chvs2000@yahoo.com
10-21 09:58 AM
Other alternative is to have your employer run the payroll for 5000 and deduct 500 from your adjusted gross income when you file taxes.
Note that you can only deduct unreimbursed work related expenses when you choose to itemize your deductions.
Note that you can only deduct unreimbursed work related expenses when you choose to itemize your deductions.
sunny1000
12-18 09:58 PM
They should also enforce it so that we don't get cheated by the employers.:p
Govt. has stipulated some wage while doing LCA. I think these activists should go after the govt. to raise that wage if they feel if it is low.
Govt. has stipulated some wage while doing LCA. I think these activists should go after the govt. to raise that wage if they feel if it is low.
krupa
07-09 12:29 PM
DOS issued one more bulletine today on 9th July 2007 !!!!!!!!!!!!!
gc_kaavaali
11-14 10:24 AM
hey fearonlygod,
Do you want to tell us your employer name? It helps other people...if u don't like u can ignore it.
I had similar situation where on H1B he was showing different salary...but he was paying less..difference is almost $10000 per year...it is between Aug 2003 and Oct 2004...Can we do anything now?
Do you want to tell us your employer name? It helps other people...if u don't like u can ignore it.
I had similar situation where on H1B he was showing different salary...but he was paying less..difference is almost $10000 per year...it is between Aug 2003 and Oct 2004...Can we do anything now?
more...
skv
07-05 03:54 PM
Cmon ever since independece we have never been united on any cause. I see threads from Gandhigiri(sending roses)...TO .. "no work on 13th"petition. But cmon look at the responses, e.g. no working day petions had only 75 votes , of which most are scared to put there employer name info. etc.
75 here 120 there..do you guys really think with these numbers will make our voices heard .. On the other end lot of people are happy about the revision of the July bulletin and yes that includes the ones stuck in BEC (hypocrisy check! ) and the desi employers who perhaps were fasting/praying or something for this to happen... :-)
Its a number's game. We will never make our voices heard unless we can join hundred of thousands for a cause. I appreciate what IV has attempted to do, but it's an inherent problem with people like us, every one is out there trying to get ahead of the line. If given the choice most would exploit each other to take advantage. I mentioned "desis" perhaps, the problem we face is quite fitting to people from populous nations. I think we are looking at the problem from a very micro level(green card backlog).. The glut in immigration is nothing new and represents similar issues faced in India or China etc.
I am sounding completely pessimistic, but its the harsh reality. Perhaps we are not tuned to be united, we've been raised, bred to be just competitive and anything else which is a byproduct of competition.
just my 2 cents.
pls before anyone starts shouting at my post. Throw the hypocrisy out of the door and then reply.
It's unfortunate, but that's the reality. History says that "British took advantage of divide and rule concept in India during their rule." If the empherors/kings/people were united, that wouldn't have possible for the British.
I know their are few people really good, but the numbers aren't good enough. Hope and wish the coming generation wil, change the history. :-)
75 here 120 there..do you guys really think with these numbers will make our voices heard .. On the other end lot of people are happy about the revision of the July bulletin and yes that includes the ones stuck in BEC (hypocrisy check! ) and the desi employers who perhaps were fasting/praying or something for this to happen... :-)
Its a number's game. We will never make our voices heard unless we can join hundred of thousands for a cause. I appreciate what IV has attempted to do, but it's an inherent problem with people like us, every one is out there trying to get ahead of the line. If given the choice most would exploit each other to take advantage. I mentioned "desis" perhaps, the problem we face is quite fitting to people from populous nations. I think we are looking at the problem from a very micro level(green card backlog).. The glut in immigration is nothing new and represents similar issues faced in India or China etc.
I am sounding completely pessimistic, but its the harsh reality. Perhaps we are not tuned to be united, we've been raised, bred to be just competitive and anything else which is a byproduct of competition.
just my 2 cents.
pls before anyone starts shouting at my post. Throw the hypocrisy out of the door and then reply.
It's unfortunate, but that's the reality. History says that "British took advantage of divide and rule concept in India during their rule." If the empherors/kings/people were united, that wouldn't have possible for the British.
I know their are few people really good, but the numbers aren't good enough. Hope and wish the coming generation wil, change the history. :-)
coopheal
03-14 03:23 PM
I do not support this campaign. As someone famously said if house is burning no point in rearranging furniture.
IV level campaign should be focused on administrative and legislative fixes.
IV level campaign should be focused on administrative and legislative fixes.
more...
GLIX
10-25 05:12 PM
Yes, it is worth it if you're PD is current. I got my approval in less than 15 days and to think there even wan request for evidence. Everything was expedited. So am now filing my 485. But for those whose PD is not current, it does not make sense to pay extra for premium processing.
s416504
12-09 01:21 PM
Visa Bulletin For January 2011 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5212.html)
more...
franklin
03-23 01:51 PM
I've just got all the info for setting up conference call and meeting with the lawmakers "info" kit.
