tnite
06-18 04:04 PM
Under Part 3.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. My current visa on passport has expired. Anybody any ideas????
1.Non immigrant visa number : put the number on the expired H1B stamp (in red color).Do not put the control number
2.whenever the expired visa was issued
3.whereever it was issued.
I assume you renewed your H1b eventhough you'r H1b stamp expired.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. My current visa on passport has expired. Anybody any ideas????
1.Non immigrant visa number : put the number on the expired H1B stamp (in red color).Do not put the control number
2.whenever the expired visa was issued
3.whereever it was issued.
I assume you renewed your H1b eventhough you'r H1b stamp expired.
jayz
07-17 07:01 PM
While today's development is great news for folks in the 485/AOS cue, what happens with people in CP? With the opening of the floodgates, I am unsure when visas will be available to CP cases who were scheduled for interviews in Aug and beyond. I am a great supporter of today's victory, but I am unsure where CP cases stand now? Another 4 year wait?
kshitijnt
07-30 08:02 AM
I do not recommend E3 visa. As non immigrant intent like F1/B1 is required on E3.
hebron
08-10 12:25 PM
Thank you my_gc_wait and amitkhare77 for your suggestions.
One last question to amitkhare77, how long did it take after you joined your new employer to file EB2.
One last question to amitkhare77, how long did it take after you joined your new employer to file EB2.
more...
sujitp@gmail.com
10-05 03:44 PM
Please delete this post
serg
07-29 12:48 AM
The 'Country of Birth' poll shows the same 43% :)
more...
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
LondonTown
03-07 11:33 PM
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Stemcell: My 140 was also denied and immediately thereafter 485 was also denied. We appealed 140 which is currently pending, we have never used EAD. My lawyer told that if 140 will get approved as a result of appeal, we can re-open denied 485s.
Are you saying that your friends 485 was NOT denied though his 140 is denied? Please re-confirm with your friend and let us know.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Stemcell: My 140 was also denied and immediately thereafter 485 was also denied. We appealed 140 which is currently pending, we have never used EAD. My lawyer told that if 140 will get approved as a result of appeal, we can re-open denied 485s.
Are you saying that your friends 485 was NOT denied though his 140 is denied? Please re-confirm with your friend and let us know.
more...
vikram_singh
07-26 08:31 PM
Guys,
I just created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
Also suggest any sites you may want to add to improve the seach engine.
-Vikram
I just created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
Also suggest any sites you may want to add to improve the seach engine.
-Vikram
kaisersose
10-12 10:29 AM
You should also consider the GC factor. If your L employer is willing to sponsor a GC, then that is terrific.
You can come into the US in Jan 2008 on L-1A, apply for your 140/485 in Feb 2008 (labor is not required for EB1 and the PDs are current) and you should have your GC by Jan 2009.
On the other hand, if you come here on a H visa, you may not have a GC even during 2019!
Weigh your options and plan accordingly.
You can come into the US in Jan 2008 on L-1A, apply for your 140/485 in Feb 2008 (labor is not required for EB1 and the PDs are current) and you should have your GC by Jan 2009.
On the other hand, if you come here on a H visa, you may not have a GC even during 2019!
Weigh your options and plan accordingly.
more...
saro28
09-09 08:43 PM
Do you think the birth certificate from Indian consulate ( here in US) are acceptable?
Did you try that option?
Did you try that option?
reddy77
03-08 08:06 AM
I have a quick question on salary issue with 485. My EB2 I-140 states that my yearly salary 87k per annum. It got approved last year. I realized that my w-2 only reflects 64k for last year. I did not work for 2 months because of some personal reason. Is this less salary going to affect my 485 application? I thougt, GC is for future jobs so its okay. Can somebody please clarify this ?
I believe the salary mentioned in the labor is the future salary, That means you should be paid that much after you got your GC. It is not the present salary...
I believe the salary mentioned in the labor is the future salary, That means you should be paid that much after you got your GC. It is not the present salary...
more...
Munna Bhai
07-12 09:48 AM
Yes, you can. You can switch to H4 and back to H1 without worrying about the Cap limitation. The only point that is little hazy is how long can you stay on a H4 before you can get back to H1 without the cap limitation kicking in. As the H1 is given in 3 year installments, would you have to get back to your H1 before that 3 year period ends, if in the middle of that period you had switched to H4?
Say, you had obtained your H1 in Jan 2007 and is good until Jan 2010 (3 years allotment), and you switched to H4 in Dec 2007 using up 1 year of your H1. I think that you can switch back to H1 without the cap limitation ONLY until Jan 2010 and your new papers will give you another 3 years of the remaining 5 years of your H1.
Let me know what you find. Good luck.
One person just told me that, I can switch to H4 but I will be subjected to Cap since my spouse is in H1b non-profit.
