Steve Mitchell
February 15th, 2004, 06:56 PM
Just added the Sony 717 to the list of cameras that the DOF calculator should give an accurate DOF reading. It is my understanding the the COC varies with varies digital cameras. I gathered this information from here (http://dfleming.ameranet.com/digital_coc.html). This is the guy who created the equations for one of Nikon's websites. That is the variable that changes and alters the DOF if I interpurt this correctly. This is the variable that is changed when determing the DOF in the DOF calculator (http://www.dphoto.us/forum/index.php?section=depthoffield) on Dphoto.us.
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
wallpaper Air Rift Ninja 2011 Bule White
Al6200
05-06 09:02 AM
I never said it was. What I am saying is that it's off topic considering what he wants to achieve.
He will? Why?
Again, that's got nothing to do with the desire to learn Win32.
And so can using the WPF in .NET, but how does that help with learning Win32?
Sorry for going a little off topic... I just was showing him some things related to Win32, like if I showed him MFC or COM.
Anywho, Win32 is a pretty cool API. One thing I'd recommend is Visual Studio's help files, or just creating a project in visual studio where the Win32 code is written in automatically, and then studying that code.
If you're not using Visual Studio, a highly recommend you use it as a compiler. There is a scaled down free version.
He will? Why?
Again, that's got nothing to do with the desire to learn Win32.
And so can using the WPF in .NET, but how does that help with learning Win32?
Sorry for going a little off topic... I just was showing him some things related to Win32, like if I showed him MFC or COM.
Anywho, Win32 is a pretty cool API. One thing I'd recommend is Visual Studio's help files, or just creating a project in visual studio where the Win32 code is written in automatically, and then studying that code.
If you're not using Visual Studio, a highly recommend you use it as a compiler. There is a scaled down free version.
kumar1
06-14 03:03 PM
God bless Raj. I am not sure if every story ends like this particular one.
Refer this:
Case Study: Upgrade from EB3 to EB2 (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-06/case_study_upgrade_from_eb3_to_eb2.html)
Refer this:
Case Study: Upgrade from EB3 to EB2 (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-06/case_study_upgrade_from_eb3_to_eb2.html)
2011 Girls Nike Air Jordan 1 amp;#8220
gcformeornot
08-16 01:44 PM
Hi,
My husband's company is paying for his 485 fees but not for me. I'm just wondering if they should charge me a separate legal fee for this case?
My understanding is legal fee already covers for both me and my husband and this has already been paid of by the Company. And now they are charging us a separate legal fee for me also as spouse.
Thanks for your advise.
is paying for my complete GC process. But I am going to pay for my wife and kid's legal fee for 485+EAD+AP and filing fees for 485+EAD+AP
My husband's company is paying for his 485 fees but not for me. I'm just wondering if they should charge me a separate legal fee for this case?
My understanding is legal fee already covers for both me and my husband and this has already been paid of by the Company. And now they are charging us a separate legal fee for me also as spouse.
Thanks for your advise.
is paying for my complete GC process. But I am going to pay for my wife and kid's legal fee for 485+EAD+AP and filing fees for 485+EAD+AP
more...
Munna Bhai
02-08 11:59 AM
You want to keep your 140 intact for 2 reasons:
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
Thanks, please let everyone know if by changing lawyers is there anyway of protecting I-140 from being revoked?? or is there any other way out??
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
Thanks, please let everyone know if by changing lawyers is there anyway of protecting I-140 from being revoked?? or is there any other way out??
bluekayal
08-20 02:24 PM
I've tried several times recently to check my status at TSC. Each time I get the same reply, " We do not do status checks any more. Please contact National Customer Service, and do a referral and open a Service Request."
I'd love to know how others are tackling this new obstacle!
