senk1s
10-10 05:23 PM
i know 2 people jul 2 filers are still waiting
called on oct 3rd - asked to wait some more time (not in database)
called on oct 3rd - asked to wait some more time (not in database)
wallpaper Cruz has volunteered in Uganda
grimreaper
05-12 10:55 AM
:)On a lighter note, the USCIS is going to start issuing Green cards that are actually Green. So now as the name suggests, the cards are going to be "Green".
USCIS - USCIS To Issue Redesigned Green Card</br>Questions and Answers (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ab8c3893c4888210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
USCIS - USCIS To Issue Redesigned Green Card</br>Questions and Answers (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ab8c3893c4888210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
cookeroo
07-19 03:12 PM
so lets call it like that WHITE CHOCOLATE;]
http://ikaizen.pl/TDC2010.jpg
http://ikaizen.pl/TDC2010.jpg
2011 Penelope Cruz Hair. ss777
tillu
04-02 10:04 PM
Hi there,
Please correct me if i am wrong.
WH-4 Time line is within a year, means if betrayel/non payment happened with in a year from the date of reporting it will be investigated, and YOU CAN FILE WH-4 FROM OUTSIDE OF US ALSO, if your consultant company sent you back with fake commitments.
But not sure if your h1 still have time, after DOL complain, you can transfer it or not??
Anyone has any idea???
This could have been usefull to ariesbkk18.
Please confirm if this is correct.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
WH-4 Time line is within a year, means if betrayel/non payment happened with in a year from the date of reporting it will be investigated, and YOU CAN FILE WH-4 FROM OUTSIDE OF US ALSO, if your consultant company sent you back with fake commitments.
But not sure if your h1 still have time, after DOL complain, you can transfer it or not??
Anyone has any idea???
This could have been usefull to ariesbkk18.
Please confirm if this is correct.
more...
gokhale35
03-01 11:13 AM
Hello,
I applied AOS in July 07 and was waiting for my and spouse FP till now. Last week I received FP notice for my spouse but her middle name on FP notice is spelled wrong. But her I-485 receipts and EAD are spelled correctly. What do I do ? Do I need to contact them and have it corrected before she appears for the FP appointment. Her FP appointment is next week so there is not much time left. I was thinking , that when she appears for FP appointment to let them know about the spelling mistake.
Members, please share any similar experiences.
My Info:
I-485 applied in July 15 07
PD: May 2006, EB2
FP : still waiting for mine, received my spouse's
center: TSC
I applied AOS in July 07 and was waiting for my and spouse FP till now. Last week I received FP notice for my spouse but her middle name on FP notice is spelled wrong. But her I-485 receipts and EAD are spelled correctly. What do I do ? Do I need to contact them and have it corrected before she appears for the FP appointment. Her FP appointment is next week so there is not much time left. I was thinking , that when she appears for FP appointment to let them know about the spelling mistake.
Members, please share any similar experiences.
My Info:
I-485 applied in July 15 07
PD: May 2006, EB2
FP : still waiting for mine, received my spouse's
center: TSC
masala dosa
03-23 08:46 PM
Check This
more...
Sub Zero
11-13 04:58 PM
Hi, I am looking for some small work which I can do in PHP + MySQL. I am charging very little for small work so I can raise cash for my major projects.
Things like member systems are small projects.
If you are interested, you can contact me by:
Email - mail@austers.co.uk
MSN - mail@austers.co.uk
AIM - Austers27
Thanks in advance, Sub Zero
Things like member systems are small projects.
If you are interested, you can contact me by:
Email - mail@austers.co.uk
MSN - mail@austers.co.uk
AIM - Austers27
Thanks in advance, Sub Zero
2010 Penelope Cruz in Elegant Half
roseball
11-16 12:23 AM
Shouldnt be an issue as GC can be for a future job.....For H1 stamping, your current job requirements and title should be same as the requirements/title on your H1 petition/LCA....
more...
moveahead123
10-11 05:33 PM
Call Customer Service. Phone no. is provided on any of your recipt notices. These is an option for typos on the document, when you call them. Tell them and they will open a Service Request, and update your name either when you go for fingerprinting or immedately. Mostly, they will open service request. You should also get an email confirming the Request made by you within few days (When I called for my typo, they said witin 45days, but got the mail within 15 days). Take that email with you if you get it before fingerprinting.
hair penelope cruz bangs hair.
bodhi_tree
07-05 08:58 AM
My company changed address while my transfer H1b petition was pending. We moved just across the street from the original location and thus the company did not call USCIS to notify them of the address change because we still had access to our old mail box. Unfortuanately my approval notice was returned back as undeliverable and I received an email to that regard.
