asekhon
01-10 11:16 AM
Dude,
which school did you got into? My opinion forget about GC, pursue the MBA if it is Insead etc, get into Mgt Consulting and work for McKinsey etc. You can come back to states on H1. Also after few years get into corp world as VP of something.
If it is not a college of Insead level try to get into part time in US. I am doing Part time MBA at Kellogg and would graduate in 2008 as well.
which school did you got into? My opinion forget about GC, pursue the MBA if it is Insead etc, get into Mgt Consulting and work for McKinsey etc. You can come back to states on H1. Also after few years get into corp world as VP of something.
If it is not a college of Insead level try to get into part time in US. I am doing Part time MBA at Kellogg and would graduate in 2008 as well.
xiaomatu
06-05 06:37 PM
I think my question is: is it possible for USCIS to review the case and change the decision they made after approval? Thanks.
msyedy
04-18 01:12 PM
Look how desperate we have become, someone is ready to shell 10k per family member to get GC.
I agree and disagree with you guys.
I disagree because, we all are legal immigrants, we have to be given priority as the American economy needs people like us. H1-B not only means growth in tech but also economy. All the H1-B personnel spend a good amount of money here on (Rent, car, insurance, food, travel) with all this new jobs and much more will be benificial to this country.
We should not be charged such amount to get what we deserve.
On the other hand- I agree to pay 10k per familiy member because, we are stuck at one place with lots of problems without GC.
Most of us are not sure whether they will be staying at one place to do an investments like buying a house. Wife cant work etc.
Keeping all the above in mind even If we loose 10k per member we will make that in less then 6 months when compared to waiting for a GC for years.
I agree and disagree with you guys.
I disagree because, we all are legal immigrants, we have to be given priority as the American economy needs people like us. H1-B not only means growth in tech but also economy. All the H1-B personnel spend a good amount of money here on (Rent, car, insurance, food, travel) with all this new jobs and much more will be benificial to this country.
We should not be charged such amount to get what we deserve.
On the other hand- I agree to pay 10k per familiy member because, we are stuck at one place with lots of problems without GC.
Most of us are not sure whether they will be staying at one place to do an investments like buying a house. Wife cant work etc.
Keeping all the above in mind even If we loose 10k per member we will make that in less then 6 months when compared to waiting for a GC for years.
gc28262
07-28 01:48 PM
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration;_ylt=AgcIIY.ht_GJNzOqM3G8sH 6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNta2N1b3FnBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNz I4L3VzX2FyaXpvbmFfaW1taWdyYXRpb24EY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBv cHVsYXIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwM3BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW 5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNqdWRnZWJsb2Nrc3A-)
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
more...
ragz4u
02-24 12:46 PM
ragz4u, ...you pipped me to the post..hehe..:)
Thanks, this is very informative!
In any case, as per Shusterman.com, this bill will be tabled to the Judiciary committee on March 2nd. Today is Feb 24th. That leaves us only THREE working days to pass on this information to the committee members. We need to do something drastic to make our point.
All the members of IV, wake up! This is the time to fight. The anti-immigrant lobby will be getting very active in the next few days. We need to do the same
Thanks, this is very informative!
In any case, as per Shusterman.com, this bill will be tabled to the Judiciary committee on March 2nd. Today is Feb 24th. That leaves us only THREE working days to pass on this information to the committee members. We need to do something drastic to make our point.
All the members of IV, wake up! This is the time to fight. The anti-immigrant lobby will be getting very active in the next few days. We need to do the same
waitin_toolong
11-08 02:04 PM
show your H1 documents as well as EAD at SSN office.
it does not matter how you get SSN.
even if you get SSn based on H1 only you will be fine.
it does not matter how you get SSN.
even if you get SSn based on H1 only you will be fine.
more...
bijualex29
05-26 06:51 AM
Analysis of Visa prediction if Bill passes in senate in current form
90,000 visas to clear backlog, 10% county limit.
9000 visas per country limit, India get 9000 visa (EB-1, will get additional 10000 visas ).
Can some one interpret the law whether unused visa will be spilled to oversubscribed countries?
Current law EB-2 and EB-3 only 40,000 visas for EB-2 and EB-3 out of 7% goes to each country 2800 visas for each country.
90,000 visas to clear backlog, 10% county limit.
9000 visas per country limit, India get 9000 visa (EB-1, will get additional 10000 visas ).
