josecuervo
07-15 02:54 PM
My Priority date is Feb 1st 2006. I got my 140 approved some time in May 2006 and Here I am today..
Congratulations. !!!
my pd is close to yours. see my signature. good luck
Congratulations. !!!
my pd is close to yours. see my signature. good luck
wallpaper Philadelphia Phillies#39; Roy
slc_ut
05-29 04:27 PM
OK Prashant, got it. Thanks.
Hi,
You can fill up these forms save and exit without picking a date ..
after u have save ur application it shouldnt take more than a minute when u want to pick a date .. I guess u got keeping looking ..
Hi,
You can fill up these forms save and exit without picking a date ..
after u have save ur application it shouldnt take more than a minute when u want to pick a date .. I guess u got keeping looking ..
Jaime
08-17 01:01 AM
The HSMP looks very attractive if you don't know the details. Yes, you get a visa even without a job offer but they give you only one year to find a job. After 1 year in the UK you'd better have a job or you will most likely send you back to your home country (you go through a government review after 1 year). Of course, if you find a good job during that first year you should be OK.
The pro I see in this is that if you are patient and work for 5 years in the UK you will get your EU passport and yo now have mobility to other parts of Europe where the IT and other industries might be better (like Ireland)
The pro I see in this is that if you are patient and work for 5 years in the UK you will get your EU passport and yo now have mobility to other parts of Europe where the IT and other industries might be better (like Ireland)
2011 Philadelphia Phillies
Rajeev
11-26 02:54 PM
Thanks - amits, iamgsprabhu, kartikiran, MunnaBhai, Rajeev, srinivas_o, SubaM99 - for your pledge of support. I also request you guys to post the contribution you plan to make ( except amits who has pleadge a contribution of $100 through PM to me).
Others, please come forward to pledge your support. Please post the amount of monetary contribution you intend to make for the rally, and then vote 'Yes' on the poll.
I will contribute $100. I am also planning to attend the rally.
Others, please come forward to pledge your support. Please post the amount of monetary contribution you intend to make for the rally, and then vote 'Yes' on the poll.
I will contribute $100. I am also planning to attend the rally.
more...
mbartosik
11-08 03:33 PM
It looks like this including dependents -- good news.
According to:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/AILAQandASept2007.pdf
there were about 320K applications (likely primary applications). Remember that July fiasco only affected EB (not family based).
quote: "While we continue to receipt the work we recently received, we project that we received over 320,000 adjustment applications due to the July visa bulletin."
So that's only 5 years to clear the backlog, assuming minimal lost GC, and no new applications by ROW (thus reducing or stopping spill over). Of course ROW will continue to create new applications.
According to:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/AILAQandASept2007.pdf
there were about 320K applications (likely primary applications). Remember that July fiasco only affected EB (not family based).
quote: "While we continue to receipt the work we recently received, we project that we received over 320,000 adjustment applications due to the July visa bulletin."
So that's only 5 years to clear the backlog, assuming minimal lost GC, and no new applications by ROW (thus reducing or stopping spill over). Of course ROW will continue to create new applications.
canleo98
02-20 06:49 PM
I don't think the data is right, though I can see my Labor filed under PERM and it shows status as 'Denied' but I have my labor approved and applied for I-140. Not sure why?
more...
jhaalaa
11-11 10:56 AM
I agree that every single job loss matters and I support keeping jobs here where possible - unless essential.
Interestingly, jobs lost due to outsourcing are far less than other factors. Here is some interesting survey link:
Where the Jobs Went - Careers (http://www.cioinsight.com/c/a/Careers/Where-the-Jobs-Went-517950/?kc=CIOMINUTE11112009CIOA)
The reason I posted it here is because the anti-immigrant lobby also views immigrants as supporters of outsourcing - which is not true because we look wholistically from an economic perspective. Also we are comparatively less emotionally charged about local issues, something that we should be more involved in to ensure comfortable assimilation for natives and immigrants alike.
Interestingly, jobs lost due to outsourcing are far less than other factors. Here is some interesting survey link:
Where the Jobs Went - Careers (http://www.cioinsight.com/c/a/Careers/Where-the-Jobs-Went-517950/?kc=CIOMINUTE11112009CIOA)
The reason I posted it here is because the anti-immigrant lobby also views immigrants as supporters of outsourcing - which is not true because we look wholistically from an economic perspective. Also we are comparatively less emotionally charged about local issues, something that we should be more involved in to ensure comfortable assimilation for natives and immigrants alike.
2010 Philadelphia Phillies
add78
05-19 03:52 PM
Good Morning.
hahahaha too funny.
hahahaha too funny.
more...
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
hair Philadelphia Phillies hats
GreenCard_Soon
02-16 12:38 PM
Hi,
Just saw this thread today. Hence, unfortunately missed the opportunity to attend yesterday's call. I would like to join into this effort.
Please let me know of the next time we plan to get together about this.
Thanks
Just saw this thread today. Hence, unfortunately missed the opportunity to attend yesterday's call. I would like to join into this effort.
Please let me know of the next time we plan to get together about this.
Thanks
more...