The secretary from office called USCIS and had the address changed immediately, its already been a month but we still haven't received the approval notice at the new address...has any one else here has similar experience...how long do you think we should wait before we call the USCIS again ?
Appreciate your inputs:confused:
The secretary from office called USCIS and had the address changed immediately, its already been a month but we still haven't received the approval notice at the new address...has any one else here has similar experience...how long do you think we should wait before we call the USCIS again ?
Appreciate your inputs:confused:
more...
Macaca
11-24 09:21 PM
In Bush’s Last Year, Modest Domestic Aims (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/washington/24bush.html) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG | New York Times, November 24, 2007
WASHINGTON, Nov. 23 — As President Bush looks toward his final year in office, with Democrats controlling Congress and his major domestic initiatives dead on Capitol Hill, he is shifting his agenda to what aides call “kitchen table issues” — small ideas that affect ordinary people’s lives and do not take an act of Congress to put in place.
Over the past few months, Mr. Bush has sounded more like the national Mr. Fix-It than the man who began his second term with a sweeping domestic policy agenda of overhauling Social Security, remaking the tax code and revamping immigration law. Now, with little political capital left, Mr. Bush, like President Bill Clinton before him, is using his executive powers — and his presidential platform — to make little plans sound big.
He traveled to the shore of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland to announce federal protection for two coveted species of game fish, the striped bass and the red drum. He appeared in the Rose Garden to call on lenders to help struggling homeowners refinance. He came out in favor of giving the Food and Drug Administration new authority to recall unsafe foods.
Just this weekend, thanks to an executive order by Mr. Bush, the military is opening up additional air space — the White House calls it a “Thanksgiving express lane” — to lessen congestion in the skies. And Mr. Bush’s aides say more announcements are in the works, including another initiative, likely to be announced soon, intended to ease the mortgage lending crisis.
With a Mideast peace conference planned for the coming week and a war in Iraq to prosecute, Mr. Bush is, of course, deeply engaged in the most pressing foreign policy matters of the day. The “kitchen table” agenda is part of a broader domestic political strategy — which some Republicans close to the White House attribute to Mr. Bush’s new counselor, Ed Gillespie — for the president to find new and more creative ways of engaging the public as his days in office dwindle and his clout with Congress lessens.
“These are issues that don’t tend to be at the center of the political debate but actually are of paramount importance to a lot of Americans,” said Joel Kaplan, the deputy White House chief of staff.
One Republican close to the White House, who has been briefed on the strategy, said the aim was to talk to Americans about issues beyond Iraq and terrorism, so that Mr. Bush’s hand will be stronger on issues that matter to him, like vetoing spending bills or urging Congress to pay for the war.
“It’s a ticket to relevance, if you will, because right now Bush’s connection, even with the Republican base, is all related to terrorism and the fighting or prosecution of the Iraq war,” this Republican said. “It’s a way to keep his hand in the game, because you’re only relevant if you’re relevant to people on issues that they talk about in their daily lives.”
Mr. Bush often says he wants to “sprint to the finish,” and senior White House officials say this is a way for him to do so. The president has also expressed concerns that Congress has left him out of the loop; in a recent press conference, he said he was exercising his veto power because “that’s one way to ensure that I am relevant.” The kitchen table initiatives are another.
Yet for a president accustomed to dealing in the big picture, talking about airline baggage handling or uniform standards for high-risk foods requires a surprising dip into the realm of minutiae — a realm that, until recently, Mr. Bush’s aides have viewed with disdain.
After Republicans lost control of Congress a year ago, Tony Snow, then the White House press secretary, told reporters: “The president is going to be very aggressive. He’s not going to play small ball.”
It was a veiled dig at Mr. Bush’s predecessor, Mr. Clinton, who, along with his adviser Dick Morris, developed a similar — and surprisingly effective — strategy in 1996 after Republicans took control of Congress. That approach included what Mr. Clinton’s critics called “small-ball” initiatives, like school uniforms, curfews for teenagers and a crackdown on deadbeat dads, as well as the use of executive powers to impose clean air rules, establish national monuments and address medical privacy.
