sri1234
05-27 11:44 AM
I wonder what are the required documents for America born citizens if they don't have passports. Just a driver license? or they have to carry birth certificates always?
I think American Citizens Drivers Licence do not have "Status Check" date where as Non-Immigrants have it.
I think American Citizens Drivers Licence do not have "Status Check" date where as Non-Immigrants have it.
wallpaper Art Nouveau Vector Pattern
bigboy007
06-11 11:12 AM
no need to worry about this proposal, as some one said this is a proposal like thousands of bills gone inside the whirl wind of politics in Senate and Congress, but as a precaution, IV warned everyone to sign this and send it to senators so they are extra aware of this situation. discussing on this is a waste of time. because this not even a burning issue and no one can pass and amendment without making aware of all the Senators.
Grassley is always against H1B and the latest Jan 8th memo is because of his push. but this proposal of his will not work out. and H1B memo is currently sued in the court.
Folks, Please do not get extra alarmed ont his stupid proposal.
Its better to be prepared rather ignore it. I understand what you are saying but it doesnt hurt to oppose.. if one doesnt oppose you never know.
Grassley is always against H1B and the latest Jan 8th memo is because of his push. but this proposal of his will not work out. and H1B memo is currently sued in the court.
Folks, Please do not get extra alarmed ont his stupid proposal.
Its better to be prepared rather ignore it. I understand what you are saying but it doesnt hurt to oppose.. if one doesnt oppose you never know.
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-10 12:50 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
2011 Stock Vector: Art-nouveau
cin45220
12-29 10:04 AM
Hi,
I am planning to start my Online MBA from Univ of Nebraska (UNL). This is AACSB certified.
Also the price point is really sweet. 17K only + Books. Business Week placed it 4th overall part time.
The Best Part-Time Business Schools: University of Nebraska - BusinessWeek (http://images.businessweek.com/ss/09/11/1105_best_part_time_business_schools/7.htm)
-That is what got me interested in the first place.
Plus it is not a "** State University" but a "University of **" which means it should have better profs.
Anyhow anyone has any pros and cons to share about this one?
n'
Joy
"Plus it is not a "** State University" but a "University of **" which means it should have better profs."
How do people come up with aforementioned insights? There is no co-relation between how a Univ is named and the quality of education offered....
I guess, according to you, Univ of phoenix must be better than all the state Univs (OSU, MSU etc..) in US
-CinBoy
I am planning to start my Online MBA from Univ of Nebraska (UNL). This is AACSB certified.
Also the price point is really sweet. 17K only + Books. Business Week placed it 4th overall part time.
The Best Part-Time Business Schools: University of Nebraska - BusinessWeek (http://images.businessweek.com/ss/09/11/1105_best_part_time_business_schools/7.htm)
-That is what got me interested in the first place.
Plus it is not a "** State University" but a "University of **" which means it should have better profs.
Anyhow anyone has any pros and cons to share about this one?
n'
Joy
"Plus it is not a "** State University" but a "University of **" which means it should have better profs."
How do people come up with aforementioned insights? There is no co-relation between how a Univ is named and the quality of education offered....
I guess, according to you, Univ of phoenix must be better than all the state Univs (OSU, MSU etc..) in US
-CinBoy
more...
ca_immigrant
07-13 11:18 AM
This is simply the explanation as to why will EB2 India get a huge number and not so much for EB2 China (so when year end statistics come out, there would not be too much noise about why EB2 India got several thousands of visa numbers more than any other category).
Indication that EB2 India will get huge numbers...this is just explanation as to why:)
be ready next month my friend.
-:)
Indication that EB2 India will get huge numbers...this is just explanation as to why:)
be ready next month my friend.
-:)
CHHAYA
08-16 09:07 PM
Hi Guys,
I got an LUD on 8/14 on mine and my wifes I485s and also on the first EADs filed along with the 485. Anything cooking? I did change my employer in Feb 2010 and yet to file AC21. If any one had similar LUDs please post.
Thanks
I see LUD on 7/10/10 on mine EAD which was filed online in 08. But no LUD on 485 or last EAD which was filed in 09.
I got an LUD on 8/14 on mine and my wifes I485s and also on the first EADs filed along with the 485. Anything cooking? I did change my employer in Feb 2010 and yet to file AC21. If any one had similar LUDs please post.
Thanks
I see LUD on 7/10/10 on mine EAD which was filed online in 08. But no LUD on 485 or last EAD which was filed in 09.
more...
GCNirvana007
10-10 01:33 PM
Just to avoid all this , You can say I'm a US citizen and move on. They cannot ask for any verification can they?
No how about carry the documents which is required by LAW rather your criminal suggestion?
Its simple, its LAW. They have clearly stated to carry. Just carry the damn documents and get over it. I see it amusing people whining about this. Its not like they are raping you. They are asking questions which they are entitled to. If someone crosses the line, then yes we can take it up on them.
No how about carry the documents which is required by LAW rather your criminal suggestion?