I'd love to know how others are tackling this new obstacle!
more...
jliechty
June 16th, 2005, 05:52 PM
From my calibrated 213T but in my non-profile-aware browser, the blacks are nice and dark while retaining "enough" detail. :)
Edit: referring to the original photos - Nik's version looks a bit too light IMHO
Edit: referring to the original photos - Nik's version looks a bit too light IMHO
2010 April april girls retro shoes,
peer123
04-04 04:20 PM
1. Did you find have any issues when getting 485 approved.
---- Here most are with GC app pending. AC21 is being used by many only in the last two months.
2. Did you file AC21.
Yes
3. Does the job responsibility has to meet 100% word by word.
Not necessary
4. Has any one you applied for EAD extension on your own.
I did not apply for extension. But when my time comes I will do it on my own.
Lawyer cost is $300 per applicant per document (EAD and AP treated separately by lawyer and charged separately by lawyer.
5. Has any one got an RFE after changing the Job on EAD and submitting AC21. if so what kind of questions do they ask.
No RFE yet. I am not sure why they will ask question if you had worked for GC company > 180 days.
Thanks for your input, If other who have done it earlier and gotten their 485 approved please advise...
---- Here most are with GC app pending. AC21 is being used by many only in the last two months.
2. Did you file AC21.
Yes
3. Does the job responsibility has to meet 100% word by word.
Not necessary
4. Has any one you applied for EAD extension on your own.
I did not apply for extension. But when my time comes I will do it on my own.
Lawyer cost is $300 per applicant per document (EAD and AP treated separately by lawyer and charged separately by lawyer.
5. Has any one got an RFE after changing the Job on EAD and submitting AC21. if so what kind of questions do they ask.
No RFE yet. I am not sure why they will ask question if you had worked for GC company > 180 days.
Thanks for your input, If other who have done it earlier and gotten their 485 approved please advise...
more...
prem_goel
11-25 01:25 PM
Please make sure you understand and read all the rules before coming to any conclusion. The rule is that only H-1b renewals who had atleast one stamping in their home country are allowed for renewal stamping in Tijuana. I had two previous stamping done at India for my H-1B and this is my renewal, so I am okay.
hair Nike 6.0 Girls Dunk Hi Black
rajnag21
07-20 07:28 PM
Hi All,
Is having paystubs absolutely essential or will w2's suffice ?
Is having paystubs absolutely essential or will w2's suffice ?
more...
lost_in_migration
05-15 12:38 PM
/\/\
hot cheap nike dunk women shoes
h1b_tristate
07-27 08:02 PM
Hi everyone,
I have a question on changing jobs. I am on my second H1b and my h1 expires in a little over a year. I have a possible offer for a job and would like to change. My question is if i DO change jobs right now, can i still apply for my PERM and will i be eligible for further h1b extentions?
A friend mentioned to me that your labour needs to be applied for atleast one whole year (even if it has been approved in PERM), to be able to apply for any kind of H1 extentions.
Can someone on here please tell me what the law is on H1B extentions and how it works exactly in a case like mine.
Thanks
I have a question on changing jobs. I am on my second H1b and my h1 expires in a little over a year. I have a possible offer for a job and would like to change. My question is if i DO change jobs right now, can i still apply for my PERM and will i be eligible for further h1b extentions?
A friend mentioned to me that your labour needs to be applied for atleast one whole year (even if it has been approved in PERM), to be able to apply for any kind of H1 extentions.
Can someone on here please tell me what the law is on H1B extentions and how it works exactly in a case like mine.
Thanks
more...
house nike shoes 2011 high tops,
jsb
01-21 09:07 AM
hi dionysus
i got this from some requirement agencies
If it really has some source of information (and is not a pure rumour), then it may come out as some kind of order that PD cutoff dates can only be moved forward (i.e. no retrogression). We all know, moving dates like a yoyo does not make any sense. It only tells that decision makers over there just don't know what they are doing. This order might force them to think and work before issuing new cutoff dates.
i got this from some requirement agencies
If it really has some source of information (and is not a pure rumour), then it may come out as some kind of order that PD cutoff dates can only be moved forward (i.e. no retrogression). We all know, moving dates like a yoyo does not make any sense. It only tells that decision makers over there just don't know what they are doing. This order might force them to think and work before issuing new cutoff dates.
tattoo air max shoes
raysaikat
04-06 01:27 PM
... But if 6 months have already elapsed after filing I485, then you are free to go anywhere.
