GCBy3000
09-25 02:33 PM
If this is derivative, then how come H1 obtained should be counted towards H4. H1 is standalone and should not be counted.
Again, my wife is on H4 for 6 years and I did not get into 485 stage. Now she wants to go to India and come back after a one year break. If she comes back after a year on new H1, it would be fine for her. If she come back on H4, can she get a H1 after one year?
Any idea, whether this is possible?
I'm not a lawyer, but my assumption would be that this is cannot be changed by an USCIS memo. Why? Because H4 is simply a derivative status which means that it obeys all the rules pertinent to the primary beneficiary's status plus additional restrictions imposed to the particular classification by law. H status is restricted to 6 year continuous presence in the US.
It would be helpful to find the definition of a derivative status; INA does not provide such definition, but I'm sure they wouldn't be using these words loosely without a proper definition.
So my guess would be is that the answer to the question of "decoupling" H4 and H1b time will boil down to the answer to another question: what really defines a derivative status.
Again, my wife is on H4 for 6 years and I did not get into 485 stage. Now she wants to go to India and come back after a one year break. If she comes back after a year on new H1, it would be fine for her. If she come back on H4, can she get a H1 after one year?
Any idea, whether this is possible?
I'm not a lawyer, but my assumption would be that this is cannot be changed by an USCIS memo. Why? Because H4 is simply a derivative status which means that it obeys all the rules pertinent to the primary beneficiary's status plus additional restrictions imposed to the particular classification by law. H status is restricted to 6 year continuous presence in the US.
It would be helpful to find the definition of a derivative status; INA does not provide such definition, but I'm sure they wouldn't be using these words loosely without a proper definition.
So my guess would be is that the answer to the question of "decoupling" H4 and H1b time will boil down to the answer to another question: what really defines a derivative status.
wallpaper Me and me dog we travel the
acecupid
08-19 09:38 PM
If you renew your passport in US it takes approx 5-6 working days. I have done that at san francisco indian consulate. In India it may take weeks or even more than a month unless you have some connections. You know how things work in India...
I dont think you should have problems even at POE with passport expiring less than 6 months. I would suggest try to renew it in US if you have time or dont renew it at all till you come back to US. Trying to do it in India might cause delays.
I dont think you should have problems even at POE with passport expiring less than 6 months. I would suggest try to renew it in US if you have time or dont renew it at all till you come back to US. Trying to do it in India might cause delays.
teddy the dog
02-07 08:59 PM
Advance Parole. You are not alone. :)
2011 Dog A Bone: Stories, Poems
dilbert_cal
04-30 12:13 PM
One of my colleague filed his 140 in third week of March. Will update when it gets cleared.
more...
visa_reval
12-12 11:34 AM
This is a good doc to help you get started in correcting your I-94.
skynet2500
06-19 05:54 PM
same rules apply to medical center. If you donot have MMR how can they give one shot and then give the medical report when another dose is pending next month.
Does that mean those who get MMR shot at medical center have one more pending ...but got their report in advance????
They can give a report saying that second one is scheudled on a particualr date. that's what they do for people taking MMR from them. They don't give 2 MMR shots at one time.
Does that mean those who get MMR shot at medical center have one more pending ...but got their report in advance????
They can give a report saying that second one is scheudled on a particualr date. that's what they do for people taking MMR from them. They don't give 2 MMR shots at one time.
more...
saketh555
05-04 03:21 PM
I'm moving from MI to TX and need to do something address. Does premium mail forwarding service works for USCIS notices? I know regular mail forwarding doesn't work and they'll be returned to INS. Please let me know if premium service works or not.
Thanks.
Thanks.
2010 silly dog poems
maverick6993
11-07 03:17 PM
I am in Birmingham and would like to join the state cahpter.
more...
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
hair dog poems and much
ivjobs
11-09 01:48 PM
Just to keep the ideas about entrepreneurship and the group activity floating at a central place, a file has been created in the group. Any one who feels their ideas, thoughts and proposals are worth and benefit the VI entrepreneur community, please add them below. The team will review them frequently and try to implement as many as feasible in the best interests of the IV and the group.
Compilation of some of the ideas/thoughts already proposed by the entrepreneurship group members:
1. Create a Charter which describes our activities,what we want to do,
roles, responsibilities, How to address issues and conflicts among
members etc.
