ssterian01
07-02 12:18 PM
Hi All,
I have I485 pending,
EB3 NON-India or China ,
EAD ,
wife on H4 , not added on 485 (married after filed I485)
If my wife is on H4 visa and I am forced to change employers on EAD, does anyone know if:
1. The process is smooth for language training if I am the sponsor and the school is accredited
2. When my 485 is eventually approved (god knows when !?) can I add her without any problems from F1 to my application, as it wold have been from H4?
Thanks everyone for any piece of information
I have I485 pending,
EB3 NON-India or China ,
EAD ,
wife on H4 , not added on 485 (married after filed I485)
If my wife is on H4 visa and I am forced to change employers on EAD, does anyone know if:
1. The process is smooth for language training if I am the sponsor and the school is accredited
2. When my 485 is eventually approved (god knows when !?) can I add her without any problems from F1 to my application, as it wold have been from H4?
Thanks everyone for any piece of information
wallpaper rock-in-the-sea-wallpaper
abracadabra102
11-07 08:15 AM
1. The 14th amendment is what this country created as a result of the civil war to end slavery. The congress-critters thinking of repealing this amendment either have forgotten their history or are evil in ways people have not understood.
2 and 3. Expectations of a balanced budget is an excellent example of not understanding the consequences of previous policies. Either a. reduce spending or b. increase taxation.
Neither is acceptable, but we still want a balanced budget. When I was young, I learnt these basics of supply and demand by carefully managing my pocket money. I suppose the rich congress kids never had to think like that.
4. I don't really know enough to comment on this
I will comment on 4.
Estate tax is in principle a very good idea. If some one dies, a portion of that persons estate is taxed (at almost 50%) before it is distributed to whomever it was willed. This promotes re-distribution of wealth, prevents concentration of wealth in a few families. Incentivises to work and earn one's own money than depend on parents property. This estate tax was first introduced by Augustus Caesar about 2000 years ago and almost all western nations use it to varying degree. I wish this tax is imposed in India too.
Warren Buffet and Bill Gates both support estate tax. There are some arguments against it. One argument is that if children do not have right to parents property, then society (through government) does not have that right either. This is basically a moral argument but we do many things for greater good at the cost of individual right (forcefully buying land for public works like roads etc.) and is generally accepted.
2 and 3. Expectations of a balanced budget is an excellent example of not understanding the consequences of previous policies. Either a. reduce spending or b. increase taxation.
Neither is acceptable, but we still want a balanced budget. When I was young, I learnt these basics of supply and demand by carefully managing my pocket money. I suppose the rich congress kids never had to think like that.
4. I don't really know enough to comment on this
I will comment on 4.
Estate tax is in principle a very good idea. If some one dies, a portion of that persons estate is taxed (at almost 50%) before it is distributed to whomever it was willed. This promotes re-distribution of wealth, prevents concentration of wealth in a few families. Incentivises to work and earn one's own money than depend on parents property. This estate tax was first introduced by Augustus Caesar about 2000 years ago and almost all western nations use it to varying degree. I wish this tax is imposed in India too.
Warren Buffet and Bill Gates both support estate tax. There are some arguments against it. One argument is that if children do not have right to parents property, then society (through government) does not have that right either. This is basically a moral argument but we do many things for greater good at the cost of individual right (forcefully buying land for public works like roads etc.) and is generally accepted.
logiclife
06-18 05:59 PM
yeah. still, isn't it a little "short"?!:)
I mean, having seeing some really long lists posted by other members, I'm a littlle concerned. :cool:
Dont be concerned. Over documentation is a common phenomenon and most people do it to preempt RFEs and inquiries and I dont think it works that way.
Here is what I posted on a separate thread earlier today. My lawyer too has sent me a very very short list of documents he needs. And although he is a little slow, his performance so far has been flawless ... Knock on wood.
A lot of lawyers try to preempt a possible RFE by including "AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE" documentation. 3 years of tax returns prove nothing more than what 1 year of tax return would prove.
Also, having a tax return of 2004 doesnt prove that you were in status at all times during 2004. Tax return shows total income that includes salary, bonus, deductions etc, and even Einstein cant figure out the immigration status in 2004 and whether the candidate was in good status at all times just by looking at the tax return.
Another example is color copies of visa stamp. What would a color copy prove that a mono-chrome copy would not? Wouldnt USCIS verify the legitimacy of the visa stamp by cross-referencing it with their own database?
Some lawyers send many years' tax returns, thinking that it might pre-empt the RFEs. Some lawyers send only whats neccesary. I've heard that one of the lawyers in New York doesnt even send employer's letter. That means, basically nothing from the employer. And he too gets cases approved.
Overloading the USCIS with a heavy file, sending a ton of things in addition to what they expect, may be a good strategy if you believe that it might thwart a RFE (and the delay caused by RFE). That doesnt mean it works that way. You can still get RFE and additional request for documents later.
However, sending too thick a bunch, would also make your case look like a "difficult" case. (my belief, I dont know but just common sense would indicate that thicker bigger files are complicated cases on first impression). And what that means is that it will get delayed because the CIS ombudsman report has documented that officers tend to work easy cases first (get the low hanging fruit first) and beef up their performance statistics by doing more cases in less time. Therefore, the complicated bigger cases that should be work on first, instead get worked on last. And sending USCIS last 5 years of tax returns might do exactly that. Why drown the officers in paperwork?
So think a little before sending USCIS 20 pounds of paperwork. More paperwork and overwhelming USCIS with documentation may not mean faster RFE-free processing. (Again, my belief - something to ponder about. But do what you think is right and what your lawyer tells you. I am not a lawyer).
