kirupa
06-29 11:42 PM
Added :)
wallpaper Bob Hairstyles | Bob Haircuts
dealsnet
04-28 05:19 PM
I did send my wife's and my daughter's RFE in one package. But have separate cover lettter and folder. One packet is enough, clearly distiguish between two set of papers.
My wife and I got RFE on medical. Now I am sending response to RFE. Do I need to send the RFE response individually by FEDEX or Can I send both of us responses in one FEDEX package? Please advise. Thanks.
My wife and I got RFE on medical. Now I am sending response to RFE. Do I need to send the RFE response individually by FEDEX or Can I send both of us responses in one FEDEX package? Please advise. Thanks.
Macaca
07-31 05:23 PM
It's Time to End Or Reduce The Cloture Clog (http://rollcall.com/issues/53_15/guest/19599-1.html) By Robert Weiner and John Larmett, July 31 2007
Robert Weiner, president of Robert Weiner Associates Public Affairs, worked for 16 years in the House of Representatives and for six years in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, was legislative assistant/press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.).
The Senate's cloture rule defeats democracy. It lets public servants hide and obfuscate behind a parliamentary quirk never intended by the framers of the Constitution. It's time to end or significantly change the cloture rule, as was last done in 1975, and move to a true democracy so that the House and Senate equally represent the American people.
There are checks and balances, the only ones the Founding Fathers stated and intended: a presidential veto, which Congress can override with two-thirds, the only supermajority specified in the Constitution; the courts; and elections. No one ever foresaw parliamentary sleight of hand as a block of the will of the majority. If Congress wants to restore Americans' confidence in its work from the current all-time lows, it needs to allow the system to work as common sense, the Constitution and the framers dictate.
During the April-May 2005 "crisis" on judicial nominations, the "Gang of 14," seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, agreed to oppose the constitutional or "nuclear" option and to oppose filibusters of judicial nominations except in "extraordinary circumstances." However, the Senate has failed to cut off debate on other issues 57 times since then, making clear that the system has failed.
Democrats are right to scream Republican "obstructionism," but Republicans, when they were in the majority, also were right to scream Democratic obstructionism. Both sides use and abuse the rule when they are in the minority to create some supermajority fantasy the public will not understand - and then blame the other side for not getting a legislative agenda accomplished.
In last year's campaigns, House Democrats promised to change the way Congress does business - and do it within the first 100 hours they were in session. With a majority of 30-60 votes, but no supermajority requirement, the House passed its entire agenda. Despite majority support, hindered by the supermajority "cloture," the Senate has struggled all year just to pass a few bills. The American people get the feeling the Senate is a train that never quite leaves the station.
The slow train continued July 17-18 when Republicans scuttled a Democratic proposal ordering troop withdrawals from Iraq in a showdown capping an all-night debate. The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture, the 27th time this year alone that body has been unable to proceed on significant pieces of legislation. In the previous Congress (controlled by Republicans), Democrats were successful 34 times in blocking Republican legislation. Cloture has become the third rail of Congressional politics. It's time for the train to move on a different track.
Everyone has been properly complaining about obstructionism, but no one has said anything about changing the Senate rule on cloture. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is talking about changing Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor, then why shouldn't the Senate also start the discussion about changing the cloture rule right now? It could be the difference in getting bills passed.
In early July, the minority's decision to filibuster the amendment by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), which stated that men and women serving in the military deserved the same amount of time at home that they served overseas, died on a 56-41 failed cloture vote - a majority supporting it but the media saying it "failed."
In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, and it should change it again. If not an end outright, the best approach to guarantee the will of the majority, why not at least drop the requirement to 55 votes - necessitating just a little bit of extra consensus to end debate. Let the will of the American people, and of a majority of the Senate itself, be acted upon.
It's time to end the cloture clog, regardless of who's in charge.
Robert Weiner, president of Robert Weiner Associates Public Affairs, worked for 16 years in the House of Representatives and for six years in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, was legislative assistant/press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.).
The Senate's cloture rule defeats democracy. It lets public servants hide and obfuscate behind a parliamentary quirk never intended by the framers of the Constitution. It's time to end or significantly change the cloture rule, as was last done in 1975, and move to a true democracy so that the House and Senate equally represent the American people.