2. Establish a core team/board who will report to a chair and is
ultimately responsible for policies, actions etc.
3.Identify and assign responsibility to individual members
4.Clearly identify the chain of command (whose responsible for what
and who does final decision)
5. Also assign the charter/board to come up with a business plan, do
investment analysis etc for the group.
6. Chalk out any short term and long term initiatives such as
attracting and retaining folks, managing day to day affairs, sharing
the wealth of knowledge and profits.
7. Should we register a ivstartup.org domain?
its 9.99/yr at godaddy, so that we can move from an informal setup
like yahoo groups to a more formal setup...with our own forum and
all..
8.Also to meet the cost...lets have a $1 as a yearly fee (or 50
cent/month) or 10$ life long membership....that will cover the cost
of hosting.
9. Like the one proposed on IV about Housing Crisis and speedy green card approval for buying houses, why not we propose an agenda for speedy green card process for I 485 pending and aspiring/existing entrepreneurs?
10. Create a shared repository for the all the startup related information specifically targeting IV audience.
Please add in your thoughts to the above or visit
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/ivstartup/files/
Compilation of some of the ideas/thoughts already proposed by the entrepreneurship group members:
1. Create a Charter which describes our activities,what we want to do,
roles, responsibilities, How to address issues and conflicts among
members etc.
2. Establish a core team/board who will report to a chair and is
ultimately responsible for policies, actions etc.
3.Identify and assign responsibility to individual members
4.Clearly identify the chain of command (whose responsible for what
and who does final decision)
5. Also assign the charter/board to come up with a business plan, do
investment analysis etc for the group.
6. Chalk out any short term and long term initiatives such as
attracting and retaining folks, managing day to day affairs, sharing
the wealth of knowledge and profits.
7. Should we register a ivstartup.org domain?
its 9.99/yr at godaddy, so that we can move from an informal setup
like yahoo groups to a more formal setup...with our own forum and
all..
8.Also to meet the cost...lets have a $1 as a yearly fee (or 50
cent/month) or 10$ life long membership....that will cover the cost
of hosting.
9. Like the one proposed on IV about Housing Crisis and speedy green card approval for buying houses, why not we propose an agenda for speedy green card process for I 485 pending and aspiring/existing entrepreneurs?
10. Create a shared repository for the all the startup related information specifically targeting IV audience.
Please add in your thoughts to the above or visit
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/ivstartup/files/
more...
asiehouston
09-05 09:19 PM
I finally got my AP, 15 days after my EAD (100 days total) . I was happy to open the packet, until this......
THEY SENT ME MY AP WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PICTURE!!!!!!!
Everything else is Correct (address, DOB, A# etc...)
GURUS, please advise what should I do...... I am so pissed!!!!! Thankfully my EAD has the correct pic.... I had done an E-file....June 7th and my previous AP expires Sept 20
THEY SENT ME MY AP WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PICTURE!!!!!!!
Everything else is Correct (address, DOB, A# etc...)
GURUS, please advise what should I do...... I am so pissed!!!!! Thankfully my EAD has the correct pic.... I had done an E-file....June 7th and my previous AP expires Sept 20
hot galore dogs sitefunny Do
mlkedave
03-06 06:34 PM
ill vote for u then paddy
thanks for telling me about the duplicate
thanks for telling me about the duplicate
more...
house your crazy dog poems and
pa_arora
07-10 04:20 PM
India and China EB2 - 01OCT03
tattoo Dogs,funny dog funny poems
needhelp!
03-28 01:30 PM
Thanks to the volunteers putting in the efforts to work on this. Soon everything should be smoothened out.
more...
pictures dog poemsquot;, quot;dog eat dog
frostrated
07-06 03:33 PM
Using AP does not change one's immigration status. It is just a travel document. You will continue to maintain your H1-B even if you use the AP to re-enter.
Using AP has no relation to using EAD. I have confirmed this with my attorney as well.
you might want to check that yourself. From what I know, your status when you enter on AP is no longer valid. Your I-94 that you receive will reflect the status you are allowed into the country. To work in H1B status, you will either need to enter in H1 status, or adjust your status to that of H1B. Dont make a wrong move and start accuring time for working without authorization. work without authorization is grounds for deporting.