Currently my H1b extension is based on i-140 approval(3 years), will same rule apply to my case.
Say, you had obtained your H1 in Jan 2007 and is good until Jan 2010 (3 years allotment), and you switched to H4 in Dec 2007 using up 1 year of your H1. I think that you can switch back to H1 without the cap limitation ONLY until Jan 2010 and your new papers will give you another 3 years of the remaining 5 years of your H1.
Let me know what you find. Good luck.
One person just told me that, I can switch to H4 but I will be subjected to Cap since my spouse is in H1b non-profit.
Currently my H1b extension is based on i-140 approval(3 years), will same rule apply to my case.
chnaveen
07-08 11:15 AM
Thanks for the valuable information. But we all know the I-485 process take long period of time. Mean time if I marry again, do I have to wait for the priority date to be current in order to Apply I-485 for my new wife?
thanks
balan.
yes,
You have to wait until your priority date becomes current to apply your dependent's 485. And for that she needs to be in US and for this you need to have valid H1 so that she can get H4 if she is already not in US and doesn't have any VISA.
If you don't have H1 and she can't come unless she can come on H1 (herself) or Business VISA.
For some reason, if she couldn't land in USA before your GC approval, but if got married before the GC Approval, then you should submit one form(I am not sure which one some on 800 series).
thanks
balan.
yes,
You have to wait until your priority date becomes current to apply your dependent's 485. And for that she needs to be in US and for this you need to have valid H1 so that she can get H4 if she is already not in US and doesn't have any VISA.
If you don't have H1 and she can't come unless she can come on H1 (herself) or Business VISA.
For some reason, if she couldn't land in USA before your GC approval, but if got married before the GC Approval, then you should submit one form(I am not sure which one some on 800 series).
more...
GoGreen
07-18 10:39 AM
Yes, You need to file it along with the receipt notice so that they can associate it with your 485.
Thanks, So the bottom line is, you cannot apply for an EAD without a I485 receipt, but you can apply for 485 and EAD together.
Thanks, So the bottom line is, you cannot apply for an EAD without a I485 receipt, but you can apply for 485 and EAD together.
apb
08-17 10:03 PM
See all of you in rally !.
And you will there with your friend...//wink.. correct.
And you will there with your friend...//wink.. correct.
more...
tammigaw
02-15 12:16 AM
i have signed non compete , but when i signed it , he explained me that i should not go to the client through some other vendor , but i can join end client as end client has contract with Prime vendor that they can hire me full time .
But now he is claiming that i cant join full time with the client as well.
During my stay with that employer , he newer paid me on time and once he held my paycheck , just to harass me.
Do you think that these grounds fall under employee undue stress to be sufficient to turn down Non Compete in court ?
But now he is claiming that i cant join full time with the client as well.
During my stay with that employer , he newer paid me on time and once he held my paycheck , just to harass me.
Do you think that these grounds fall under employee undue stress to be sufficient to turn down Non Compete in court ?
santiwar
07-21 09:38 PM
If John Lennon was alive, i am quite sure he would be a member of IV. considering how much paint he was put through to get a green card...
For those who have seen the documentary " U.S. vs John Lennon" documentary will certainly know what i am talking about.
His way of protesting was actually quite similar to ours. He was a self proclaimed "Peacenik". He protested by laying in bed and growing his hair...
For those interested in this documentary can look for it on Google Video. Just checked, its still there. Just search for "USVSJL.avi "
"All we are saying.....is give GC a chance"
Peace out!
For those who have seen the documentary " U.S. vs John Lennon" documentary will certainly know what i am talking about.
His way of protesting was actually quite similar to ours. He was a self proclaimed "Peacenik". He protested by laying in bed and growing his hair...
For those interested in this documentary can look for it on Google Video. Just checked, its still there. Just search for "USVSJL.avi "
"All we are saying.....is give GC a chance"
Peace out!
gc28262
07-21 09:33 AM
IMO it looks like USCIS is trying to find some reason to deny an H1B petition. Fragomen doesn't have the guts to defend their clients before USCIS since they underwent some investigation.
They are just trying to play safe.
They are just trying to play safe.
shan74
10-23 07:20 AM
There is a chance that i might get laid off. I have a pending I485 filed on July 2. My I-140 was approved in June 06. Would like to know if i get laid off within how many days do i have to find a job.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
lostinbeta
10-03 01:49 PM
<FONT FACE="Verdana" STYLE="font-size: 10px">Very Evil:evil:</FONT>
<div style="width: 300; font-size: 10px; font-family: Verdana; color: #9E9E9E; Filter: FlipV">Very Evil:evil:</div>
<div style="width: 300; font-size: 10px; font-family: Verdana; color: #9E9E9E; Filter: FlipV">Very Evil:evil:</div>
No comments:
Post a Comment