Does not sound right. Where did you hear that?
Does not sound right. Where did you hear that?
more...
pictures Girls+nike+shox+shoes
wandmaker
10-13 02:40 PM
I got the 140 denial notice.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
there is no proof (valid labor) that you are eligible for EB2. since you labor is expired, there is no labor and you can not proceed with 140 - so they denied your 140
I think the first line "The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary..." is relevant to your suspicion of an expired labor. It effectively says that there are no valid labor certification against your I140 application, which means that the Labor certification you filed your I140 against, is not valid anymore.
Please restart your Labor again, ASAP.
Correct
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
there is no proof (valid labor) that you are eligible for EB2. since you labor is expired, there is no labor and you can not proceed with 140 - so they denied your 140
I think the first line "The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary..." is relevant to your suspicion of an expired labor. It effectively says that there are no valid labor certification against your I140 application, which means that the Labor certification you filed your I140 against, is not valid anymore.
Please restart your Labor again, ASAP.
Correct
dresses Girls have been doodling about
martinvisalaw
07-06 04:42 PM
Hi Martin,
Thanks once again for your reply with in no time.I really admire your service.I went through your Faqs but the part i dint understood is..
If you don't show the extension approval notice (maybe because you didn't know the case was approved before you returned), you will get just the old expiration date on your new I-94. This will then be the operative end date, not the extension date. This is because CIS has a "last action" rule, whereby the last status they give you is what governs. In this situation, the last action would be your admission until the visa and date.
As i get a new I94 attached with expiration date as my new 797 approval date(Assuming i get approval after my travel when i am in USA) .So my old I94 is valid till My present visa date and after that i have my New I 94 which is valid till my Extension approval date.So iam unable to get what complication i may get into.Only problem i can think of is if i dont get I 94 attached to my I 797 Approval Notice.Do let me know if iam missing anything.Thanks again.
The complication occurs if the extension is approved while you are outside the US, and you only show the old visa on returning. In that case, your old expiration date will govern, because it will supersede the extension approval based on the CIS "last action rule."
Thanks once again for your reply with in no time.I really admire your service.I went through your Faqs but the part i dint understood is..
If you don't show the extension approval notice (maybe because you didn't know the case was approved before you returned), you will get just the old expiration date on your new I-94. This will then be the operative end date, not the extension date. This is because CIS has a "last action" rule, whereby the last status they give you is what governs. In this situation, the last action would be your admission until the visa and date.
As i get a new I94 attached with expiration date as my new 797 approval date(Assuming i get approval after my travel when i am in USA) .So my old I94 is valid till My present visa date and after that i have my New I 94 which is valid till my Extension approval date.So iam unable to get what complication i may get into.Only problem i can think of is if i dont get I 94 attached to my I 797 Approval Notice.Do let me know if iam missing anything.Thanks again.
The complication occurs if the extension is approved while you are outside the US, and you only show the old visa on returning. In that case, your old expiration date will govern, because it will supersede the extension approval based on the CIS "last action rule."
more...
makeup new kevin garnett shoes 2011.
Better_Days
11-03 07:13 PM
Thats the concern. CIR pits illegals vs legals. The CIR bill allocates quotas from legals to illegals.
Depends on how the CIR is crafted. To bring the republicans on board, it may have biz friendly provisions and hence may be beneficial for us all.
Last time there was a point based system which was meant to replace the Employment based system; big biz hated that idea. They might introduce a point based system in addition to the employment based stream. It would be specially great if it has its own quota. Every US PhD and Master degree holder that gets into the point based system, frees us visa for others. We may be relief in form of permanent number capture: numbers wasted are automatically rolled over to next year.