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
kriskris
07-20 02:13 PM
Do you think we can apply a duplicate 485 when the actual 485 packet is already sent. Even in this case how do you send the sealed medical reports since you have already sent them.
I am in the same boat as you are. please let me know.
I am in the same boat as you are. please let me know.
more...
Hong12
02-04 12:52 AM
I just got the H1 Approval for 1 year and 2 months (1 year H1 Extension and 2 months recapture time). I am currently in Malaysia and need to apply for a visa at US Consulate in Malaysia. Since I am on the H1 visa, I have to show the proof that I will return back to Malaysia after the end of my work period in US. Accordingly, I would need to purchase the round trip ticket. The issue is that the plane ticket only valid for the maximum of 1 year, but my visa valid for 1 year and 2 months. Please advise if one way plane ticket would be sufficient for the visa interview or need to be a round trip plane ticket. If it is not, what should I do? Also, I wonder if the application package including I-129 submitted to USCIS need to be stamped �Certified True Copy� with the original signature of the lawyer or employer for the visa interview. Can I use the copy one that is stamped �Certified True Copy� with the non-original signatures of my lawyer or employer? Anybody pls help. Thank you very much.
bombaysardar
07-23 03:35 PM
J. BARRRET - Jul 2nd at 10:25 AM
same person, same time :)
same person, same time :)
more...
Dhundhun
07-09 10:08 PM
I guess Priority mail would have been a better option - The real question is do they go and pickup from the PO
That's true. Priority Mail + Delivery Confirmation.
That's true. Priority Mail + Delivery Confirmation.
Coppertop
10-13 11:54 AM
5 days left! Someone needs to break the tie!
more...
ImmiLosers
10-06 03:42 PM
HE likes RED though..
How can I check mine?:confused:
And what does 3 red dots on my messages mean?
Thanks
How can I check mine?:confused:
And what does 3 red dots on my messages mean?
Thanks
desibechara
08-01 07:35 PM
hi:
I am filing my I140 and i485 togther this week. I have had 2 previous employers to the current one.
I wporked for my first employer for nearly 3 years ( some months less) and then other employer for some 4 months and finally switching to the current employer..where I have been working for 6.5 years.
I am getting experience letter from first employer but second employer where I worked for 4 months has no record.
Is it ok to file I140 with just experienced letters from my first and the present employer and let go the one with just 4 months? Please let me now..I did call the former employer who worked there..but she also does not remmeber because it was 7 years back and that too for short time.
Please let me know..is that is risky or will come back with RFE?
DB
I am filing my I140 and i485 togther this week. I have had 2 previous employers to the current one.
I wporked for my first employer for nearly 3 years ( some months less) and then other employer for some 4 months and finally switching to the current employer..where I have been working for 6.5 years.
I am getting experience letter from first employer but second employer where I worked for 4 months has no record.
Is it ok to file I140 with just experienced letters from my first and the present employer and let go the one with just 4 months? Please let me now..I did call the former employer who worked there..but she also does not remmeber because it was 7 years back and that too for short time.
Please let me know..is that is risky or will come back with RFE?
DB
more...
whitecollarslave
01-28 04:32 PM
The misconception that immigrants are displacing American workers is gaining popularity. If we are to make a case for immigration reform that helps EB community, we ought to show that EB immigrants are not displacing American workers, but helping the overall economy. In the midst of current economic situation and growing public sentiment against immigrants, paying taxes, obeying laws and assimilating with American society and culture is not enough. It is important to stress the obvious - how individuals from EB community are contributing towards the economy, innovation and competitiveness. In order to illustrate this, I would like to get examples of people from EB community.
The people mentioned in the earlier replies do not help this argument. I am looking for examples such as the founder of orkut - who is an EB immigrant, once on H1-B visa.
Thanks again.
The people mentioned in the earlier replies do not help this argument. I am looking for examples such as the founder of orkut - who is an EB immigrant, once on H1-B visa.
Thanks again.
lazycis
02-14 04:42 PM
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the “fingerprint check” described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the “fingerprint check” described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
a1b2c3
05-21 11:54 AM
please reply in case you need more info
morchu
04-23 09:28 PM
"date of actual move"
I understand the 10-day rule, but when does the clock start?
The date of lease starting or the date of actual move.....ideally these shouldnt be too far apart, but in my case they will be, hence the confusion.
LT
I understand the 10-day rule, but when does the clock start?
The date of lease starting or the date of actual move.....ideally these shouldnt be too far apart, but in my case they will be, hence the confusion.
LT
USDream2Dust
04-23 10:52 PM
One word. Congrats. Lots of people get GC on immigrationvoice.org with PD's in 2002 and 2003.
Great news for newbie's like me with PD in 06/07.
Great news for newbie's like me with PD in 06/07.
No comments:
Post a Comment