Using AP has no relation to using EAD. I have confirmed this with my attorney as well.
you might want to check that yourself. From what I know, your status when you enter on AP is no longer valid. Your I-94 that you receive will reflect the status you are allowed into the country. To work in H1B status, you will either need to enter in H1 status, or adjust your status to that of H1B. Dont make a wrong move and start accuring time for working without authorization. work without authorization is grounds for deporting.
dresses Romantic Love Poems,
joydiptac
06-01 04:53 PM
Just provide the information that they have asked for. They are about to make a decision on your case. i.e. Whether to preadjudicate or not.
So that when the numbers are available yours will be ready to send the card. :)
So that when the numbers are available yours will be ready to send the card. :)
more...
makeup quot;famous dog poemsquot;,
gcformeornot
12-31 01:23 PM
vote
girlfriend Poems middot; Showing Love
fromnaija
04-05 04:27 PM
I am in similar situation with only three months left on my H1. My strategy is to apply for three year extension through current employer (done).
Transfer to new employer only when I have an approved three year extension and then reapply PERM, I140 in EB2.
I don't think 7 months are enough to get to I140 stage. Give room for things going south and for RFE if any.
Being from ROW, porting PD is least of my worries because PD for EB2 ROW is current so I don't really have to port my PD. My only concern is if I have enough time to get my I-140 approved from the new employer so that I can continue to extend my H1B. From my calculation above, there is enough time but I am not sure if have missed any steps or miscalculated the processing times.
As for EB2 from the current company, that isn't working out well hence the drastic measure to move company.
Transfer to new employer only when I have an approved three year extension and then reapply PERM, I140 in EB2.
I don't think 7 months are enough to get to I140 stage. Give room for things going south and for RFE if any.
Being from ROW, porting PD is least of my worries because PD for EB2 ROW is current so I don't really have to port my PD. My only concern is if I have enough time to get my I-140 approved from the new employer so that I can continue to extend my H1B. From my calculation above, there is enough time but I am not sure if have missed any steps or miscalculated the processing times.
As for EB2 from the current company, that isn't working out well hence the drastic measure to move company.
hairstyles Contact luxury love poems
sk2006
07-03 03:24 AM
Here's an idea that came up in my head:
There's no use working 'towards' EB wait period issues, there will always be thorns in the roses.. Lets work 'against' EB advantages (superficially) - well this could be in parallel to 'towards' part.
Here's the agenda:
"Restrict/Prohibit all non-immigrant class workers (H1, L1 etc) from investing, be it 401k, IRAs, Regular stock investing, Real Estate investing, Forex etc"
(Before you all start bashing this, let me put down some pros & cons)...
Pros:
1. People (with immigrant intent) will not be in limbo. if you want to move back after living 5-6 yrs in US, there's nothing to pay penalty on. Today there's an early withdrawal penalty on 401K, IRA.
Like many of us - who applied for 140/485 waiting endlessly for the magic card.... investing our dear hard earned money in 401ks & other investment vehicles - only to see them lose value or worse stuck in that vehicle (Of course there's another school of thought that says if I invested 10k in 401k, & net value is now 20k & even if I withdraw it paying penalty, I will be in green..but i guess this demographic will be significantly small). My colleagues & I too procrastinated about moving back to India - but since we still have to recover our 401k/IRA losses we have been pushing the magic year a little further - but thats just me.
2. Markets/Businesses will realize the sudden disappearance of funds coming into market because of this new law & Market forces might lobby towards faster Immigrant status changes - remember this law is only for non-immigrants, Permanent residents would have no restrictions on investments.
3. We (IV community) need not work diligently on this issue. We might just have to create some numbers on folks who made good amount of money in speculating oil/natural gas/gold and driving these prices like crazy OR who have been sending profits on investments to their home country. If we at least get this ball roll, anti-immigrants like numbersusa will pick up this agenda & work 'with' us..
4. Home country flourishes.. 401k has an annual limit of 15.5k $ for 2008, 16.5K $ for 2009). Assuming 250K non-immigrants (H1s, L1s) restricted to invest, yearly 3Billion USD just disappears from markets & at least a small percentage would find its way to home country. This is just 401K. If we add IRAs and regular trading accounts, Real Estate.... Wall Street would crap in their pants - they need our money to drive their Ferraris, Lambos you know!! If Wall Street says something, Capitol Hill HAS to listen.