Bottom line is that we cannot be absolutely sure that any CIR will result in a net loss to EB green card aspirants. On the other hand, at my age, you come to realize that the devil you know, is indeed often better than the devil that you dont know.
Depends on how the CIR is crafted. To bring the republicans on board, it may have biz friendly provisions and hence may be beneficial for us all.
Last time there was a point based system which was meant to replace the Employment based system; big biz hated that idea. They might introduce a point based system in addition to the employment based stream. It would be specially great if it has its own quota. Every US PhD and Master degree holder that gets into the point based system, frees us visa for others. We may be relief in form of permanent number capture: numbers wasted are automatically rolled over to next year.
Bottom line is that we cannot be absolutely sure that any CIR will result in a net loss to EB green card aspirants. On the other hand, at my age, you come to realize that the devil you know, is indeed often better than the devil that you dont know.
girlfriend Cheerleading Shoes For Girls,
Better_Days
11-20 07:00 PM
Come one folks. Since posting this, I had another beautiful addition to my family and then a minor surgery. Any insights or opinion will be highly appreciarted.
The quoted post above describes my situation. I140 and I485 were pending. I140 got denied and ended up with AAO. Second I140 got approved and I485 is linked with this 2nd approved I140 even though the priority date was not current.
Called USCIS twice to get the receipt number of the 140 underlying my 485 and got the receipt number for the second, approved 140 everytime.
The company has received an RFE from the AAO and they simply are in no mood to respond to it. They are going to withdraw the first 140. The lawyer retained by my company is absolutely clueless about how and why the second,approved 140 got linked with the pending 485 without the priority date being current. He is trying to play it safe by covering his own behind by saying statements like "USCIS made a mistake and if they every discovered this mistake in future, I will be regarded as being out of status from the day I used any EAD based on this pending 485", He is suggesting that we file a new 485 when the dates being current ( I am EB3/ROW).
Now I know that there are a lot of people who have had their 485s linked to their second, approved 140 automatically. Did this happen to any of you without the PD being current? Please do respond if you are in this boat.
Also, is there a policy or memo that explicitly refers to it? Can anyone please provide me a reference?
If the first 140 is withdrawn? Will it have ANY impact on the second 140 or the pending 485? The reason I ask this question is that after the AAO issed an RFE, the status on both my 140's changed to "Post Decisioon Activity". This is what worries me the most.
Any comment on any of the above questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for you time.
The quoted post above describes my situation. I140 and I485 were pending. I140 got denied and ended up with AAO. Second I140 got approved and I485 is linked with this 2nd approved I140 even though the priority date was not current.
Called USCIS twice to get the receipt number of the 140 underlying my 485 and got the receipt number for the second, approved 140 everytime.
The company has received an RFE from the AAO and they simply are in no mood to respond to it. They are going to withdraw the first 140. The lawyer retained by my company is absolutely clueless about how and why the second,approved 140 got linked with the pending 485 without the priority date being current. He is trying to play it safe by covering his own behind by saying statements like "USCIS made a mistake and if they every discovered this mistake in future, I will be regarded as being out of status from the day I used any EAD based on this pending 485", He is suggesting that we file a new 485 when the dates being current ( I am EB3/ROW).
Now I know that there are a lot of people who have had their 485s linked to their second, approved 140 automatically. Did this happen to any of you without the PD being current? Please do respond if you are in this boat.
Also, is there a policy or memo that explicitly refers to it? Can anyone please provide me a reference?
If the first 140 is withdrawn? Will it have ANY impact on the second 140 or the pending 485? The reason I ask this question is that after the AAO issed an RFE, the status on both my 140's changed to "Post Decisioon Activity". This is what worries me the most.