Its simple, its LAW. They have clearly stated to carry. Just carry the damn documents and get over it. I see it amusing people whining about this. Its not like they are raping you. They are asking questions which they are entitled to. If someone crosses the line, then yes we can take it up on them.
2010 hairstyles Art Nouveau Pattern
srikondoji
07-20 03:11 PM
Virald,
What makes you start another stupid thread?
There are gazillion threads that discussed this issue at length. Already people have discussed this and are planning their plan B and for your kind information, Greg didnot say that all July 2 applications will be rejected.
Don't try to scare people and then try to back it up by saying "I am trying to figure that out too"
I don't know, I am trying to figure that out too.
What makes you start another stupid thread?
There are gazillion threads that discussed this issue at length. Already people have discussed this and are planning their plan B and for your kind information, Greg didnot say that all July 2 applications will be rejected.
Don't try to scare people and then try to back it up by saying "I am trying to figure that out too"
I don't know, I am trying to figure that out too.
more...
msgrewal81
02-18 05:40 PM
this bill would allow to adjust status to GC, if you lived for the last 5 years continuously except for casual absence. It does not eliminate H1B, but makes it tougher at advertisement stage for EB.
Where did you read that "except for casual absence". Because that might make it go or nogo for many people.
There would be many people who might have gone outside US to India or so for a month or so for maybe twice in last 5 years. Will that count as casual absence and forgiven ?
eg. my wife will be in US for 5 years in August'09, but she has been to India atleast twice for 2 months and 1 month respectively during these 5 years.
Where did you read that "except for casual absence". Because that might make it go or nogo for many people.
There would be many people who might have gone outside US to India or so for a month or so for maybe twice in last 5 years. Will that count as casual absence and forgiven ?
eg. my wife will be in US for 5 years in August'09, but she has been to India atleast twice for 2 months and 1 month respectively during these 5 years.
hair geometric art nouveau
mallu
02-22 07:17 PM
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
more...
jcmenon
07-24 09:31 AM
I totally agree with you. Lets go allout for this. We have to convince this first to IV core to take this up with priority then only we can pursue this with USCIS.
hot Art+nouveau+patterns+and+
gsc999
07-03 03:55 PM
Here is my $99 by paypal.
Amount: $99.00 USD
Transaction ID: 5DB90775US5552631
Amount: $99.00 USD
Transaction ID: 5DB90775US5552631
more...
house Art Nouveau Designs
GCcomesoon
04-29 02:18 PM
Hi
As mentioned in my previous post
I got the approval email for my 485 filed in June - 2007.I guess my wife's case should be approved soon.So does that mean biometrics is needed in my case as the message which is commmon - Card production is not given which I guess is sent for most of the approved cases ?
Or has anyone updates after the approval message ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
I called TSC yesterday & they said that biometrics notice has been requested ( which they said to me 1 month back too ) , Now till I get my biometrics done, I won't get the actual physical card.Keep in USCIS in mind, I wonder how much time this will take ??
Would appreciate if anyone could share any thoughts, any similar experiences?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
As mentioned in my previous post
I got the approval email for my 485 filed in June - 2007.I guess my wife's case should be approved soon.So does that mean biometrics is needed in my case as the message which is commmon - Card production is not given which I guess is sent for most of the approved cases ?
Or has anyone updates after the approval message ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
I called TSC yesterday & they said that biometrics notice has been requested ( which they said to me 1 month back too ) , Now till I get my biometrics done, I won't get the actual physical card.Keep in USCIS in mind, I wonder how much time this will take ??
Would appreciate if anyone could share any thoughts, any similar experiences?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
tattoo Kitted Beanie Free Patterns - Looking for free art nouveau patterns for
alterego
07-12 07:34 PM
I posted this in another thread.
There could be two reasons for this huge forward movement for EB2.
1) They want to minimize wastage by making more visas available for CP.
2) There was some heartburn among EB2 China applicants when their PD was set to April 2004. Since there are a lot more EB2 India applicants with PD's earlier than that, they felt that most of the EB2-ROW spillover would go to India. Moving the dates forward to 2006 would ensure that EB2 China gets a decent share of the spillover.
Point taken, However when EB2 India is moved to June 1 2006, there will be even more EB2 India with PD earlier than it was previously. So whichever date you set as the cut off, EB2 India will have more people with PDs earlier than that. So I guess I am not understanding how that helps Chinese applicants. Unless the USCIS decides which of the petitions they will process with current priority dates and gives preference to Chinese cases. Per my understanding, they are supposed to use RD in such a situation. However who knows what they will do.
There could be two reasons for this huge forward movement for EB2.
1) They want to minimize wastage by making more visas available for CP.
2) There was some heartburn among EB2 China applicants when their PD was set to April 2004. Since there are a lot more EB2 India applicants with PD's earlier than that, they felt that most of the EB2-ROW spillover would go to India. Moving the dates forward to 2006 would ensure that EB2 China gets a decent share of the spillover.
