eb3retro
02-24 03:49 PM
To whom it may concern, please, help us. Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
crap..who are you.???
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
crap..who are you.???
dionysus
01-16 07:53 PM
Earlier, INS used to be very lenient with H1B transfer without current paystubs. I know of cases where people got H1 transfered without having paystubs for more than a year!
However, seems like of late CIS has woken up to the shady practices of H1 consultant body shops, and is aware of the fact that many consultants are living in this country without working and without paystubs. So they are becoming more stringent with regards to paystub evidence.
I also have a feeling that most such requests are coming from Vermont service center where many H1 petitions are hanging.
To answer your question, in the absence of any paystubs, prepare a nice letter to CIS explaining the situation, and then leave it to your destiny. US immigration processes like H1 and GC always had an element of chance in it. It is always helpful to be ready for any eventuality in such a dicey game.
However, seems like of late CIS has woken up to the shady practices of H1 consultant body shops, and is aware of the fact that many consultants are living in this country without working and without paystubs. So they are becoming more stringent with regards to paystub evidence.
I also have a feeling that most such requests are coming from Vermont service center where many H1 petitions are hanging.
To answer your question, in the absence of any paystubs, prepare a nice letter to CIS explaining the situation, and then leave it to your destiny. US immigration processes like H1 and GC always had an element of chance in it. It is always helpful to be ready for any eventuality in such a dicey game.
dval_dpal
12-27 02:21 PM
hello guys...
i'm about to spend 180k to open a business in month or so....am i eligible for this?
thank you for your inputs..
i'm about to spend 180k to open a business in month or so....am i eligible for this?
thank you for your inputs..
linuxra
07-23 02:31 PM
I got an rfe on employment v l and history of 5 year in oct 2009 replied dec 2009
after that no update?how abt u?
after that no update?how abt u?
more...
sgorla
02-20 03:30 PM
Out of 105960 filed applications, 79,782 applications have been certified, and Indians have 22,298, which is almost 28 % (DOL certified EB petitions).
I was looking at the flcdatacenter website for Perm labors filed in 2006, and here are the numbers of total perm filed :
Total : 105960
India : 26636 = 25.2%
China : 8222 = 7.75%
No wonder china is moving faster in the EB categories
I was looking at the flcdatacenter website for Perm labors filed in 2006, and here are the numbers of total perm filed :
Total : 105960
India : 26636 = 25.2%
China : 8222 = 7.75%
No wonder china is moving faster in the EB categories
ArunAntonio
08-31 12:33 AM
And I can get your country registered.
The registration comes with
- A free template to help you draft a constition
- Free template designs for the flag of the nation
- A dummies guide on how to make your country the most powerful nation.
- A dummies guide on fool proof immigration laws to your country
- A free guide on the mistakes of the empires of the past.
To avail the above you will have to send a cashiers cheque in $$ (Your countries currency is not accepted .. yet)
-- All monies from this transaction will go towards sponsoring IV members for the Rally.
-- Vote here --> http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12441
The registration comes with
- A free template to help you draft a constition
- Free template designs for the flag of the nation
- A dummies guide on how to make your country the most powerful nation.
- A dummies guide on fool proof immigration laws to your country
- A free guide on the mistakes of the empires of the past.
To avail the above you will have to send a cashiers cheque in $$ (Your countries currency is not accepted .. yet)
-- All monies from this transaction will go towards sponsoring IV members for the Rally.
-- Vote here --> http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12441
more...
EB3June03
06-18 01:08 PM
From:- http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/civil_surgeon_ltr.pdf
Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons
A new TB classification (Class B: Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment) should be used for all applicants who are recent arrivals to the United States (less than 5 years) from countries with a high TB prevalence, with a Mantoux TST reaction of 10 mm or greater of induration, and no evidence of TB disease. See Section V of the TB Technical Instructions for other conditions for which referral for evaluation for treatment of latent TB infection is recommended. The civil surgeon should pro-actively contact the TB Control Program of the local health department to identify specific sources of treatment for latent TB infection and make the appropriate referral.