Any comment on any of the above questions will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for you time.
hairstyles 2011 new TOMS men / women
MerciesOfInjustices
05-22 12:48 AM
On Monday, May 22, 2006, a very important new study was released on the "impact of backlogs, processing delays, and long wait times on legal immigrants seeking to join the U.S. workforce as skilled employment-based and family-sponsored immigrants". Aman Kapoor and Shilpa Ghodgaonkar from IV spoke at the release as did Senator Cornyn! The title of the study says it very clearly - Legal Immigrants: Waiting Forever (http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPStudyLegalImmigrantsWaitingForever052206.pdf)!
Certainly this is a great study, for several reasons.
It is the first of its kind
It is derived from official data, not from anecdotal evidence
It is written by independent, non-partisan scholars, who are not immigrants!
It confirms the need for fixing the 'Legal side of Immigration' ASAP!
Among the findings of the study:
• Waits for green cards (permanent residence) in the Skilled Workers and Professionals category have worsened considerably in the past few years, with the current wait for a newly-sponsored high skill immigrant in this category exceeding five years.
One of the co-authors is Stuart Anderson, Executive Director of the National Foundation for American Policy. He is very experienced on Immigration matters, and has served in the INS (in Policy/Planning) and on Capitol Hill. Impeccable credentials - though I would not support anybody on the operations side of the INS! He might have even authored the language of some of the laws that govern us now, when he served on Sen Brownback's staff!
Stuart Anderson, Executive Director of the National Foundation for American Policy, served as Executive Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning and Counselor to the Commissioner at the Immigration and Naturalization Service from August 2001 to January 2003. He spent four and a half years on Capitol Hill on the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, first for Senator Spencer Abraham and then as Staff Director of the subcommittee for Senator Sam Brownback. Prior to that, Stuart was Director of Trade and Immigration Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., where he produced reports on the military contributions of immigrants and the role of immigrants in high technology. He has an M.A. from Georgetown University and a B.A. in Political Science from Drew University. Stuart has published articles in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and other publications.
Amongst others on NFAP Advisory Board, the name of James Ziglar stands out. Many of us remember him as the former head of the INS - definitely somebody who is well-versed with Immigration matters.
But, this Board also includes Prof Jagdish Bhagwati, renowned economist - certainly a very learned & highly-skilled immigrant. (Interestingly, if Prof Bhagwati had to apply for his Green Card today - he would get it only in several years! Or, they would have to get an Act of Congress for him!). Also on the Board is Cesar Conda, who was an advisor to Vice-President Cheney on domestic policy.
The official release (http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPRelease052206.pdf) of the study took place at Washington D.C.
Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who opposes the current guestworker plan in the bill being debated in the Senate, said he had offered an amendment to the bill that would eliminate the quota for some highly-skilled workers educated in the US. He said economic competitiveness was at stake in the way in which the issue was handled.
Aman Kapoor, founder of the group (Immigration Voice), says the broken employment-based immigration system forces workers like him to live in a state of limbo. People working in the US who are waiting for their green cards, as he has done since October 2003, cannot change jobs or move up in position, thus restricting their opportunities, he says.
It was also covered by MSNBC (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12919954/).
Please look up the NFAP website NFAP (http://www.nfap.com)! It is amazingly accurate, and uptodate. It highlights mostly H-1B related issues, but is very knowledgeable about the business aspects of Immigration.
We already know our issues, but a study from non-partisan scholars adds immense weight to them! Even if this study goes beyond our issues, all of the issues will be important to us or our family at some point of our lives!
In summary, this study will be huge in advancing our cause!
Certainly this is a great study, for several reasons.
It is the first of its kind
It is derived from official data, not from anecdotal evidence
It is written by independent, non-partisan scholars, who are not immigrants!
It confirms the need for fixing the 'Legal side of Immigration' ASAP!
Among the findings of the study:
• Waits for green cards (permanent residence) in the Skilled Workers and Professionals category have worsened considerably in the past few years, with the current wait for a newly-sponsored high skill immigrant in this category exceeding five years.
