '06" campaign pledge has so far amounted to "None in '07." Much of this (federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, for instance) is out of Democrats' control, given the Senate's supermajority rules and President Bush's veto pen; in some cases (having Medicare negotiate drug prices, for example), that's just as well. But even such relatively noncontroversial matters as increasing the minimum wage remain undone. Voters are starting to notice, and the coming weeks will be crucial for Democrats to put some actual accomplishments on the board.
On a matter that is within their control, it's still uncertain whether House Democrats will produce a lobbying and ethics reform package worthy of their campaign pledges to end the "culture of corruption." The key tests will be whether lawmakers require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign cash they deliver (as the Senate version of the measure has done) and whether the House will create a more credible ethics process, including some kind of independent arm to assess and investigate ethics allegations.
On immigration, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is right to bring to the floor last year's measure, which won the support of 23 Republicans. The clock is ticking on this incendiary topic, and the administration has not improved matters by pushing an unbalanced and punitive plan. If Mr. Bush is looking for a legacy issue beyond Iraq, this could be it, but he is, so far, blowing the chance.
On trade, an agreement that seems to clear the way for approval of trade pacts with Peru and Panama is a start, but only that. Much more important is the passage of deals with Colombia and South Korea, and extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which is needed to complete a new global trade treaty. Congressional leaders should work with Mr. Bush to extend the authority -- not because they like or trust him but because doing so will be better for the economy in which they, too, have an important stake.
FOUR MONTHS into the 110th Congress is too early to assign grades to the new Democratic majority -- but not too soon to remind lawmakers that most of their self-assigned tasks remain undone; that progress in the next few months on immigration, trade and lobbying reform is critical; and that this Congress will be judged on what it accomplished -- and on where it punted.
The biggest punt thus far concerns entitlement spending, an issue on which the administration, chiefly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., has been seeking to jump-start discussions. This is an auspicious moment that Democrats seem determined to squander. First, the Democratic Congress has a lame-duck Republican president who could take, or at least share, the blame for cuts that will have to be part of any solution. Second, as members of Congress well know, the longer they wait to take on Medicare and, particularly, Social Security, the harder the problem they will face.
Democrats have seized on Vice President Cheney's comments to Fox News in January about raising payroll taxes -- "This president has been very, very clear on his position on taxes, and nothing's changed" -- as a rationale for why they can't risk bargaining with the administration. But this is an excuse, not a legitimate basis for inaction. After all, Mr. Cheney also said there would be "no preconditions."
Meanwhile, lawmakers for the most part have used their oversight powers usefully, though we wish more energy were spent examining torture policies, for instance, and less on subpoenaing the secretary of state. Although the budget process has yet to play itself out, the adoption of tough pay-as-you-go rules to constrain new mandatory spending has had a surprisingly beneficial effect in restraining demands for new programs. The Senate's passage of a measure to strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers is an important step.
Still unanswered is whether Democrats will deliver on their campaign promises and whether both sides will find ways to forge consensus on issues of common concern. House Democrats' "Six for '06" campaign pledge has so far amounted to "None in '07." Much of this (federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, for instance) is out of Democrats' control, given the Senate's supermajority rules and President Bush's veto pen; in some cases (having Medicare negotiate drug prices, for example), that's just as well. But even such relatively noncontroversial matters as increasing the minimum wage remain undone. Voters are starting to notice, and the coming weeks will be crucial for Democrats to put some actual accomplishments on the board.
On a matter that is within their control, it's still uncertain whether House Democrats will produce a lobbying and ethics reform package worthy of their campaign pledges to end the "culture of corruption." The key tests will be whether lawmakers require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign cash they deliver (as the Senate version of the measure has done) and whether the House will create a more credible ethics process, including some kind of independent arm to assess and investigate ethics allegations.
On immigration, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is right to bring to the floor last year's measure, which won the support of 23 Republicans. The clock is ticking on this incendiary topic, and the administration has not improved matters by pushing an unbalanced and punitive plan. If Mr. Bush is looking for a legacy issue beyond Iraq, this could be it, but he is, so far, blowing the chance.
On trade, an agreement that seems to clear the way for approval of trade pacts with Peru and Panama is a start, but only that. Much more important is the passage of deals with Colombia and South Korea, and extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which is needed to complete a new global trade treaty. Congressional leaders should work with Mr. Bush to extend the authority -- not because they like or trust him but because doing so will be better for the economy in which they, too, have an important stake.
sk.aggarwal
11-05 10:21 AM
A consultant in my project recently got his visa stamped in India. He didn't faced any issues. They didn't even ask for client letter. I guess he is just lucky :).
I am going to India next month and need to get my visa stamped. I work for a TARP employer ... Lets see how it goes.
I am going to India next month and need to get my visa stamped. I work for a TARP employer ... Lets see how it goes.
terpcurt
February 5th, 2005, 06:45 PM
WOW./....... Just wow