There are checks and balances, the only ones the Founding Fathers stated and intended: a presidential veto, which Congress can override with two-thirds, the only supermajority specified in the Constitution; the courts; and elections. No one ever foresaw parliamentary sleight of hand as a block of the will of the majority. If Congress wants to restore Americans' confidence in its work from the current all-time lows, it needs to allow the system to work as common sense, the Constitution and the framers dictate.
During the April-May 2005 "crisis" on judicial nominations, the "Gang of 14," seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, agreed to oppose the constitutional or "nuclear" option and to oppose filibusters of judicial nominations except in "extraordinary circumstances." However, the Senate has failed to cut off debate on other issues 57 times since then, making clear that the system has failed.
Democrats are right to scream Republican "obstructionism," but Republicans, when they were in the majority, also were right to scream Democratic obstructionism. Both sides use and abuse the rule when they are in the minority to create some supermajority fantasy the public will not understand - and then blame the other side for not getting a legislative agenda accomplished.
In last year's campaigns, House Democrats promised to change the way Congress does business - and do it within the first 100 hours they were in session. With a majority of 30-60 votes, but no supermajority requirement, the House passed its entire agenda. Despite majority support, hindered by the supermajority "cloture," the Senate has struggled all year just to pass a few bills. The American people get the feeling the Senate is a train that never quite leaves the station.
The slow train continued July 17-18 when Republicans scuttled a Democratic proposal ordering troop withdrawals from Iraq in a showdown capping an all-night debate. The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture, the 27th time this year alone that body has been unable to proceed on significant pieces of legislation. In the previous Congress (controlled by Republicans), Democrats were successful 34 times in blocking Republican legislation. Cloture has become the third rail of Congressional politics. It's time for the train to move on a different track.
Everyone has been properly complaining about obstructionism, but no one has said anything about changing the Senate rule on cloture. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is talking about changing Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor, then why shouldn't the Senate also start the discussion about changing the cloture rule right now? It could be the difference in getting bills passed.
In early July, the minority's decision to filibuster the amendment by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), which stated that men and women serving in the military deserved the same amount of time at home that they served overseas, died on a 56-41 failed cloture vote - a majority supporting it but the media saying it "failed."
In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, and it should change it again. If not an end outright, the best approach to guarantee the will of the majority, why not at least drop the requirement to 55 votes - necessitating just a little bit of extra consensus to end debate. Let the will of the American people, and of a majority of the Senate itself, be acted upon.
It's time to end the cloture clog, regardless of who's in charge.
2011 Images for ob hairstyle
medc
02-09 04:50 AM
I am trying to make a FOIA request for specific documents within my file.
I would like to have any document that states the exact date my AOS application was entered, such as the receipt (which I dont have). Does anyone know which form or document I can specifically ask for that will state this?
I would like to have any document that states the exact date my AOS application was entered, such as the receipt (which I dont have). Does anyone know which form or document I can specifically ask for that will state this?
more...
mrudul_hr
07-21 10:42 AM
one does not have to advertise for H1, might be they are advertisement is for filing your Labor application for GC.
jliechty
June 23rd, 2005, 03:47 PM
I checked out the latest in your gallery here, looks great! :)
more...
Macaca
11-10 05:44 PM
Why Moderate Republicans Wield Newfound Clout; Democrats Need Allies To Override Bush Vetoes Of Major Legislation (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119457364946187455.html) By David Rogers. Wall Street Journal, Nov 9, 2007
Long ignored when their party was in control, moderate Republicans are the new power brokers in an increasingly bitter series of veto confrontations between President Bush and the Democratic Congress.
Senior Democrats met last night with centrist House Republicans, trying to get a veto-proof majority for a child-health-insurance initiative opposed by Mr. Bush. Senate moderates played a part in an earlier 79-14 roll call overriding his veto of a water-resources bill. Moderates in both chambers will decide the future of a $151 billion education, labor and health-care budget approved by the House last night, 274-141, with 51 Republicans opposing the president.
The new dynamic reflects both the Democratic takeover of Congress and how Mr. Bush responded to it. In 1994, after Republicans took over, President Clinton saw a new middle ground defined by the election and moved away from fellow liberals in Congress. Mr. Bush did the opposite, moving to the right to shore up his conservative base, leaving an opening in the center.