One of the co-authors is Stuart Anderson, Executive Director of the National Foundation for American Policy. He is very experienced on Immigration matters, and has served in the INS (in Policy/Planning) and on Capitol Hill. Impeccable credentials - though I would not support anybody on the operations side of the INS! He might have even authored the language of some of the laws that govern us now, when he served on Sen Brownback's staff!
Stuart Anderson, Executive Director of the National Foundation for American Policy, served as Executive Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning and Counselor to the Commissioner at the Immigration and Naturalization Service from August 2001 to January 2003. He spent four and a half years on Capitol Hill on the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, first for Senator Spencer Abraham and then as Staff Director of the subcommittee for Senator Sam Brownback. Prior to that, Stuart was Director of Trade and Immigration Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., where he produced reports on the military contributions of immigrants and the role of immigrants in high technology. He has an M.A. from Georgetown University and a B.A. in Political Science from Drew University. Stuart has published articles in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and other publications.
Amongst others on NFAP Advisory Board, the name of James Ziglar stands out. Many of us remember him as the former head of the INS - definitely somebody who is well-versed with Immigration matters.
But, this Board also includes Prof Jagdish Bhagwati, renowned economist - certainly a very learned & highly-skilled immigrant. (Interestingly, if Prof Bhagwati had to apply for his Green Card today - he would get it only in several years! Or, they would have to get an Act of Congress for him!). Also on the Board is Cesar Conda, who was an advisor to Vice-President Cheney on domestic policy.
The official release (http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPRelease052206.pdf) of the study took place at Washington D.C.
Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who opposes the current guestworker plan in the bill being debated in the Senate, said he had offered an amendment to the bill that would eliminate the quota for some highly-skilled workers educated in the US. He said economic competitiveness was at stake in the way in which the issue was handled.
Aman Kapoor, founder of the group (Immigration Voice), says the broken employment-based immigration system forces workers like him to live in a state of limbo. People working in the US who are waiting for their green cards, as he has done since October 2003, cannot change jobs or move up in position, thus restricting their opportunities, he says.
It was also covered by MSNBC (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12919954/).
Please look up the NFAP website NFAP (http://www.nfap.com)! It is amazingly accurate, and uptodate. It highlights mostly H-1B related issues, but is very knowledgeable about the business aspects of Immigration.
We already know our issues, but a study from non-partisan scholars adds immense weight to them! Even if this study goes beyond our issues, all of the issues will be important to us or our family at some point of our lives!
In summary, this study will be huge in advancing our cause!
ravindrajadeja
04-28 08:02 PM
Hi Folks!
I know this is a known topic. I was engaged to a GIRL in INDIA and i got my gc. I know there are limited options of bringing her here once i get married. Can you please let me know the options i have and the best option.
Thanks a lot in advance
Ravi
I know this is a known topic. I was engaged to a GIRL in INDIA and i got my gc. I know there are limited options of bringing her here once i get married. Can you please let me know the options i have and the best option.
Thanks a lot in advance
Ravi
pappu
08-19 01:27 PM
Hi,
My wife's EAD is expiring on 8/3, and the renewal was filed on 5/19 w/ notice date 5/24.
We have just requested expedite request but may not get it in time.
She just entered into USA using AP in July.
485 was filed in Aug 07.
If she continues to work till the EAD is processed, would she be protected under rule 245K? Does she need to stop working immediately?
And what happens if she does not get the EAD by Aug 19 (90 days)? Would the infopass office issue an interim EAD based on the application?
Thanks,
You can ask this in the Attorney conference call today
My wife's EAD is expiring on 8/3, and the renewal was filed on 5/19 w/ notice date 5/24.
We have just requested expedite request but may not get it in time.
She just entered into USA using AP in July.
485 was filed in Aug 07.
If she continues to work till the EAD is processed, would she be protected under rule 245K? Does she need to stop working immediately?
And what happens if she does not get the EAD by Aug 19 (90 days)? Would the infopass office issue an interim EAD based on the application?
Thanks,
You can ask this in the Attorney conference call today
No comments:
Post a Comment