Cons:
1. H1s L1s wont be able to reap profits in investments. Hey at least you wont be losing your money. This is like a pseudo protection of your money if you have H1, L1 cards. Who knows? This might create huge demand for people wanting to convert from EB2/EB3 to H1 :)
If you all see any other sides of this story, you know where to find that 'reply' button.
Disclaimer: I am not looking to crash markets - just trying to leverage our situation with that of markets, with anti-immigrant groups' position as catalyst.
Also:
Ban us from buying land, cars and houses as well and see how fast media, NAR and automobile companies come out in favor of faster GC for us!
There's no use working 'towards' EB wait period issues, there will always be thorns in the roses.. Lets work 'against' EB advantages (superficially) - well this could be in parallel to 'towards' part.
Here's the agenda:
"Restrict/Prohibit all non-immigrant class workers (H1, L1 etc) from investing, be it 401k, IRAs, Regular stock investing, Real Estate investing, Forex etc"
(Before you all start bashing this, let me put down some pros & cons)...
Pros:
1. People (with immigrant intent) will not be in limbo. if you want to move back after living 5-6 yrs in US, there's nothing to pay penalty on. Today there's an early withdrawal penalty on 401K, IRA.
Like many of us - who applied for 140/485 waiting endlessly for the magic card.... investing our dear hard earned money in 401ks & other investment vehicles - only to see them lose value or worse stuck in that vehicle (Of course there's another school of thought that says if I invested 10k in 401k, & net value is now 20k & even if I withdraw it paying penalty, I will be in green..but i guess this demographic will be significantly small). My colleagues & I too procrastinated about moving back to India - but since we still have to recover our 401k/IRA losses we have been pushing the magic year a little further - but thats just me.
2. Markets/Businesses will realize the sudden disappearance of funds coming into market because of this new law & Market forces might lobby towards faster Immigrant status changes - remember this law is only for non-immigrants, Permanent residents would have no restrictions on investments.
3. We (IV community) need not work diligently on this issue. We might just have to create some numbers on folks who made good amount of money in speculating oil/natural gas/gold and driving these prices like crazy OR who have been sending profits on investments to their home country. If we at least get this ball roll, anti-immigrants like numbersusa will pick up this agenda & work 'with' us..
4. Home country flourishes.. 401k has an annual limit of 15.5k $ for 2008, 16.5K $ for 2009). Assuming 250K non-immigrants (H1s, L1s) restricted to invest, yearly 3Billion USD just disappears from markets & at least a small percentage would find its way to home country. This is just 401K. If we add IRAs and regular trading accounts, Real Estate.... Wall Street would crap in their pants - they need our money to drive their Ferraris, Lambos you know!! If Wall Street says something, Capitol Hill HAS to listen.
Cons:
1. H1s L1s wont be able to reap profits in investments. Hey at least you wont be losing your money. This is like a pseudo protection of your money if you have H1, L1 cards. Who knows? This might create huge demand for people wanting to convert from EB2/EB3 to H1 :)
If you all see any other sides of this story, you know where to find that 'reply' button.
Disclaimer: I am not looking to crash markets - just trying to leverage our situation with that of markets, with anti-immigrant groups' position as catalyst.
Also:
Ban us from buying land, cars and houses as well and see how fast media, NAR and automobile companies come out in favor of faster GC for us!
vijse
12-19 08:42 PM
For the sake of others who may search this forum in future, could you tell how you got it corrected? Thanks!
I went to a CPB defferred inspection site which was the one closest to where I live ,with my pasasport ,I-94 and my H1 petition . So the officer clearly saw it was an error and gave me a new I-94 .
I went to a CPB defferred inspection site which was the one closest to where I live ,with my pasasport ,I-94 and my H1 petition . So the officer clearly saw it was an error and gave me a new I-94 .
zzsbzz
07-14 02:30 PM
FWIW, a big technology company's lawyer are sending almost 1100 applications.
Yes. I'm not sure if you're talking about the same big technology company but one decided to go ahead with filing applications for all it's eligible employees on Thursday.
Yes. I'm not sure if you're talking about the same big technology company but one decided to go ahead with filing applications for all it's eligible employees on Thursday.
0 comments:
Post a Comment