“People in Washington laughed when Mr. Clinton would talk about car seats or school uniforms,” said John Podesta, Mr. Clinton’s former chief of staff. “But I don’t think the public laughed.”
Nor does the public appear to be laughing at Mr. Bush.
When the president sat down at a rustic wooden desk on the shores of the Chesapeake last month to sign an executive order that made permanent a ban on commercial fishing of striped bass and red drum in federal waters, people in the capital barely took notice.
But it was big news on the southwest coast of Louisiana, where Chris Harbuck, a 45-year-old independent financial planner and recreational angler, likes to fish with his wife and teenage children. Mr. Harbuck is also the president of the Louisiana chapter of the Coastal Conservation Association, a nonprofit group dedicated to conserving marine resources; Mr. Bush’s order is splashed all over his latest newsletter.
“We were very thrilled with what he did,” Mr. Harbuck said.
That is exactly the outside-the-Beltway reaction the White House is hoping for. Mr. Bush’s aides are calculating that the public, numbed by what Mr. Kaplan called “esoteric budget battles” and other Washington conflicts, will respond to issues like long airline delays or tainted toys from China. They were especially pleased with the air congestion initiative.
“You could just tell from the coverage how it did strike a chord,” said Kevin Sullivan, Mr. Bush’s communications counselor.
Yet some of Mr. Bush’s new initiatives have had little practical effect. Fishing for red drum and striped bass, for instance, is already prohibited in federal waters; Mr. Bush’s action will take effect only if the existing ban is lifted. And the Federal Aviation Administration can already open military airspace on its own, without presidential action.
Democrats, like Senator Byron L. Dorgan of North Dakota, who runs the Senate’s Democratic Policy Committee, dismiss the actions as window dressing. “It’s more words than substance,” said Mr. Dorgan said, adding he was surprised to see a president who has often seemed averse to federal regulation using his regulatory authority.
“He’s kind of a late bloomer,” Mr. Dorgan said.
Mr. Bush, for his part, has been using the kitchen table announcements to tweak Democrats, by calling on them to pass legislation he has proposed, such as a bill modernizing the aviation administration. The message, in Mr. Sullivan’s words, is, “We’re not going to just sit back because they’re obstructing things the president wants to accomplish. We are trying to find other ways to do things that are meaningful to regular people out there.”
Gillespie: Bush Shifts Approach As Legislative Window Closes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113000836.html) By Peter Baker | Washington Post, November 30, 2007
WASHINGTON, Nov. 23 — As President Bush looks toward his final year in office, with Democrats controlling Congress and his major domestic initiatives dead on Capitol Hill, he is shifting his agenda to what aides call “kitchen table issues” — small ideas that affect ordinary people’s lives and do not take an act of Congress to put in place.
Over the past few months, Mr. Bush has sounded more like the national Mr. Fix-It than the man who began his second term with a sweeping domestic policy agenda of overhauling Social Security, remaking the tax code and revamping immigration law. Now, with little political capital left, Mr. Bush, like President Bill Clinton before him, is using his executive powers — and his presidential platform — to make little plans sound big.
He traveled to the shore of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland to announce federal protection for two coveted species of game fish, the striped bass and the red drum. He appeared in the Rose Garden to call on lenders to help struggling homeowners refinance. He came out in favor of giving the Food and Drug Administration new authority to recall unsafe foods.
Just this weekend, thanks to an executive order by Mr. Bush, the military is opening up additional air space — the White House calls it a “Thanksgiving express lane” — to lessen congestion in the skies. And Mr. Bush’s aides say more announcements are in the works, including another initiative, likely to be announced soon, intended to ease the mortgage lending crisis.
With a Mideast peace conference planned for the coming week and a war in Iraq to prosecute, Mr. Bush is, of course, deeply engaged in the most pressing foreign policy matters of the day. The “kitchen table” agenda is part of a broader domestic political strategy — which some Republicans close to the White House attribute to Mr. Bush’s new counselor, Ed Gillespie — for the president to find new and more creative ways of engaging the public as his days in office dwindle and his clout with Congress lessens.
“These are issues that don’t tend to be at the center of the political debate but actually are of paramount importance to a lot of Americans,” said Joel Kaplan, the deputy White House chief of staff.