The White House's more-confrontational tactics are a strategy calculated to disrupt the new majority and reduce the effectiveness of Congress to challenge Mr. Bush on the war in Iraq. The result has been a convergence of veto threats over spending levels and domestic policy, leaving little time for the two sides to reach deals.
A stopgap bill to keep the government funded until Dec. 14 neared passage last night, and Democrats have agreed to give the president his top priority: a $471 billion Pentagon budget including emergency funds for armored vehicles in Iraq. But new fights flared up in the House over war policy, and there is no peace in sight on the domestic front.
The education budget faces an almost certain veto. A $105.6 billion transportation and housing budget, approved by House-Senate negotiators, faces the same fate.
The White House argues that Democrats won no mandate in 2006 to increase spending and have floundered over how best to present the bills to Mr. Bush. "Their strategy changes by the hour," White House Budget Director Jim Nussle said. "I get different answers from every one of them."
Unaccustomed to the spotlight, Republican moderates find themselves in an uncomfortable role somewhere between being tied to the railroad tracks as the Democrats and White House come barreling down, and being the switchman who can save the train.
Yesterday's Senate vote on the water-resources veto was the first time Mr. Bush has been overridden. The more-telling test will come on the child-health-insurance and education bills now in play.
The health-care bill calls for an additional $35 billion in spending over the next five years to expand coverage for the children of working-class families. To win over moderates, Democrats are prepared to add tighter income limits and push more parents off the rolls. There has been a backlash from New Jersey and Rhode Island senators worried about the impact on their states; at the same time, House Republican leaders are pressing to pull their members back.
"There's a decent chance of a deal," said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.).
"I'm seeing the potential for some successes," said Rep. Joseph Knollenberg (R., Mich.).
As talks continue, a synergy has developed between the fate of the child-health bill and education budget, known as the "Labor H" bill -- so much so that the health talks even moved into the House Appropriations Committee rooms last night as members voted on the floor.
On a vote Tuesday night, it was evident that Republicans, who had stood with the president against the health-care bill, were looking for a chance to show their independence on the second bill, Labor H.
"There was a lot of talk in the corner. 'I'm getting a lot of heat at home because of my [health-care] vote,'" said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R., Ohio). "'I have to make it right on Labor H.'"
In crafting the package, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D., Wis.) has moved to the right to win over Republicans. Spending has been cut by about $1 billion below the level approved by the House in July, and antiabortion language has been preserved for conservatives.
"I've been told many times by the White House that they have no intention of compromising," he warned in a last appeal to moderates last night. "It's put up or shut up time."
Long ignored when their party was in control, moderate Republicans are the new power brokers in an increasingly bitter series of veto confrontations between President Bush and the Democratic Congress.
Senior Democrats met last night with centrist House Republicans, trying to get a veto-proof majority for a child-health-insurance initiative opposed by Mr. Bush. Senate moderates played a part in an earlier 79-14 roll call overriding his veto of a water-resources bill. Moderates in both chambers will decide the future of a $151 billion education, labor and health-care budget approved by the House last night, 274-141, with 51 Republicans opposing the president.
The new dynamic reflects both the Democratic takeover of Congress and how Mr. Bush responded to it. In 1994, after Republicans took over, President Clinton saw a new middle ground defined by the election and moved away from fellow liberals in Congress. Mr. Bush did the opposite, moving to the right to shore up his conservative base, leaving an opening in the center.
The White House's more-confrontational tactics are a strategy calculated to disrupt the new majority and reduce the effectiveness of Congress to challenge Mr. Bush on the war in Iraq. The result has been a convergence of veto threats over spending levels and domestic policy, leaving little time for the two sides to reach deals.
A stopgap bill to keep the government funded until Dec. 14 neared passage last night, and Democrats have agreed to give the president his top priority: a $471 billion Pentagon budget including emergency funds for armored vehicles in Iraq. But new fights flared up in the House over war policy, and there is no peace in sight on the domestic front.
The education budget faces an almost certain veto. A $105.6 billion transportation and housing budget, approved by House-Senate negotiators, faces the same fate.
The White House argues that Democrats won no mandate in 2006 to increase spending and have floundered over how best to present the bills to Mr. Bush. "Their strategy changes by the hour," White House Budget Director Jim Nussle said. "I get different answers from every one of them."