Juan28210
11-03 03:59 PM
Hi,
I'm on H1b visa. My employer refuses to pay for my medical insurance. Does anyone know if this is legal?
Thanks.
I'm on H1b visa. My employer refuses to pay for my medical insurance. Does anyone know if this is legal?
Thanks.
hot and Philadelphia Phillies
logiclife
08-01 01:57 PM
Here is my prediction.
With July Fiasco INS has learnt their lessons.
They have potential to process and approve 40K cases in one month.
Once all receipting is done by Sept 17th for all late Aug 17th filers, they will immediately start processing all oct 08 current cases.
I think they might even issue again 40K cases in october ?
Why not ?
So it is important to quickly do the FP and after FP within 3 weeks the name check gets cleared.
So anyone who does FP in Sept and who is current in oct , be ready to get your GC soon.
I would say dont be surprised if it takes just one month to approve ?????
Finger-printing and namecheck are not connected. Namecheck is triggered as soon as receipt is generated. Fingerprinting is separete. The two are not going to affect each other. The only thing is fingerprinting results are out in about a minute or two, namecheck can take anywhere from 2 minutes to 20 years.
you can expect faster processing times for those categories who tend to be current for most bulletins. Which is EB1 and ROW EB2. Everyone else who is current every once in blue moon is not going to get processed quickly.
The only guarantee is that they wont waste the visa numbers this year or next year, coz they did that last year and wasted 10,000 visa numbers and got unpleasant treatment for that.
With July Fiasco INS has learnt their lessons.
They have potential to process and approve 40K cases in one month.
Once all receipting is done by Sept 17th for all late Aug 17th filers, they will immediately start processing all oct 08 current cases.
I think they might even issue again 40K cases in october ?
Why not ?
So it is important to quickly do the FP and after FP within 3 weeks the name check gets cleared.
So anyone who does FP in Sept and who is current in oct , be ready to get your GC soon.
I would say dont be surprised if it takes just one month to approve ?????
Finger-printing and namecheck are not connected. Namecheck is triggered as soon as receipt is generated. Fingerprinting is separete. The two are not going to affect each other. The only thing is fingerprinting results are out in about a minute or two, namecheck can take anywhere from 2 minutes to 20 years.
you can expect faster processing times for those categories who tend to be current for most bulletins. Which is EB1 and ROW EB2. Everyone else who is current every once in blue moon is not going to get processed quickly.
The only guarantee is that they wont waste the visa numbers this year or next year, coz they did that last year and wasted 10,000 visa numbers and got unpleasant treatment for that.
more...
house in Philadelphia. A fan is
Macaca
01-28 08:19 PM
Although it does not feature in this article, Bush is using the word 'Guest Worker' more often these days. Any opinions about the emphasis on the word 'Guest' these days in Bush's speeches? Is there a covert message there?
He is backing off from amnesty. Guest worker is one option without amnesty. Here is numbersusa crap (http://www.numbersusa.com/index) on covert message.
Current state of guest worker program is at Unions Split on Immigrant Workers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012601635.html).
He is backing off from amnesty. Guest worker is one option without amnesty. Here is numbersusa crap (http://www.numbersusa.com/index) on covert message.
Current state of guest worker program is at Unions Split on Immigrant Workers (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012601635.html).
tattoo Philadelphia Phillies (25-12)
dionysus
01-16 07:53 PM
Earlier, INS used to be very lenient with H1B transfer without current paystubs. I know of cases where people got H1 transfered without having paystubs for more than a year!
However, seems like of late CIS has woken up to the shady practices of H1 consultant body shops, and is aware of the fact that many consultants are living in this country without working and without paystubs. So they are becoming more stringent with regards to paystub evidence.
I also have a feeling that most such requests are coming from Vermont service center where many H1 petitions are hanging.
To answer your question, in the absence of any paystubs, prepare a nice letter to CIS explaining the situation, and then leave it to your destiny. US immigration processes like H1 and GC always had an element of chance in it. It is always helpful to be ready for any eventuality in such a dicey game.
However, seems like of late CIS has woken up to the shady practices of H1 consultant body shops, and is aware of the fact that many consultants are living in this country without working and without paystubs. So they are becoming more stringent with regards to paystub evidence.
I also have a feeling that most such requests are coming from Vermont service center where many H1 petitions are hanging.
To answer your question, in the absence of any paystubs, prepare a nice letter to CIS explaining the situation, and then leave it to your destiny. US immigration processes like H1 and GC always had an element of chance in it. It is always helpful to be ready for any eventuality in such a dicey game.
more...
pictures Reds Phillies Baseball
gc03
12-08 08:58 AM
Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) 3rd-term Republican from New Hampshire.
Contact Information
Web Site: gregg.senate.gov
Washington Office:
393 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-2904
Phone: (202) 224-3324
Fax: (202) 224-4952
Main District Office:
125 N. Main St.
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: (603) 225-7115
*************************
Senator John E. Sununu (R-NH) 1st-term Republican from New Hampshire.