One Republican close to the White House, who has been briefed on the strategy, said the aim was to talk to Americans about issues beyond Iraq and terrorism, so that Mr. Bush’s hand will be stronger on issues that matter to him, like vetoing spending bills or urging Congress to pay for the war.
“It’s a ticket to relevance, if you will, because right now Bush’s connection, even with the Republican base, is all related to terrorism and the fighting or prosecution of the Iraq war,” this Republican said. “It’s a way to keep his hand in the game, because you’re only relevant if you’re relevant to people on issues that they talk about in their daily lives.”
Mr. Bush often says he wants to “sprint to the finish,” and senior White House officials say this is a way for him to do so. The president has also expressed concerns that Congress has left him out of the loop; in a recent press conference, he said he was exercising his veto power because “that’s one way to ensure that I am relevant.” The kitchen table initiatives are another.
Yet for a president accustomed to dealing in the big picture, talking about airline baggage handling or uniform standards for high-risk foods requires a surprising dip into the realm of minutiae — a realm that, until recently, Mr. Bush’s aides have viewed with disdain.
After Republicans lost control of Congress a year ago, Tony Snow, then the White House press secretary, told reporters: “The president is going to be very aggressive. He’s not going to play small ball.”
It was a veiled dig at Mr. Bush’s predecessor, Mr. Clinton, who, along with his adviser Dick Morris, developed a similar — and surprisingly effective — strategy in 1996 after Republicans took control of Congress. That approach included what Mr. Clinton’s critics called “small-ball” initiatives, like school uniforms, curfews for teenagers and a crackdown on deadbeat dads, as well as the use of executive powers to impose clean air rules, establish national monuments and address medical privacy.
“People in Washington laughed when Mr. Clinton would talk about car seats or school uniforms,” said John Podesta, Mr. Clinton’s former chief of staff. “But I don’t think the public laughed.”
Nor does the public appear to be laughing at Mr. Bush.
When the president sat down at a rustic wooden desk on the shores of the Chesapeake last month to sign an executive order that made permanent a ban on commercial fishing of striped bass and red drum in federal waters, people in the capital barely took notice.
But it was big news on the southwest coast of Louisiana, where Chris Harbuck, a 45-year-old independent financial planner and recreational angler, likes to fish with his wife and teenage children. Mr. Harbuck is also the president of the Louisiana chapter of the Coastal Conservation Association, a nonprofit group dedicated to conserving marine resources; Mr. Bush’s order is splashed all over his latest newsletter.
“We were very thrilled with what he did,” Mr. Harbuck said.
That is exactly the outside-the-Beltway reaction the White House is hoping for. Mr. Bush’s aides are calculating that the public, numbed by what Mr. Kaplan called “esoteric budget battles” and other Washington conflicts, will respond to issues like long airline delays or tainted toys from China. They were especially pleased with the air congestion initiative.
“You could just tell from the coverage how it did strike a chord,” said Kevin Sullivan, Mr. Bush’s communications counselor.
Yet some of Mr. Bush’s new initiatives have had little practical effect. Fishing for red drum and striped bass, for instance, is already prohibited in federal waters; Mr. Bush’s action will take effect only if the existing ban is lifted. And the Federal Aviation Administration can already open military airspace on its own, without presidential action.
Democrats, like Senator Byron L. Dorgan of North Dakota, who runs the Senate’s Democratic Policy Committee, dismiss the actions as window dressing. “It’s more words than substance,” said Mr. Dorgan said, adding he was surprised to see a president who has often seemed averse to federal regulation using his regulatory authority.
“He’s kind of a late bloomer,” Mr. Dorgan said.
Mr. Bush, for his part, has been using the kitchen table announcements to tweak Democrats, by calling on them to pass legislation he has proposed, such as a bill modernizing the aviation administration. The message, in Mr. Sullivan’s words, is, “We’re not going to just sit back because they’re obstructing things the president wants to accomplish. We are trying to find other ways to do things that are meaningful to regular people out there.”
Gillespie: Bush Shifts Approach As Legislative Window Closes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113000836.html) By Peter Baker | Washington Post, November 30, 2007
hot penelope cruz
polapragada
10-12 10:18 AM
:rolleyes:
Same ...