I mean, having seeing some really long lists posted by other members, I'm a littlle concerned. :cool:
Dont be concerned. Over documentation is a common phenomenon and most people do it to preempt RFEs and inquiries and I dont think it works that way.
Here is what I posted on a separate thread earlier today. My lawyer too has sent me a very very short list of documents he needs. And although he is a little slow, his performance so far has been flawless ... Knock on wood.
A lot of lawyers try to preempt a possible RFE by including "AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE" documentation. 3 years of tax returns prove nothing more than what 1 year of tax return would prove.
Also, having a tax return of 2004 doesnt prove that you were in status at all times during 2004. Tax return shows total income that includes salary, bonus, deductions etc, and even Einstein cant figure out the immigration status in 2004 and whether the candidate was in good status at all times just by looking at the tax return.
Another example is color copies of visa stamp. What would a color copy prove that a mono-chrome copy would not? Wouldnt USCIS verify the legitimacy of the visa stamp by cross-referencing it with their own database?
Some lawyers send many years' tax returns, thinking that it might pre-empt the RFEs. Some lawyers send only whats neccesary. I've heard that one of the lawyers in New York doesnt even send employer's letter. That means, basically nothing from the employer. And he too gets cases approved.
Overloading the USCIS with a heavy file, sending a ton of things in addition to what they expect, may be a good strategy if you believe that it might thwart a RFE (and the delay caused by RFE). That doesnt mean it works that way. You can still get RFE and additional request for documents later.
However, sending too thick a bunch, would also make your case look like a "difficult" case. (my belief, I dont know but just common sense would indicate that thicker bigger files are complicated cases on first impression). And what that means is that it will get delayed because the CIS ombudsman report has documented that officers tend to work easy cases first (get the low hanging fruit first) and beef up their performance statistics by doing more cases in less time. Therefore, the complicated bigger cases that should be work on first, instead get worked on last. And sending USCIS last 5 years of tax returns might do exactly that. Why drown the officers in paperwork?
So think a little before sending USCIS 20 pounds of paperwork. More paperwork and overwhelming USCIS with documentation may not mean faster RFE-free processing. (Again, my belief - something to ponder about. But do what you think is right and what your lawyer tells you. I am not a lawyer).
2011 wallpaper rock. wallpaper rock
clif
07-26 01:17 PM
How are the dates mentioned in the following press release (on July 20th) to be interpreted:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes20Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes20Jul07.pdf
more...
surabhi
07-15 12:52 PM
I have used AC21 to change jobs
I have a closing statement from my previous employer mentioning the exercisable options.
Here it goes:
Exercisable Options
Price $30
grant date 1/10/2007
Shares exercisable 400
total price =12000
Last date to exercise
7/20/2008
However the market share value for the company now is 26.00
now my question is if I were to exercise before the last date will I be getting the total amount of $12000 or 26 x 400 = $10400 or the difference between the share values which is infact negative or nothing?
I find it difficult understand this financial terms. I dont understand clearly the term 'Exercisable options' Is there a hidden treasure am going to get?????
You will want to exercise your option only if the stock price on the date of sale > strike price (30$).
Whenever you sell, any amount > 30$ is your money, else the options are under water and useless
I have a closing statement from my previous employer mentioning the exercisable options.
Here it goes:
Exercisable Options
Price $30
grant date 1/10/2007
Shares exercisable 400
total price =12000
Last date to exercise
7/20/2008
However the market share value for the company now is 26.00
now my question is if I were to exercise before the last date will I be getting the total amount of $12000 or 26 x 400 = $10400 or the difference between the share values which is infact negative or nothing?
I find it difficult understand this financial terms. I dont understand clearly the term 'Exercisable options' Is there a hidden treasure am going to get?????
You will want to exercise your option only if the stock price on the date of sale > strike price (30$).
Whenever you sell, any amount > 30$ is your money, else the options are under water and useless
El Hacko
July 14th, 2006, 10:34 PM
TWO TICKETS MADONNA ROME
ON SALE TWO TICKETS FOR MADONNA'S CONCERT IN ROME
THE 6tH AUGUST 2006.
OLYMPIC STADIUM IN ROMA
SECTOR = CURVA NORD
PRICE FOR 2 TICKETS = 240 EURO
I SEND WITH INTERNATIOL POST AFTER THE PAYMANT
PAYMENT WITH PAYPAL OR BANK TRANSFER
FOR FURTHERT QUESTION
merletta@email.it
Sign me up...I'm ready to go Italia..Home of the 2006 Winter Olympics, World Cup Champions and makers of fine wine and pizza's.
Oh..The tickets...Do they come with a pit pass for at least 3 songs?
No? Oh so sorry...
*LOL*
ON SALE TWO TICKETS FOR MADONNA'S CONCERT IN ROME
THE 6tH AUGUST 2006.
OLYMPIC STADIUM IN ROMA
SECTOR = CURVA NORD
PRICE FOR 2 TICKETS = 240 EURO
I SEND WITH INTERNATIOL POST AFTER THE PAYMANT
PAYMENT WITH PAYPAL OR BANK TRANSFER
FOR FURTHERT QUESTION
merletta@email.it
Sign me up...I'm ready to go Italia..Home of the 2006 Winter Olympics, World Cup Champions and makers of fine wine and pizza's.
Oh..The tickets...Do they come with a pit pass for at least 3 songs?
No? Oh so sorry...
*LOL*