dxldad
05-12 01:38 PM
So, it always makes sense to get it done via PCP and then take that documentation to the Civil Surgeon. If we get a discount - great; otherwise still ok.
Does CS do the exactly same tests as PCP?
How much time does it take to get results from CS?
How much does CS charge?
The Civil Surgeon does not even need to do any tests if you have all the documentation. You could check the website to find civil surgeons in your area and then call them up and ask for the rates. There is no uniform rate and people charge what they feel like. If you ask around, you would get good rates.
Does CS do the exactly same tests as PCP?
How much time does it take to get results from CS?
How much does CS charge?
The Civil Surgeon does not even need to do any tests if you have all the documentation. You could check the website to find civil surgeons in your area and then call them up and ask for the rates. There is no uniform rate and people charge what they feel like. If you ask around, you would get good rates.
wallpaper [Image: dragonball-z-all-800
drirshad
08-10 07:53 PM
Don't miss this ship, get ur medical done in India and file ASAP i m not sure if u go for Consular Processing do u need to here or not. Its only filing 485 u need to be here. Check with ur attorney ....
sathishkrish
07-23 08:54 PM
I am working for company A under H1-B visa and my PERM was approved early this year and my I-140 (EB2) is pending. I summitted I-485 last week since the PD is current again. Almost the same time, I moved to another department in the same company because of company reconstruction. The job seems to be having different requirements(>50% difference). I have a couple of questions:
1. Within how long I need to inform my company lawyer and then USCIS that my job changed within the same company?
2. What are the concequences if I do not inform my company laywer about my job change? Will USCIS know this in the future and deny my I-140 and I-485?
3. Will my pending I-140 get denied since my job requirement changed (if my company lawyer inform USICS)?
4. What are the possible outcomes for my I-485 under this job change situation?
5. Is that possible that I just stay there as nothing happened and wait for USCIS response to my I-140 and I-485?
6. What can be done in order to avoid a new PERM and new I-140? I really don't want to start all over again since who knows what the PD will be after Oct. this year...
If your job description has changed progressively, then it should be OK. What I mean is - If you are a developer and later became a senior developer then its acceptable I presume.
I dont know what else to say as far your situation is concerned - Good Luck!
1. Within how long I need to inform my company lawyer and then USCIS that my job changed within the same company?
2. What are the concequences if I do not inform my company laywer about my job change? Will USCIS know this in the future and deny my I-140 and I-485?
3. Will my pending I-140 get denied since my job requirement changed (if my company lawyer inform USICS)?
4. What are the possible outcomes for my I-485 under this job change situation?
5. Is that possible that I just stay there as nothing happened and wait for USCIS response to my I-140 and I-485?
6. What can be done in order to avoid a new PERM and new I-140? I really don't want to start all over again since who knows what the PD will be after Oct. this year...
If your job description has changed progressively, then it should be OK. What I mean is - If you are a developer and later became a senior developer then its acceptable I presume.
I dont know what else to say as far your situation is concerned - Good Luck!
2011 01a-dragon-all-z-anime-
spulapa
08-05 01:35 PM
It auto-converts all H1Bs and EADs into Green Cards effective immediately. :)
Pappu ke muh mein ghee shakar... :D
Pappu ke muh mein ghee shakar... :D
more...
beppenyc
03-20 08:15 PM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-20-2006/0004323801&EDATE=
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
Jerry2009
05-11 01:47 PM
Hi desimass77. How do you convince the school that you are qualified?
My wife has a similar situation. We tried to convince school that we are qualified under "parolee" category. However, my wife's I-94 expires (she entered US using AP last June). Her school uses this reason to reject again. Now, we decide to re-enter US again to get a fresh I-94.
Her school officials say that they are going to query USCIS database once my wife gets a new I94 stamp. It is something called G-845 form.
Just curious, did you school query USCIS database on your case? Or your school just think yo are qualified?
I think the "parolee" category is really ambiguous, since it requires student to enter US with parole for at least one year. On the other hand, it wants I-94 unexpired. AP can hardly fit into this category, as if we entered US, the valid length is usually less than 1 year, unless we re-enter US on the exact same date when the AP was issued.
Please, if anybody successfully convinced school on FAFSA, please share your experience here!
My wife has a similar situation. We tried to convince school that we are qualified under "parolee" category. However, my wife's I-94 expires (she entered US using AP last June). Her school uses this reason to reject again. Now, we decide to re-enter US again to get a fresh I-94.
Her school officials say that they are going to query USCIS database once my wife gets a new I94 stamp. It is something called G-845 form.
Just curious, did you school query USCIS database on your case? Or your school just think yo are qualified?
I think the "parolee" category is really ambiguous, since it requires student to enter US with parole for at least one year. On the other hand, it wants I-94 unexpired. AP can hardly fit into this category, as if we entered US, the valid length is usually less than 1 year, unless we re-enter US on the exact same date when the AP was issued.
Please, if anybody successfully convinced school on FAFSA, please share your experience here!
more...
bekugc
04-19 05:59 PM
regd ur qn --> So do you think using EAD gives a person an Immigrant status in turn losing his non-immigrant status?
485 stage itself is called 'adjustment of status'. so using EAD or AP , takes u out of nonimmigrant status, and brings u into a intermediate status - thats why they write AOS/parolee on i94 if u use AP. . i dont think u become an "immigrant" untill ur 485/gc is approved.
485 stage itself is called 'adjustment of status'. so using EAD or AP , takes u out of nonimmigrant status, and brings u into a intermediate status - thats why they write AOS/parolee on i94 if u use AP. . i dont think u become an "immigrant" untill ur 485/gc is approved.
2010 Dragon-all-z-wallpaper-09
pappu
02-23 06:03 PM
Does anyone else have a problem clicking the last forum topic on the left side. I am using IE7 and never have a hyperlink to click on for that one topic only.
-a
I am unable to understand 'the last forum topic on the left side'
Could you please explain or maybe send me a screenshot of the error(info at immigrationvoice.org) and we will fix it
-a
I am unable to understand 'the last forum topic on the left side'
Could you please explain or maybe send me a screenshot of the error(info at immigrationvoice.org) and we will fix it
more...
485Mbe4001
02-06 02:53 PM
How does this affect AC 21, can you get a new job as a manager or you have to look for the one you used to apply for GC?
hair Dragon Ball Z Desktop
jliechty
June 14th, 2005, 04:12 PM
I have a Tamron 90mm macro for my D1, and despite the D1's autofocus strength, AF is still as useless as ever for macro (with the Sigma lenses that have HSM, AF might become somewhat useful in certain limited situations at less-than-lifesize magnification). If I could afford it, I would be happier with a longer lens (maybe the 150mm Sigma as a nice compromise) for most of my macro photography - including butterflies, insects, and plant life in the field.
Bear in mind that if you do get the Nikon 200mm f/4 (or the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 HSM macro - HSM being equivalent to AF-S), you'll probably want to keep the 60mm for situations where you don't want so much telephoto compression (flowers being a prime example).
Edit: ah, I see you're using a D2X. Then, maybe you could get some use out of the autofocus for chasing insects in flight. With a D70 (which is what I assumed that you had at first), you couldn't expect so much luck. ;)
Bear in mind that if you do get the Nikon 200mm f/4 (or the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 HSM macro - HSM being equivalent to AF-S), you'll probably want to keep the 60mm for situations where you don't want so much telephoto compression (flowers being a prime example).
Edit: ah, I see you're using a D2X. Then, maybe you could get some use out of the autofocus for chasing insects in flight. With a D70 (which is what I assumed that you had at first), you couldn't expect so much luck. ;)