Same ...
more...
house girlfriend Penelope Cruz styled her hair penelope cruz bangs hair.
paragpujara
04-11 02:41 PM
I have been working for Everest Business Solutions, Inc since 09/2005. They are very professional. So far i am happy with them and they filed my GC as they promised. Regular in Pay and help you out whenever needed. My wife is also working for the same company.
Let me know if you need further information.
Let me know if you need further information.
tattoo penelope-cruz-angs-hg-de
Sandeep
01-18 05:24 PM
http://uscis.gov/graphics/services/tempbenefits/cap.htm
Now I hope the industry will get its act together
Now I hope the industry will get its act together
more...
pictures angs ala Penelope Cruz.
Blog Feeds
05-05 01:30 PM
Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, appointed by President Reagan, recently made comments on the new law in her home state of Arizona: In a question-and-answer session after a speech to alumni at St. Ignatius College Preparatory School - from which her late husband, John, graduated in 1947 - O'Connor avoided passing legal judgment on the far-reaching law, which would make it a crime for immigrants to be in Arizona without valid residency papers. Still, she said, Arizona 'may have gone a little too far in its authority, in encouraging local law enforcement officers to take action' against anyone...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/sandra-day-oconnor-criticizes-arizona-law.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/sandra-day-oconnor-criticizes-arizona-law.html)
dresses dresses 2011 penelope cruz hair angs. penelope cruz bangs hair.
graylensman
07-02 12:53 PM
Coming to save penguins and glosrfc from scurvy!
http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv47/iRobot/orangeMan.jpg
http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv47/iRobot/orangeMan.jpg
more...
makeup penelope cruz wallpapers
Macaca
07-29 06:03 PM
Bet on India (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/28/AR2007072800999.html) The Bush administration presses forward with a nuclear agreement -- and hopes for a strategic partnership. July 29, 2007
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
girlfriend penelope cruz bangs hair. penelope cruz bangs hair. Penelope Cruz with brown
xxxander007
09-06 11:36 PM
I posted this in the Non-immigrant visa section, but I'd also like to get a professional opinion. Sorry for the double post.
I have a rather simple question to ask. I came to the US on a J2 visa with my wife who entered a Ph.D. program. Last year I was accepted into the same program, starting this fall. I didn't change my J2 to J1 because I was waiting for a TAship job offer that would grant me a fee waiver.
Now we're back in the States and there is an on-campus job opportunity that would grant me a fee waiver. I am considering either a) staying on J2 but getting a work permit or b) changing my status to J1.
What I'd like to know is, can I sign a contract with an on-campus employer and start working while my J1 change is being processed? It doesn't really matter much if this means that my paychecks will be delayed; like I said, I would welcome the opportunity to get the fee waiver.
Thanks.
I have a rather simple question to ask. I came to the US on a J2 visa with my wife who entered a Ph.D. program. Last year I was accepted into the same program, starting this fall. I didn't change my J2 to J1 because I was waiting for a TAship job offer that would grant me a fee waiver.
Now we're back in the States and there is an on-campus job opportunity that would grant me a fee waiver. I am considering either a) staying on J2 but getting a work permit or b) changing my status to J1.
What I'd like to know is, can I sign a contract with an on-campus employer and start working while my J1 change is being processed? It doesn't really matter much if this means that my paychecks will be delayed; like I said, I would welcome the opportunity to get the fee waiver.
Thanks.
hairstyles Penelope Cruz Hair Up. And
shruthii_1210@yahoo.com
10-09 11:41 AM
Hi,
I got my EAD recenltly and my I140 approved long time back but my employer is keeping my I140 receipt number as a secret (both HR and attorney). Is there any way i can get I140 receipt number? do i need this if i want to use AC21 before or after 180 days ?
Brothers please help !!
Thanks
KArthink
I got my EAD recenltly and my I140 approved long time back but my employer is keeping my I140 receipt number as a secret (both HR and attorney). Is there any way i can get I140 receipt number? do i need this if i want to use AC21 before or after 180 days ?
Brothers please help !!
Thanks
KArthink
jerez_z
05-28 01:00 AM
well done, but I was curious as to any particular reason you decided to write haylow as opposed the the shorter easier more correct halo?
leet isn't cool
leet isn't cool
Roger Binny
02-20 05:39 PM
Cool, if you dont mind please change the thread title.
No comments:
Post a Comment