Can some one interpret the law whether unused visa will be spilled to oversubscribed countries?
Current law EB-2 and EB-3 only 40,000 visas for EB-2 and EB-3 out of 7% goes to each country 2800 visas for each country.
luckylavs
04-30 03:39 PM
Hi Dhundhun,
I too have the same issue of not getting any RN nor the checks are cashed. Its been a month now. Today I called USCIS and they told me to wait for another month since no one has touched the application yet.
I have applied EAD renewal to AZ lock box. It was delivered on Mar 29. I have not got any receipt so far. Also check is not cashed.
Now it is 30 days and I should be able to call USCIS.
I have two questions:
1. Mail was sent with delivery confirmation, which confirms delivery on Mar 29. What if the package is lost there? Could I applying again? How USCIS treats two applications?
2. I have not received any receipt, except I have delivery slip from Post Office. In counting 90 days, is it taken based on receipt or based on Post Office slip?
Thanks a lot.
I too have the same issue of not getting any RN nor the checks are cashed. Its been a month now. Today I called USCIS and they told me to wait for another month since no one has touched the application yet.
I have applied EAD renewal to AZ lock box. It was delivered on Mar 29. I have not got any receipt so far. Also check is not cashed.
Now it is 30 days and I should be able to call USCIS.
I have two questions:
1. Mail was sent with delivery confirmation, which confirms delivery on Mar 29. What if the package is lost there? Could I applying again? How USCIS treats two applications?
2. I have not received any receipt, except I have delivery slip from Post Office. In counting 90 days, is it taken based on receipt or based on Post Office slip?
Thanks a lot.
more...
GoneSouth
08-20 01:25 PM
I would just wait out the 6 months for AC21 to kick in, then go to work for a reputable company. There's no need to sign on with a dicey consulting shop once you've got your EAD and AC21 is in play.
Also, I believe the AC21 "same or similar job" constraint is more flexible than you're thinking. As long as you stay within the same o*net category (e.g., programmer or systems analyst or whatever), you should be fine. USCIS doesn't care whether you're a java programmer or a .net programmer. (But I am not a lawyer, you may want to clear any potential new job with a qualified attorney).
Also, I believe the AC21 "same or similar job" constraint is more flexible than you're thinking. As long as you stay within the same o*net category (e.g., programmer or systems analyst or whatever), you should be fine. USCIS doesn't care whether you're a java programmer or a .net programmer. (But I am not a lawyer, you may want to clear any potential new job with a qualified attorney).
CaliHoneB
05-05 02:08 PM
My thoughts exactly! Here is a thread I opened on the subject a couple of weeks ago:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=600
The idea makes such good economic sense (the government would be price discriminating to increase its revenue) that if USCIS were a private entity they would have implemented something like this a long time ago. But unfortunately it is not and we have to suffer under a "one size fits all" system.
I am glad some one else also agrees with my thoughts..Let us continue this discussion on old thread..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=600
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=600
The idea makes such good economic sense (the government would be price discriminating to increase its revenue) that if USCIS were a private entity they would have implemented something like this a long time ago. But unfortunately it is not and we have to suffer under a "one size fits all" system.
I am glad some one else also agrees with my thoughts..Let us continue this discussion on old thread..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=600
more...
desi485
11-24 05:48 PM
I would also suggest that those who have had their I-485 denied due to changing employers should submit DHS Form 7001 to the Ombudsman's office.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_dhsform7001.pdf
Guys, any good news to share??? I am still waiting for reply to my letters or email. Nothing received till today...
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_dhsform7001.pdf
Guys, any good news to share??? I am still waiting for reply to my letters or email. Nothing received till today...
saketkapur
03-26 11:09 AM
My wife got it stamped twice in Delhi....there were no issues as her application does not mention any 485 filing......
You can only file for her adjustment once her waiver requirements have been met....until then she has nothing to do with your application.
Once her waiver requirements have been met and your PD is current she can file her I-485application as an "accompnying spouse".
Now there has been some difference of opinion as per different answers I have received on forums from Murthy and Ron Gotcher. As per Murthy the I-485 can only be filed once the waiver is complete but as per Ron AOS can be filed once the waiver is approved. In the latter scenario she can make use of EAD and AP benefits but her final AOS will only be approved upon waiver completion. (Both the above scenarios are obviously only possible if your date is current.....:eek:)
If any of you guys find out whichever of the above scenarios is correct then please update the thread......even though with the PDs sitting in dark ages I do not think the above situation will really matter in my case.