Unaccustomed to the spotlight, Republican moderates find themselves in an uncomfortable role somewhere between being tied to the railroad tracks as the Democrats and White House come barreling down, and being the switchman who can save the train.
Yesterday's Senate vote on the water-resources veto was the first time Mr. Bush has been overridden. The more-telling test will come on the child-health-insurance and education bills now in play.
The health-care bill calls for an additional $35 billion in spending over the next five years to expand coverage for the children of working-class families. To win over moderates, Democrats are prepared to add tighter income limits and push more parents off the rolls. There has been a backlash from New Jersey and Rhode Island senators worried about the impact on their states; at the same time, House Republican leaders are pressing to pull their members back.
"There's a decent chance of a deal," said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.).
"I'm seeing the potential for some successes," said Rep. Joseph Knollenberg (R., Mich.).
As talks continue, a synergy has developed between the fate of the child-health bill and education budget, known as the "Labor H" bill -- so much so that the health talks even moved into the House Appropriations Committee rooms last night as members voted on the floor.
On a vote Tuesday night, it was evident that Republicans, who had stood with the president against the health-care bill, were looking for a chance to show their independence on the second bill, Labor H.
"There was a lot of talk in the corner. 'I'm getting a lot of heat at home because of my [health-care] vote,'" said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R., Ohio). "'I have to make it right on Labor H.'"
In crafting the package, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D., Wis.) has moved to the right to win over Republicans. Spending has been cut by about $1 billion below the level approved by the House in July, and antiabortion language has been preserved for conservatives.
"I've been told many times by the White House that they have no intention of compromising," he warned in a last appeal to moderates last night. "It's put up or shut up time."
2010 In 2010, Bob hairstyles is
immi2006
10-29 09:29 PM
Cisco Systems: Company To Have 10,000 Staff In India By 2010
October 29, 2007: 07:01 AM EST
NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO) plans to have 10,000 employees in India by 2010, its chief executive said Monday.
"We currently have 3,000 employees working in India," John Chambers told reporters on the sidelines of a company event.
Cisco had earlier said it would shift 20% of its top management staff across all functions to India by 2012
http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSDEL00066020071029
October 29, 2007: 07:01 AM EST
NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO) plans to have 10,000 employees in India by 2010, its chief executive said Monday.
"We currently have 3,000 employees working in India," John Chambers told reporters on the sidelines of a company event.
Cisco had earlier said it would shift 20% of its top management staff across all functions to India by 2012
http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSDEL00066020071029
more...
enthu999
07-25 02:41 PM
My country of citizenship is Canada and currently working on TN status. Canada is covered under Visa waiver program so, I don't need to get visa stamping but need to travel through a POE so, I could get new I-94 for the H validity period.
In the I-129, I have opted for Calgary as POE, but due to some reasons now I have to travel via Toronto, would that be ok?
In the I-129, I have opted for Calgary as POE, but due to some reasons now I have to travel via Toronto, would that be ok?
hair ob hairstyle with
ns521
02-22 05:48 PM
Any advantage of opening an account on USCIS website to receive automatic case status updates? or I don't need to do that if I keep checking the status online by myself?
more...
zarez
03-02 09:03 AM
It's a sketch of me in my younger days from my moleskine. I am thinking about making a short anime for local amateur show. Drawing is influenced by moby's natural blues. If entry is to much "moby" and doesn't count, it's ok.
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/3075/mara.gif (http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mara.gif)
(http://g.imageshack.us/img258/mara.gif/1/)
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/3075/mara.gif (http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mara.gif)
(http://g.imageshack.us/img258/mara.gif/1/)
hot Reverse Bob Haircut Links
amindarshana
12-03 08:27 AM
Hi
I have filed 140 /485 concurrent on Aug 3rd and haven't received any receipt. Have opened SR , Sent FAX ..but no updates.
As per the nrew rule implemented on July 16th , All the previously approved labor will expire on Jan 12 2008.
If for any reason we don;t receive receipt , what happens to labor.. Are we back to square one ..
If anybody in simiar situation... Please reply.
I have filed 140 /485 concurrent on Aug 3rd and haven't received any receipt. Have opened SR , Sent FAX ..but no updates.