What if the applicant is NOT a recent arrival in US and does NOT have any evidence of TB disease? I hope there is another category for that (which might be exempt from treatment).
Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons
A new TB classification (Class B: Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment) should be used for all applicants who are recent arrivals to the United States (less than 5 years) from countries with a high TB prevalence, with a Mantoux TST reaction of 10 mm or greater of induration, and no evidence of TB disease. See Section V of the TB Technical Instructions for other conditions for which referral for evaluation for treatment of latent TB infection is recommended. The civil surgeon should pro-actively contact the TB Control Program of the local health department to identify specific sources of treatment for latent TB infection and make the appropriate referral.
What if the applicant is NOT a recent arrival in US and does NOT have any evidence of TB disease? I hope there is another category for that (which might be exempt from treatment).
humdesi
02-17 02:13 AM
There's nothing new in that website. EB-2 India for entire FY is GONE.. FINIS.. KHATAM... KHALLAS.
Theoretically there might be some spillover if EB-3 RoW doesn't get used. But with namecheck requirements lifted and EB-3 RoW advanced so early, I doubt there's going to be any spillover.
Bottomline - wait till Oct for EB-2 India. Big question is at what date will it open and how fast will it move. Well, we saw how EB-2 became unavailable even after retrogressing to Jan 2000. So not much hope of going beyond 2001, even after Oct....
Theoretically there might be some spillover if EB-3 RoW doesn't get used. But with namecheck requirements lifted and EB-3 RoW advanced so early, I doubt there's going to be any spillover.
Bottomline - wait till Oct for EB-2 India. Big question is at what date will it open and how fast will it move. Well, we saw how EB-2 became unavailable even after retrogressing to Jan 2000. So not much hope of going beyond 2001, even after Oct....
more...
AirWaterandGC
05-12 10:09 AM
Thank you for taking action on AILA's Contact Congress website. If you'd like to get more involved in our advocacy efforts, please contact AILA's Manager of Grassroots Advocacy, Jenny Levy.
Your message was sent to:
Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)
Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)
Representative J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL 14th)
This is a suggestion for members using AILA tool. While we appreciate AILA for creating these useful tools, IV is not part of this AILA campaign.
If you want to use the AILA tool. Use your own letter and not AILA letter. Make sure not to use words like 'H1B' and 'illegal/undocumented' in the letter. Lawmaker offices will look at it and will not even care to read it fully. They will assume it is for H1B increase or about illegal immigration. Sometimes you will get an automated reply that has nothing to do with your issues you raised in your letter.
There are some good letter templates in http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3999
and some of them do not use H1B word at all. They are totally focussed on 'Green card'. You can choose to use any one of them. As we see the progress on CIR IV will have its own webfax and call the lawmakers campaign.
Your message was sent to:
Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)
Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)
Representative J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL 14th)
This is a suggestion for members using AILA tool. While we appreciate AILA for creating these useful tools, IV is not part of this AILA campaign.
If you want to use the AILA tool. Use your own letter and not AILA letter. Make sure not to use words like 'H1B' and 'illegal/undocumented' in the letter. Lawmaker offices will look at it and will not even care to read it fully. They will assume it is for H1B increase or about illegal immigration. Sometimes you will get an automated reply that has nothing to do with your issues you raised in your letter.
There are some good letter templates in http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3999
and some of them do not use H1B word at all. They are totally focussed on 'Green card'. You can choose to use any one of them. As we see the progress on CIR IV will have its own webfax and call the lawmakers campaign.
pappu
01-30 05:46 PM
http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/4480oomshiva
Do not post the same link on multiple threads. They will be deleted. Just post on the thread where it is useful. There is a news article thread where you should post your links.
Do not post the same link on multiple threads. They will be deleted. Just post on the thread where it is useful. There is a news article thread where you should post your links.
more...