Above is just my opinion. Please consult a reputed immigration attorney as every case is different.
Thanks for your response. I understand the process for J1 waiver and I have PD of Oct 2007 and hence not worried about including her in my 485 for now.
I'm more worried along the lines of her J1 visa stamping and problems at port of entry while returning to US. Since USCIS knows that I'm planning to immigrate to US (due to I-140) will they ask any questions or make her life difficult or reject her visa while stamping.
Did you wife go through J1 stamping when your I-140 was approved? Can you also provide your email id to know more about J1 waiver details in your case and how you handled it. It would be useful for us in another 3 years :-)
You can only file for her adjustment once her waiver requirements have been met....until then she has nothing to do with your application.
Once her waiver requirements have been met and your PD is current she can file her I-485application as an "accompnying spouse".
Now there has been some difference of opinion as per different answers I have received on forums from Murthy and Ron Gotcher. As per Murthy the I-485 can only be filed once the waiver is complete but as per Ron AOS can be filed once the waiver is approved. In the latter scenario she can make use of EAD and AP benefits but her final AOS will only be approved upon waiver completion. (Both the above scenarios are obviously only possible if your date is current.....:eek:)
If any of you guys find out whichever of the above scenarios is correct then please update the thread......even though with the PDs sitting in dark ages I do not think the above situation will really matter in my case.
Above is just my opinion. Please consult a reputed immigration attorney as every case is different.
Thanks for your response. I understand the process for J1 waiver and I have PD of Oct 2007 and hence not worried about including her in my 485 for now.
I'm more worried along the lines of her J1 visa stamping and problems at port of entry while returning to US. Since USCIS knows that I'm planning to immigrate to US (due to I-140) will they ask any questions or make her life difficult or reject her visa while stamping.
Did you wife go through J1 stamping when your I-140 was approved? Can you also provide your email id to know more about J1 waiver details in your case and how you handled it. It would be useful for us in another 3 years :-)
more...
cooldudesfo
09-10 11:57 PM
Hi,
Our applications (myself and my wife) reached USCIS NSC on July 2nd. On 09/08/2007, we both received EAD's and today (09/10/2007), we received Notice from CSC that our cases are being transferred to NSC as our cases fall under NSC's jurisdiction. My I-140 was approved by NSC in Feb 2007.
Also, our cases were received on July 2nd @ NSC and the RD on Transfer Notice I received today have RD of 08/28/2007.
Anybody in same situation...I am confused here....don't know how cases are being transfered from Center to Center and why RD is not July 2nd.
Comments ???
Cooldude
Our applications (myself and my wife) reached USCIS NSC on July 2nd. On 09/08/2007, we both received EAD's and today (09/10/2007), we received Notice from CSC that our cases are being transferred to NSC as our cases fall under NSC's jurisdiction. My I-140 was approved by NSC in Feb 2007.
Also, our cases were received on July 2nd @ NSC and the RD on Transfer Notice I received today have RD of 08/28/2007.
Anybody in same situation...I am confused here....don't know how cases are being transfered from Center to Center and why RD is not July 2nd.
Comments ???
Cooldude
yabadaba
03-20 03:55 PM
What about all H1-B, L-1, J-1, K-1....all potential EB immigrant, pick a date and do not spend a dime on that day. That will hurt this economy and get some attention. Please do not tell me that people on H1 and L1 do not make and spend enough money.
I pledge not to spend a dime forever...in fact i cant remember the last time i spent a dime on anything...in this day and age i end up spending quarters and dollars.
I pledge not to spend a dime forever...in fact i cant remember the last time i spent a dime on anything...in this day and age i end up spending quarters and dollars.
more...
crazyghoda
05-12 07:08 PM
Interesting. That's why I always fly the US - India non-stop by Delta or Continental nowadays. No more dealing with nonsense from 3rd countries in Europe and their rude immigration officers.
joydiptac
12-08 05:21 PM
I agree ...now take a vaccation for the 4 months since anyways you are not getting paid. BTW, nothing stops u from taking up a part time job ;-)
Hi Raj
You waited this long and is really required to wait for another 4 + months. It is upto your best judgement but if i were you I will pass on these 4 months....