As per the nrew rule implemented on July 16th , All the previously approved labor will expire on Jan 12 2008.
If for any reason we don;t receive receipt , what happens to labor.. Are we back to square one ..
If anybody in simiar situation... Please reply.
more...
house Classic Blunt Bob Hairstyle
perm2gc
05-23 05:26 PM
Hi All,
I am finishing my PHD and wanted to know if anyone knows about the process of applying for an H-1b and/or GC for this particular category of health professionals.
Would greatly appreciate any help or advice.
Please read the first title in the home page.you have your answer in it.:D
I am finishing my PHD and wanted to know if anyone knows about the process of applying for an H-1b and/or GC for this particular category of health professionals.
Would greatly appreciate any help or advice.
Please read the first title in the home page.you have your answer in it.:D
tattoo In short ob hairstyle,
karthiknv143
02-07 04:23 PM
Guess its never or may be part of CIR(which is also never):rolleyes:
more...
pictures Bob Hair Styles
ng123456
10-28 05:38 PM
I came in on an F1 and got transfered to a H1B without leaving the country.
My H1 was approved for 3 years ie till 2012.
Due to problems at my work place, my H1 got revoked by my employer.
I'm in the medical profession, hence, jobs are few and far between if removed form a training program such as I was in. The next cycle of jobs dont start employment till July 2011.
I am currently within the 180 day limit.
What are my options? My countrys consulate is known to be tight fisted with visas, especially as I have overstayed since I lost my job abruptly.
If my fiance and I do get married, am I eligible for for adjustment of status?
Please help!
My H1 was approved for 3 years ie till 2012.
Due to problems at my work place, my H1 got revoked by my employer.
I'm in the medical profession, hence, jobs are few and far between if removed form a training program such as I was in. The next cycle of jobs dont start employment till July 2011.
I am currently within the 180 day limit.
What are my options? My countrys consulate is known to be tight fisted with visas, especially as I have overstayed since I lost my job abruptly.
If my fiance and I do get married, am I eligible for for adjustment of status?
Please help!
dresses ob hairstyles pictures.
amslonewolf
11-29 10:22 PM
Hi -
I remember seeing a website, that displays all the labor certifications filed by an attorney for a company. Unfortunately, I lost the link to that website.
Can one of you post the link to this website, if you have it,,
I remember seeing a website, that displays all the labor certifications filed by an attorney for a company. Unfortunately, I lost the link to that website.
Can one of you post the link to this website, if you have it,,
more...
makeup Bob Hairstyles For Thick Hair
Macaca
04-05 08:17 AM
Printing Office's Work Stacks Up (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/03/AR2007040301829.html), By Lyndsey Layton, Washington Post Staff Writer, Wednesday, April 4, 2007
The Congressional Record, for instance, is printed daily and captures every debate, vote, parliamentary maneuver, tribute to a fife-and-drum corps, post office naming, and utterance by members on the floor of the House and the Senate. It averages 250 pages.
Ordinarily, the legislative process is paper-intensive. From the moment a bill is introduced by a member of Congress to its signature on parchment paper by the president, the printing office must print 10 different documents related to that piece of legislation, often doing the work overnight.
The agency is producing 3 million or 4 million pages a week for Congress from its 1.5 million-square-foot North Capitol Street headquarters, the largest information-processing, printing and distribution facility in the world. Tapella could not say how that compares with the workload under the last Congress.
All the talk of paper led some members of the panel to question why the printing office, which was created in 1813 when printing was a central tool in communication, hasn't gone all-electronic.
"Are you completely transitioning to a digital system as some point?" the subcommittee chairman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.), asked during a hearing.
The printing office is in the middle of a $29 million technological shift that will allow it to store and maintain all federal documents electronically, Tapella said. About 92 percent of everything it publishes now is available in an electronic format, said Michael L. Wash, the agency's chief technical officer. The agency produced its first online edition of the Congressional Record two weeks ago.
But Turri said the printing office will stick with paper until Congress directs it to do otherwise.
"It's kind of like the newspaper business," said Rep. Zach Wamp (R-Tenn). "They know things are going electronic, but they know people are going to want to read their newspaper with their coffee."