Contact Information
Web Site: sununu.senate.gov
E-mail: mailbox@sununu.senate.gov
Washington Office:
111 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-2903
Phone: (202) 224-2841
Fax: (202) 228-4131
Main District Office:
1589 Elm St., Ste. 3
Manchester, NH 03101
Phone: (603) 647-7500
Fax: (603) 647-9352
*************************
Representative Charles Bass (R-NH 2nd) 6th-term Republican from New Hampshire.
Contact Information
Web Site: www.house.gov/bass
E-mail: cbass@mail.house.gov
Washington Office:
2421 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-2902
Phone: (202) 225-5206
Fax: (202) 225-2946
Main District Office:
142 N. Main St.
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: (603) 226-0249
Fax: (603) 226-0476
=========================
Just called all 3 senators and asked to Support the High-Skilled Immigrant Interim Relief Act of 2006
Very EASY.
Contact Information
Web Site: gregg.senate.gov
Washington Office:
393 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-2904
Phone: (202) 224-3324
Fax: (202) 224-4952
Main District Office:
125 N. Main St.
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: (603) 225-7115
*************************
Senator John E. Sununu (R-NH) 1st-term Republican from New Hampshire.
Contact Information
Web Site: sununu.senate.gov
E-mail: mailbox@sununu.senate.gov
Washington Office:
111 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-2903
Phone: (202) 224-2841
Fax: (202) 228-4131
Main District Office:
1589 Elm St., Ste. 3
Manchester, NH 03101
Phone: (603) 647-7500
Fax: (603) 647-9352
*************************
Representative Charles Bass (R-NH 2nd) 6th-term Republican from New Hampshire.
Contact Information
Web Site: www.house.gov/bass
E-mail: cbass@mail.house.gov
Washington Office:
2421 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-2902
Phone: (202) 225-5206
Fax: (202) 225-2946
Main District Office:
142 N. Main St.
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: (603) 226-0249
Fax: (603) 226-0476
=========================
Just called all 3 senators and asked to Support the High-Skilled Immigrant Interim Relief Act of 2006
Very EASY.
dresses v Philadelphia Phillies,
rongha_2000
10-02 01:17 PM
Thank you.. THis is very helpful.
You do not have to apply for new SSN but do the following taken from SSA website:
If your work eligibility has changed or if have become a U.S. citizen, you must apply for a replacement card. Your replacement card will no longer read �Not Valid for Employment,� but you will retain the same Social Security number.
To get a replacement card:
Complete an Application For A Social Security Card (Form SS-5); and
Show us documents proving your:
Immigration status;
Work eligibility; and
Identity.
Take (or mail) your completed application and documents to your local Social Security office.
All documents must be either originals or copies certified by the issuing agency. We cannot accept photocopies or notarized copies of documents.
We will mail your number and card as soon as we have all of your information and have verified your documents.
For details about the type of evidence you must provide, see Social Security Numbers For Noncitizens (Publication No. 05-10096) or Documents You Need for a Social Security Card.
You do not have to apply for new SSN but do the following taken from SSA website:
If your work eligibility has changed or if have become a U.S. citizen, you must apply for a replacement card. Your replacement card will no longer read �Not Valid for Employment,� but you will retain the same Social Security number.
To get a replacement card:
Complete an Application For A Social Security Card (Form SS-5); and
Show us documents proving your:
Immigration status;
Work eligibility; and
Identity.
Take (or mail) your completed application and documents to your local Social Security office.
All documents must be either originals or copies certified by the issuing agency. We cannot accept photocopies or notarized copies of documents.
We will mail your number and card as soon as we have all of your information and have verified your documents.
For details about the type of evidence you must provide, see Social Security Numbers For Noncitizens (Publication No. 05-10096) or Documents You Need for a Social Security Card.
more...
makeup Philadelphia Phillies v
smartboy75
07-09 12:14 PM
is'nt an Advanced parol document a re-entry permit ???
girlfriend Philadelphia Phillies players
Libra
10-24 10:08 AM
yeah it took almost a year to send an RFE that too after repeated calls to CIS.
Libra,
Congrats!!! Did it take an year for the RFE itself???
Romesh and naresh,
Any updates?
thanks,
Sampath
Libra,
Congrats!!! Did it take an year for the RFE itself???
Romesh and naresh,
Any updates?
thanks,
Sampath
hairstyles Philadelphia Phillies#39; Ryan
boston_guy147
02-18 08:37 PM
Thanks gst76!...thats very useful info...I did not know that it was mandatory to go to home country for 1st H1b stamping. Is this a new rule?
My email is sharma.ee@gmail.com
My email is sharma.ee@gmail.com
jeny
08-06 08:39 AM
Yes Jayant it is Consular Process. Today i send a mail to them, hope they will replay.
Thanks
I just recived mail from embassy saying that there is no visa avilable for my case. When avilable they will call me for the interview again. Thank you ALL
Thanks
I just recived mail from embassy saying that there is no visa avilable for my case. When avilable they will call me for the interview again. Thank you ALL
Daisy
10-26 10:31 AM
I have a question: How many months in advance should you apply for H1 extension? Do you get extension from the date you applied or from date when your H1 expires?
No comments:
Post a Comment