Jerry2121
07-06 09:26 PM
Hello ,
Here is a run down on my case:
First I-485 applied in 6/2002,
Fingerprint done, EAD obtained in 2/03
Application withdrawn by spouse due to conviction
Second I-485 applied by my 2nd DW in 7/05
Interview granted in 5/06
Case still pending due name check
GC? till date
Anyone with a similar case and any advice on this case? I've spent about 30K USD on this case on Lawyers and still have NOT got any decision from the USCIS. Now , I'm considering filing a WOM. Whats your take on this? Thanks !
Here is a run down on my case:
First I-485 applied in 6/2002,
Fingerprint done, EAD obtained in 2/03
Application withdrawn by spouse due to conviction
Second I-485 applied by my 2nd DW in 7/05
Interview granted in 5/06
Case still pending due name check
GC? till date
Anyone with a similar case and any advice on this case? I've spent about 30K USD on this case on Lawyers and still have NOT got any decision from the USCIS. Now , I'm considering filing a WOM. Whats your take on this? Thanks !
abhijitp
01-25 01:35 PM
Volunteers all over the country are helping this effort outside of a local train station in SF Bay area, and members who live within 2 miles of the train station don't even read their mails!
Thanks Janislal and Kicca.
Together, we will make the admin fixes HAPPEN!
Thanks Janislal and Kicca.
Together, we will make the admin fixes HAPPEN!
more...
tmskhan
05-25 02:18 PM
thanks dude..
if you don't mind, can you please answer few questions?
Did u take help from any third party guys who arrange things for you like bank draft/getting mexican permit and other stuff?
Could you list out documents you carried for stamping?
Yes I contacted one of the agents I found on the internet (mexico assistance) who arranged the trip and the hotel accomodations on both sides of the border. I carried all the documents that are usually asked for stamping but the VO wanted to see only my employement verification letter.
if you don't mind, can you please answer few questions?
Did u take help from any third party guys who arrange things for you like bank draft/getting mexican permit and other stuff?
Could you list out documents you carried for stamping?
Yes I contacted one of the agents I found on the internet (mexico assistance) who arranged the trip and the hotel accomodations on both sides of the border. I carried all the documents that are usually asked for stamping but the VO wanted to see only my employement verification letter.
Nil
11-10 02:54 PM
^^^^
more...
mambarg
08-03 05:18 PM
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
Question 12. Can the 180 days that an I-485 application must be pending for I-140 portability eligibility accrue during a period when visa numbers are unavailable?
Answer: Yes. The fact that a visa number becomes unavailable after the filing of the I-485 application does not stop the number of days required for I-140 portability eligibility from accruing.
Question 13. Does the alien�s priority date change as a result of porting under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: No. The priority date continues to be determined at the time of the initial labor certification filing with the Department of Labor or at the time the initial I-140 immigrant petition is filed with USCIS (in cases where no labor certification is required).
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for �same or similar� employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
Question 12. Can the 180 days that an I-485 application must be pending for I-140 portability eligibility accrue during a period when visa numbers are unavailable?
Answer: Yes. The fact that a visa number becomes unavailable after the filing of the I-485 application does not stop the number of days required for I-140 portability eligibility from accruing.
Question 13. Does the alien�s priority date change as a result of porting under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: No. The priority date continues to be determined at the time of the initial labor certification filing with the Department of Labor or at the time the initial I-140 immigrant petition is filed with USCIS (in cases where no labor certification is required).
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for �same or similar� employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
Vet04
12-08 12:47 PM
" kumar1" - What has salary to do with questions or coming to forum? Sorry,I didn't get your point here. I have seen people post all sorts of questions and problems in this forum.
Thank you very much for the time to write your views though ,specially the cons, I would definitely like to know the cons too.
thanx sri, lord and smisachu for the answers.
Thank you very much for the time to write your views though ,specially the cons, I would definitely like to know the cons too.
thanx sri, lord and smisachu for the answers.
more...
noone2day78
02-10 04:32 PM
Hi all,
I have received my EAD in oct 07 and my AP last month, with my spouse being primary applicant. Currently I am on h1b, however, I have a better offer at hand thro another employer who does not sponsor h1b. I was searching for posts on comparing h1b vs ead..but could not locate one.