Thanks
Hi Raj
You waited this long and is really required to wait for another 4 + months. It is upto your best judgement but if i were you I will pass on these 4 months....
Thanks
more...
jthomas
05-05 06:16 PM
What happens to the GC petition? I guess that is probably also Amit's concern in the long term
- cheers
kris
It totally depends on how much risk one wants to take. If someone's PD is near to approval he may think about getting back to the same position temporary.
I have a canadian PR so i took the risk of taking unemployment benifits.
you can never know when USCIS would be sending a RFE. We guys have been waiting for a long time or some of them still have to wait for a long time. So calculate the risk
Secondly in my field most of the jobs have been moving to China and i don't think my petitioned job would be in US after 2-4 years.
J Thomas
- cheers
kris
It totally depends on how much risk one wants to take. If someone's PD is near to approval he may think about getting back to the same position temporary.
I have a canadian PR so i took the risk of taking unemployment benifits.
you can never know when USCIS would be sending a RFE. We guys have been waiting for a long time or some of them still have to wait for a long time. So calculate the risk
Secondly in my field most of the jobs have been moving to China and i don't think my petitioned job would be in US after 2-4 years.
J Thomas
waitingimmigrant
10-21 05:18 PM
he he .. was wondering the same... was thinking it was about a different time dimension :P....
this time it is revised under "Reuniting Families Act" ... lets see how this goes...
Expecting the ... and hoping for the best :)
this time it is revised under "Reuniting Families Act" ... lets see how this goes...
Expecting the ... and hoping for the best :)
Ramba
10-24 01:48 PM
Why do you want to spent $2000 for lawyer for AC21? If you have same or similar offer letter, why cant you type a simple covering letter for your AC21?Do it yourself. US certified post cost around $2.00. Hiring lawyer for AC21 is waste of money.
lvinaykumar
06-30 12:40 PM
I am sure many of you don't know about TANA organization ( www.tana.org ). TANA is held every 2 years in one of the major cities in US, and for 2009 TANA is scheduled to happen in Chicago.
"TANA IS GOING TO CELEBRATE 2009 CONFERENCE IN CHICAGO AT DONALD E STEPHENS CONVENTION CENTER, ROSEMONT FROM JULY 02, 2009 TO JULY 04, 2009. "
They usually get around 12,000 to 15,000 guest of Telugu speaking people. The point i would like to make is to increase the exposure of to IV, we need to put up a booth in TANA 2009. I have attended TANA organization committee meeting on Sunday, 29 2008 and have spoken to them about IV. TANA has several stage shows, booth for business , food stalls and much more. TANA Chicago org will be needing some help( not sure what at this time ). but if we can help them so that they give us some exposure in the TANA 2009. it will be really great.
Secondly, we can have our own booth which will cost some money we can get lot of publicity.
This is just a idea and a i think it is a win-win for both of us. Let me know what you guys think.
"TANA IS GOING TO CELEBRATE 2009 CONFERENCE IN CHICAGO AT DONALD E STEPHENS CONVENTION CENTER, ROSEMONT FROM JULY 02, 2009 TO JULY 04, 2009. "
They usually get around 12,000 to 15,000 guest of Telugu speaking people. The point i would like to make is to increase the exposure of to IV, we need to put up a booth in TANA 2009. I have attended TANA organization committee meeting on Sunday, 29 2008 and have spoken to them about IV. TANA has several stage shows, booth for business , food stalls and much more. TANA Chicago org will be needing some help( not sure what at this time ). but if we can help them so that they give us some exposure in the TANA 2009. it will be really great.
Secondly, we can have our own booth which will cost some money we can get lot of publicity.
This is just a idea and a i think it is a win-win for both of us. Let me know what you guys think.
dealsnet
01-05 08:16 AM
If your extension paper come with I-94 attached, take it and staple it on your passport. (That is your new I-94). White paper need to keep in safe place. If it is expired, no value for it.
Hello:
I have a last minute doubt - my H1B stamp on the passport is expired, so is the white I94 card. I have a valid I797 extension.
Can I use automatic revalidation? I am in doubt because the white I94 card is expired and I will have to present it to the officer at the port of entry.
Thanks.
Hello:
I have a last minute doubt - my H1B stamp on the passport is expired, so is the white I94 card. I have a valid I797 extension.
Can I use automatic revalidation? I am in doubt because the white I94 card is expired and I will have to present it to the officer at the port of entry.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment