justin bieber eyes

images Be a year by justin bieber

Justin Bieber thrilled

blackberry

08-05 08:04 PM

So this contradicts the theory of applicant not getting reciept notice if using G-28 !
Is there anyone else who had the same experience ??

--BB

---

wallpaper Justin Bieber thrilled

Here#39;s a picture of Justin on

rajuram

05-06 11:17 PM

I am a jul 2007 filer, EB3 India, Priority Date 4/2002.

Around 10 days ago, I got a soft lud for the first time on my 485!!! Since my PD is not current, why would LUD change? Does it mean that they are looking at it?

---

justin bieber pants.

Better_Days

12-01 12:55 PM

Guys,

I want to know what are the chances of getting I-140 approve if we file a new petition and current I-140 appeal process is pending with USCIS. My I-140 was denied on education basis. In denial notice USCIS wrote that we did not prove that my 3+3 (Diploma + Engg degree from India) degree is not equivalent to B.S in Computer science from Labor certification.

Guys please share your experience with me since its important for me to get I-140 approve for future growth.

Thanks

To answer your original question, my I-140 under EB3 was denied on the basis that my 3-year Bachelor in Computer Science was not equivalent to a 4-year BCS degree. I appealed to the AAO and attached an evaluation from Sheila Danzig.

While the AAO was pending, I started the process from scratch by filing a new PERM and my second I-140 was approved. So I guess it is possible to file a new I-140 while the original one is under appeal.

---

2011 Here#39;s a picture of Justin on

justin bieber eye colour

panky72

05-21 02:03 PM

hi,

Just want to find out the process to apply for interim EAD...I applied for EAD renewal on 8th of may and my EAD expires August 16th...i doubt i get my EAD before my current expires...i just want to find out whether i can apply for interim EAD or ??? if yes, what are the current procedures? I e-filed my EAD application and sent all documents to TSC...please help gurus.

I think the interim EAD is no longer available. But you might get your EAD before Aug 16th. I got my EAD in 45 days (paper file at NE)

---

more...

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

kittu1991

11-16 01:37 PM

If you enter US using your AP even for the same employer you will no longer have your H1B status valid, you an return back to H1B status only after a renewal. After entering US on AP you need to inform you employer. Your status after entering on AP makes you a Parolee.

Please don't give out wrong information. Noone asking you to reply if you are not 100% sure of what you are saying.:mad:

Using AP will not invalidate your H1. You can enter in AP and work with the same employer as long as your H1 is valid and you transfer it to new employer if needed.

---

Justin Bieber Ti Amo ♥

smisachu

02-01 04:04 PM

Here is what I would do..
1. Pay off your debts..
2. Collect 6 months of paycheck equivalent money in CDs.
3. Buy life insurance.
4. contribute to 401K if employer offers a match.
5. Start children's education fund (4o3b?)
6. Buy some gold may be 5-10% of savings.
7. Invest in US based large cap consistent dividend yielding stocks > 4% yield (example:- PFE & T).
8. Invest in an index fund with exposure to global economies with low expense ratio.
9. Invest in your health (gym membership or equipment etc..)
10. Buy some real estate if you can afford.

Anything left over from this you should be put in equity tranche of a Synthetic CDO-Squared and hedge the USD-INR fluctuation on the payout of your investments by buying long dated Quanto options maturing at the expiration of your H1 or patience in waiting for GC-which ever comes first.
:D

I am kidding of course...

---

more...

justin bieber haircut 2011

amitjoey

08-05 01:10 PM

The requirements of the job dictates whether or not you can qualify for EB2. So if you have a PHD or Post doctoral research, will not matter if the job you are doing only requires a Bachelors degree holder with minimal experience.

On the other hand if the job requires that you have Bachelors with atleast 5 years of experience you could. Also, you have to pass the market labor test. So, the job has to be for skills that are in demand for which there is no US citizen available.

---

2010 justin bieber pants.

Be a year by justin bieber

arihant

12-28 11:08 AM

All the gurus on this forum,
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;

My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from INSEAD france for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?

Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..

I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......

PLEASE respond
:(

Why is your 485 case pending since 2002? Is it stuck in Name Check or due to retrogression. I thought that 485 cases are progressing relatively fast as long as the case is not affected by retrogression and is not stuck in the black hole called "name check"!

---

more...

How Did Justin Bieber Get This

pappu

12-24 09:03 AM

Celebrating 2nd IV anniversary: IV action Item

Dear members,

IV will be completing a milestone in a couple of days. Let us use this opportunity to celebrate the fact that IV has been able to bring the community together and we have been able to get small successes till now.

Let us also celebrate this event by inviting as many new members we can and raise the membership of IV.

You can review IV achievements here:

http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5&Itemid=47


Pls use these templates to send emails to your friends requesting them to join IV

http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=36

http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=58&Itemid=36

http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_iv_invite_friends&Itemid=55

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16034&highlight=walking_dude
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15976&highlight=walking_dude
======================

If you have a blog, pls post IV related messages, links, Banner ads on your blogs.
Banners are available at http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=65&Itemid=36

Let us also list such blogs on this thread. Here are some blogs:
(1) http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com
(2) http://iv-physicians.blogspot.com
(3) http://iv-tristate.blogspot.com
(4) http://dcrally.blogspot.com
(5) http://www.touchdownusa.org/
(6) http://skilledimmigrants.blogspot.com/
(7) http://www.touchdownusa.org/floral/FloralProtest.html
(8) http://www.tired-immigrant.blogspot.com/

---

hair justin bieber eye colour

Photo Of Justin Bieber On The

perm2gc

01-06 04:46 PM

My wife is on H4 and is exploring the posibility of converting to a H1. She recently went for her first interview and the people over there told her that there is a new rule for H4 to H1B conversion. According to them, she needs to go to India and get her H1B stamped before she can start working. Is this true? As far as I know, all one needs is an approved I-797 (for I-129 petition) indicating that the approval is for change of status to H1B (meaning that the approval notice has a I-94).

Please let me know if there is any merit in the above statement?
Nope its not true.All she need is approved I-797.Visa Stamping is only required when she has to travel outside US and reenter.

---

more...

steve buscemi justin bieber

justin150377

07-17 02:20 PM

Screw Murthy !!! I have never seen him picking up any good news.

Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)

---

hot Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

Mouth Eyes Justin Bieber

arpu31

11-15 01:48 PM

Thank you for your reply.

Even though we get a new I-94, it is still with my consulting company as the company does not give me my I797.
If I go to India and apply for H4 again, then wont the officer ask me on why I am trying to get the H4 stamping again since it already has a previous valid H4 stamping on it? since there is no H1 stamping on my passport.

Or can I go out of USA and get back on the same revious H4 stamping?

Thanks,

Arpu

I believe whenever you apply H1 or H4 in US, you will get new I-94 so you don't need to go outside US.

#3 : no, only show H1B approval from ur spouse.
#4 : I don't know about 60 days rule but this is like chicken and egg situation. to get paid (using H1), you will need to have SSN. if you don't get paid then you are violating ur H1 condition. so I believe the reasonable answer is you have to get SSN and a project so you can get paid and stay using H1B status (if not revert to H4 asap).
#5 : I believe you are not out of status but you are violating H1 condition.

But again, Please check with ur attorney since I am not an attorney.

Sorry if my answers will scare you a bit.

Regards,

---

more...


house Justin Bieber

The look in Bieber#39;s eyes in

vybe3142

07-25 12:03 AM

thanks much, ...

i was just worried about not having a salary for those 90 days or so would affect my whole GC process.
Yes, my I140 WILL be revoked. I'm on good terms with my previous employer and this is just something they will be doing to protect their interests.

---

tattoo Justin Bieber Ti Amo ♥

justin bieber eyes. shervieux

contact

04-27 10:45 AM

whether the incident is true or not, IV member is trying to caution us that we should be fully focused when the officer examines our passport.

---

more...


pictures justin bieber haircut 2011

Justin+ieber+eyes+2011

lazycis

10-05 09:03 PM

Your H1-B does not matter. What matters is LC for your I-140. It sounds like you want to use AC21 portability. EAD allows to work for any employer(s), but you have to make sure your I-140/I-485 is intact.

---

dresses Mouth Eyes Justin Bieber

Here#39;s Justin Bieber giving us

anilsal

08-15 01:44 PM

Will do my very best to attend and will encourage others to attend too. I know this is important to me like you and everyone else here and Thanks for what are doing to community.

Thanks for the contribution. :) Also I do suggest you take a look at the IV merchandise.

Getting checks cashed must be a relief for you. Enjoy the peace that comes with it. :)

Additionally:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12389

---

more...


makeup How Did Justin Bieber Get This

Justin Bieber

jonty_11

02-13 05:42 PM

call customer care USCIS and ask for an update/status

---

girlfriend justin bieber eyes. shervieux

I close my eyes.. and PRAY

purgan

01-22 11:35 AM

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html

The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts

Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.

The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.

Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.

Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?


Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.

A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.

Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?

China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.

Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?

A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.

Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?

A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.

Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?

A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.

Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?

A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.

Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?

A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.

Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?

A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.

Q: What are the implications for the future?

A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.

About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.

---

hairstyles steve buscemi justin bieber

Justin Bieber#39;s Pretty

dingudi

10-25 09:33 PM

But has this happened to anyone where first online status says card ordered and then it reverts back to previous status of received and pending application. And this is only for my spouse.

---

krishmunn

11-24 01:27 PM

Go for SBI Global link ... best exchange rate and cheapest. They take 4 business days though. I never had any problem sending to any bank in India through SBI Global link. You (or your parents) do nto need an SBI Account to use this

---

vedicman

01-04 08:34 AM

Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.

Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.

The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.

The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.

The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.

Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.

The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.

Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.

Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.

So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.

Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?

There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.

�

Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.

The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.

But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.

Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.

Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.

Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.

Suro in Wasahington Post

Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com

---