Point taken, However when EB2 India is moved to June 1 2006, there will be even more EB2 India with PD earlier than it was previously. So whichever date you set as the cut off, EB2 India will have more people with PDs earlier than that. So I guess I am not understanding how that helps Chinese applicants. Unless the USCIS decides which of the petitions they will process with current priority dates and gives preference to Chinese cases. Per my understanding, they are supposed to use RD in such a situation. However who knows what they will do.
more...
pictures Art Nouveau Style Pattern
cgs
10-20 04:26 PM
The following was a response to my request to support legal immigration for skilled workers.
*****
Thank you for writing me in support of the H-1B visa program. I agree with you that the limited increase in visas for highly skilled immigrants will benefit the economy.
The demand for these workers is clear. When the H-1B annual numerical limits reverted to 65,000 from 195,000 the Fiscal Year 2004 limit was reached in mid-February 2004, and the Fiscal Year 2005 limit was reached on October 1, 2004, the first day of the fiscal year.
Skilled immigrants play a valuable role in our economy. Using the technology sector as an example, the economic production of companies assisted by workers on H1-B visas in 1998 created more than $16.8 billion in sales and over 58,000 jobs. Our challenge is to capture this economic benefit while also creating more jobs and opportunity for American workers.
As you know, the intent is that H1-B visas should only be issued if qualified American workers are unable to take the jobs in question. Also, H1-B visa holders should be paid a fair market wage for their work, not less than what an American worker would make for performing the same work. The intent of the program is not to undercut existing wage structures by importing foreign workers.
As this debate continues, I believe it is important for Congress to assess how the H1-B visa affects job opportunities for Americans and wages in the relevant sectors. If the H-1B visa continues to help our economy and improve opportunities for American workers, I will continue my support for this program. As the Senate considers this matter, I will certainly keep your concerns in mind.
Again, thank you for writing me about the H1-B visa program. Please stay in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
United States Senator
P.S. Our system does not allow direct response to this email. However, if you would like to contact me again, please use the form on the website: http://obama.senate.gov/contact/
Stay up to date with Barack's work in the Senate and on issues of importance to Illinois. Subscribe to the weekly podcast here: http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/
*****
Thank you for writing me in support of the H-1B visa program. I agree with you that the limited increase in visas for highly skilled immigrants will benefit the economy.
The demand for these workers is clear. When the H-1B annual numerical limits reverted to 65,000 from 195,000 the Fiscal Year 2004 limit was reached in mid-February 2004, and the Fiscal Year 2005 limit was reached on October 1, 2004, the first day of the fiscal year.
Skilled immigrants play a valuable role in our economy. Using the technology sector as an example, the economic production of companies assisted by workers on H1-B visas in 1998 created more than $16.8 billion in sales and over 58,000 jobs. Our challenge is to capture this economic benefit while also creating more jobs and opportunity for American workers.
As you know, the intent is that H1-B visas should only be issued if qualified American workers are unable to take the jobs in question. Also, H1-B visa holders should be paid a fair market wage for their work, not less than what an American worker would make for performing the same work. The intent of the program is not to undercut existing wage structures by importing foreign workers.
As this debate continues, I believe it is important for Congress to assess how the H1-B visa affects job opportunities for Americans and wages in the relevant sectors. If the H-1B visa continues to help our economy and improve opportunities for American workers, I will continue my support for this program. As the Senate considers this matter, I will certainly keep your concerns in mind.
Again, thank you for writing me about the H1-B visa program. Please stay in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
United States Senator
P.S. Our system does not allow direct response to this email. However, if you would like to contact me again, please use the form on the website: http://obama.senate.gov/contact/
Stay up to date with Barack's work in the Senate and on issues of importance to Illinois. Subscribe to the weekly podcast here: http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/
dresses art nouveau patterns
sirinme
10-21 02:45 PM
I just sent mine.
- sirinme
- sirinme
more...
makeup Pattern from plants in style
Ramba
07-14 06:01 PM
Consult an attorney because if you applied for I-485 in July 2007 and quit employer in August, you might not be covered under AC21 since 6 months did not pass since adjucation request (I-485) was files with USCIS.
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
girlfriend ornate pastel art nouveau
10dulkar
08-15 05:18 PM
Expected news for EB3 folks
hairstyles Art Nouveau Pattern 8
chmur
03-23 08:56 PM
After arriving in US , typically It takes about a year or two before you start ur GC process.(Initial job/city jumping )
So most of the applicants in 01-02 arrived during the halcyon days of 99-00.
with this analogy, I don't expect too many applicant in 03-04
So most of the applicants in 01-02 arrived during the halcyon days of 99-00.
with this analogy, I don't expect too many applicant in 03-04
bheemi
07-02 09:51 AM
mr/mrs himu73..
use your language properly..
use your language properly..
Imigrait
02-04 12:48 PM
CanadianIndian,
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Short answer to your question in BOLD is Yes.
Please go through this thread for further details. Also, use the search function to find further details on this forum for answer to rest of your questions.
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Short answer to your question in BOLD is Yes.
Please go through this thread for further details. Also, use the search function to find further details on this forum for answer to rest of your questions.