Could someone enlighten me on this issue as to what wld be common issues that are raised if one switches to ead (other than the possibility of being out of status). I am presuming that if my spouse stays on h1b I can switch to h4 status if required?
Please advice..I need to make a decision this weekend!!
Thanks
San
I have received my EAD in oct 07 and my AP last month, with my spouse being primary applicant. Currently I am on h1b, however, I have a better offer at hand thro another employer who does not sponsor h1b. I was searching for posts on comparing h1b vs ead..but could not locate one.
Could someone enlighten me on this issue as to what wld be common issues that are raised if one switches to ead (other than the possibility of being out of status). I am presuming that if my spouse stays on h1b I can switch to h4 status if required?
Please advice..I need to make a decision this weekend!!
Thanks
San
cox
November 25th, 2005, 03:26 PM
Thanks for the feedback, guys. Yeah, the DoF was insufficient, and that also made focusing difficult. The flower movement was irritating, and I need to learn to deal with that. I'm just getting started here. It seems that the reaction to the dark/light treatment is pretty split, maybe a little in favor of the light. I had two very different days lighting-wise, and got these contrasing shots. I kind of lean to the dark one, but they each have a different personality.
Gary, thanks for the tips. I was having a terrible time with the flower movement. I was on a tripod, remote shutter, 2.5x eyepiece and couldn't get the image crisp at smaller aperture. I finally figured out that it was small flower movements that were killing me. I moved to shallower DoF to get a faster shutter. Do you have any tips for holding the plant steady? You have some incredible shots, and must have come up with some techniques for immobilizing the flower without it showing up in the photo. I'd be grateful if you could share...
Gary, thanks for the tips. I was having a terrible time with the flower movement. I was on a tripod, remote shutter, 2.5x eyepiece and couldn't get the image crisp at smaller aperture. I finally figured out that it was small flower movements that were killing me. I moved to shallower DoF to get a faster shutter. Do you have any tips for holding the plant steady? You have some incredible shots, and must have come up with some techniques for immobilizing the flower without it showing up in the photo. I'd be grateful if you could share...
FinalGC
12-02 02:55 PM
I heard that if the labor is approved and h1b is about to expire, I can apply I-140 under premium processing due to a recent rule change>>>
>>This is not true for your case, since you did not apply for GC 365 days prior to completion of 6 year h1.....
You cannot transfer to H4, since the 6 year limit is for the "H" category.
I dont think you can work on OPT immediately after applying for F1.
As I think you have another option. I am giving you the conceptual idea, but check with your lawyer to see the exact details....
=> Apply for GC and also apply for F1 (check with lawyer the details).....Keep working with company until H1 expires, then jump into F1 status. Go on an extended vacation from work, maybe without pay. As soon as 140 gets approved apply for 3 year h1 (check details with lawyer), then jump back with company and continue on your new H1 and GC process....who knows you might change your mind about US in a couple of years, after earning all the $$$ and the GC might help you stay for ever...:-)
>>This is not true for your case, since you did not apply for GC 365 days prior to completion of 6 year h1.....
You cannot transfer to H4, since the 6 year limit is for the "H" category.
I dont think you can work on OPT immediately after applying for F1.
As I think you have another option. I am giving you the conceptual idea, but check with your lawyer to see the exact details....
=> Apply for GC and also apply for F1 (check with lawyer the details).....Keep working with company until H1 expires, then jump into F1 status. Go on an extended vacation from work, maybe without pay. As soon as 140 gets approved apply for 3 year h1 (check details with lawyer), then jump back with company and continue on your new H1 and GC process....who knows you might change your mind about US in a couple of years, after earning all the $$$ and the GC might help you stay for ever...:-)
ita
01-23 01:26 PM
Thank you very much for all the replies.
Online we filled D-156 form (I guess you meant D-156 right?) but where is 157 (D or I but where do you find 157 form).?
Thank you.
Online we filled D-156 form (I guess you meant D-156 right?) but where is 157 (D or I but where do you find 157 form).?
Thank you.
life99f
05-14 07:02 PM
Thank you!
No comments:
Post a Comment