The Congressional Record, for instance, is printed daily and captures every debate, vote, parliamentary maneuver, tribute to a fife-and-drum corps, post office naming, and utterance by members on the floor of the House and the Senate. It averages 250 pages.
Ordinarily, the legislative process is paper-intensive. From the moment a bill is introduced by a member of Congress to its signature on parchment paper by the president, the printing office must print 10 different documents related to that piece of legislation, often doing the work overnight.
The agency is producing 3 million or 4 million pages a week for Congress from its 1.5 million-square-foot North Capitol Street headquarters, the largest information-processing, printing and distribution facility in the world. Tapella could not say how that compares with the workload under the last Congress.
All the talk of paper led some members of the panel to question why the printing office, which was created in 1813 when printing was a central tool in communication, hasn't gone all-electronic.
"Are you completely transitioning to a digital system as some point?" the subcommittee chairman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.), asked during a hearing.
The printing office is in the middle of a $29 million technological shift that will allow it to store and maintain all federal documents electronically, Tapella said. About 92 percent of everything it publishes now is available in an electronic format, said Michael L. Wash, the agency's chief technical officer. The agency produced its first online edition of the Congressional Record two weeks ago.
But Turri said the printing office will stick with paper until Congress directs it to do otherwise.
"It's kind of like the newspaper business," said Rep. Zach Wamp (R-Tenn). "They know things are going electronic, but they know people are going to want to read their newspaper with their coffee."
girlfriend Bob Hairstyles
Latha Reddy
08-10 09:53 PM
prevailing wage calculations for EB-2 applications to be filed for Sr. Systems Analyst and Sr. Software Engineer. As of January 1, 2010, these wage requests have to be filed using US DOL�s electronic iCert system. For the past couple of years, the NJ DOL had given us LEVEL II wages for these positions. Now, US DOL is giving us LEVEL III wages for these positions which is at $102,274
EB-2 Software Engineer/Systems Analyst LEVEL III at $102,274 , or file under EB-2 ITPM LEVEL II at $116,501
I wanted to confirm whether these wage Calculations Declared by DOL are correct to file for EB2 category and do we need to quote such high salary ranges.I have master's degree plus 5+years of Experience in IT field.So, i will qualify for EB2 category but only wanted to confirm whether the wages declared by DOL were correct in respect to Jan 2010
Anyone or the concerned attorney can you please clarify on this.
Thanks
EB-2 Software Engineer/Systems Analyst LEVEL III at $102,274 , or file under EB-2 ITPM LEVEL II at $116,501
I wanted to confirm whether these wage Calculations Declared by DOL are correct to file for EB2 category and do we need to quote such high salary ranges.I have master's degree plus 5+years of Experience in IT field.So, i will qualify for EB2 category but only wanted to confirm whether the wages declared by DOL were correct in respect to Jan 2010
Anyone or the concerned attorney can you please clarify on this.
Thanks
hairstyles long Bob hairstyles will
hoser7
02-25 11:35 AM
I was recently on H1B and renewal/extension was denied. So I left promptly to go back to Canada to establish residence there and start working. Now I need to return to the USA to retrieve some personal belongings, wrap up my residence and bring a car back etc...
My question is, when I enter the USA for the first time after being denied H1B will I have a hard time and will they be reluctant for some reason to permit me to enter as a visitor? I can't see why they would but who knows???
My family is still in the US and I need to help to get them prepared to come back
My question is, when I enter the USA for the first time after being denied H1B will I have a hard time and will they be reluctant for some reason to permit me to enter as a visitor? I can't see why they would but who knows???
My family is still in the US and I need to help to get them prepared to come back
joshraj
04-08 04:44 PM
Hi Friends,
Starting this thread for NSC 140 applicants to track LUDs and Approvals.
The whole purpose of this thread is to get the indication of where NSC is with the appoval process for 140.
I hope every one who is connected to NSC for I140 application will update this thread.
Cheers!
JoshRaj
Starting this thread for NSC 140 applicants to track LUDs and Approvals.
The whole purpose of this thread is to get the indication of where NSC is with the appoval process for 140.
I hope every one who is connected to NSC for I140 application will update this thread.
Cheers!
JoshRaj
Cantamessa
05-05 07:50 AM
Hello i am new user for this site. so i do not enough this site. thanks
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น