prinive
03-28 08:35 PM
Any one else ....:o
wallpaper Miss Lindsay Lohan has
nousername
11-20 09:05 PM
Sorry to hear about your situation.. Your husbands b***s should be chopped for physically abusing you..
I'm not sure where you are based or which country you originally belong to but like in SF Bay Area (California) there is Indian Community Center which on Sunday's offer free legal advice. Here is the link Free Legal Clinic | Indiacc Home (http://www.indiacc.org/legal_clinic)
You might have something like this around you live..
Good luck.
Help!
I divorced my husband after 14 months of marriage. I have a green card with conditional residency (the I-751 90 day 'window' to remove conditions starts Sept 2010). My husband was abusive mentally and physically, I have no contact with him.
I cannot prove the abuse definitively as I covered it up at the time (no photos or police reports, only my testimony and perhaps that of the counselors we saw together). The advice I have received on how to proceed has been conflicting; some say wait and apply during the 90 day window to remove the conditions and it MIGHT be ok; some say I need to file now and prove the abuse.
I have no money for a lawyer as my husband also stole most of my money and I just got laid off as well. Any ideas?!? Does anyone know if it is riskier to try and prove the abuse or how hard that is and if I'm more likely to lose my green card that way? Is there any way at all do to this without thousands to spend on a lawyer?
Many thanks in advance for all help and advice.
P.S. I've tried the local bar association, legal aid and a thousand other options, all of which have either been dead-ends or given me yet more conflicting info.
I'm not sure where you are based or which country you originally belong to but like in SF Bay Area (California) there is Indian Community Center which on Sunday's offer free legal advice. Here is the link Free Legal Clinic | Indiacc Home (http://www.indiacc.org/legal_clinic)
You might have something like this around you live..
Good luck.
Help!
I divorced my husband after 14 months of marriage. I have a green card with conditional residency (the I-751 90 day 'window' to remove conditions starts Sept 2010). My husband was abusive mentally and physically, I have no contact with him.
I cannot prove the abuse definitively as I covered it up at the time (no photos or police reports, only my testimony and perhaps that of the counselors we saw together). The advice I have received on how to proceed has been conflicting; some say wait and apply during the 90 day window to remove the conditions and it MIGHT be ok; some say I need to file now and prove the abuse.
I have no money for a lawyer as my husband also stole most of my money and I just got laid off as well. Any ideas?!? Does anyone know if it is riskier to try and prove the abuse or how hard that is and if I'm more likely to lose my green card that way? Is there any way at all do to this without thousands to spend on a lawyer?
Many thanks in advance for all help and advice.
P.S. I've tried the local bar association, legal aid and a thousand other options, all of which have either been dead-ends or given me yet more conflicting info.
samir
04-27 08:48 PM
Hi,
Can some one help me out on the above subject, i had birthcertificate which contains only my Father's name( This birth certificate got from MRO office at AP, India). One of my friend told me that the birth certificate should contain both Mother and Father's Name.
Can some one provide me sample birth certficate , so that it will helpfull to me send to my parents, so that i will get BC from MRO office, AP, India.
Thanks inadvance
Please check with your local Indian consulate if they can issue a BC. If you have a current original passport which includes the names of both your parents, it should work fine. Your original BC is not required.
Link to this service provided by the Consulate General in San Francisco
http://www.cgisf.org/visa/indian_services.html#mis-bc
Can some one help me out on the above subject, i had birthcertificate which contains only my Father's name( This birth certificate got from MRO office at AP, India). One of my friend told me that the birth certificate should contain both Mother and Father's Name.
Can some one provide me sample birth certficate , so that it will helpfull to me send to my parents, so that i will get BC from MRO office, AP, India.
Thanks inadvance
Please check with your local Indian consulate if they can issue a BC. If you have a current original passport which includes the names of both your parents, it should work fine. Your original BC is not required.
Link to this service provided by the Consulate General in San Francisco
http://www.cgisf.org/visa/indian_services.html#mis-bc
2011 Lindsay Lohan is wearing some
pmpforgc
04-08 12:09 AM
since it might be easy to pass PACE Act. We can try to attach all this amendments included in SJC/Frist bill along with Brownback amendment to be included for high skill legal immigration reform in the PACE act. PACE Act already has some immigration provisions which can be modified to included these amendements. It has big support from both sides and we are not attached to undocumented or agricultural workers there, so may not be that much oppostion except in house.
This is some thing to think about in this recess.
This is some thing to think about in this recess.
more...
jamesbond007
11-19 03:32 PM
Does this mean that, if we do not want to be overstepped in the Q, everyone has to have an attorney with AILA membership?? :eek:
Everyone send chocolates/gifts to your attorney for Thanksgiving/Christmas and be on their good side.
Everyone send chocolates/gifts to your attorney for Thanksgiving/Christmas and be on their good side.
reddy77
07-23 08:25 AM
Pittsburg ?? what state CA or PA ?? since there is no "h", I assume you are talking about pittsburg in CA ...
Hi Thanks for your inputs.
But both the employers are consultant.
One is in Fremont CA and other in Pittsburg. Both are offering almost same salary.
So which should be an better option, if they have a similar better client list?
Hi Thanks for your inputs.
But both the employers are consultant.
One is in Fremont CA and other in Pittsburg. Both are offering almost same salary.
So which should be an better option, if they have a similar better client list?
more...
prom2
10-30 09:58 PM
People might mistake this as a thread for people who filed on June 7th, simply because there are other threads out there for people who filed in specific date ranges. I believe you meant June 2007 in your title, right?
Oh, I understand. You are right.
Oh, I understand. You are right.
2010 Lindsay Lohan Hair 2009, 2010
joydiptac
06-01 04:53 PM
Just provide the information that they have asked for. They are about to make a decision on your case. i.e. Whether to preadjudicate or not.
So that when the numbers are available yours will be ready to send the card. :)
So that when the numbers are available yours will be ready to send the card. :)
more...
Blog Feeds
09-18 10:20 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyrK0-vU6UHg0G0t6M7ASyb5C3SNZCuOzKlQzOX_zeYds6jlyccKvAmTImXXQSOtJ8Vdq4yS6pUhZk5j1mOmeQoss9X0VQC0wZntOFXnXfwG5LvR0LpkqGevYNjjcUJdrGptupZnMZlDo/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyrK0-vU6UHg0G0t6M7ASyb5C3SNZCuOzKlQzOX_zeYds6jlyccKvAmTImXXQSOtJ8Vdq4yS6pUhZk5j1mOmeQoss9X0VQC0wZntOFXnXfwG5LvR0LpkqGevYNjjcUJdrGptupZnMZlDo/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyrK0-vU6UHg0G0t6M7ASyb5C3SNZCuOzKlQzOX_zeYds6jlyccKvAmTImXXQSOtJ8Vdq4yS6pUhZk5j1mOmeQoss9X0VQC0wZntOFXnXfwG5LvR0LpkqGevYNjjcUJdrGptupZnMZlDo/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyrK0-vU6UHg0G0t6M7ASyb5C3SNZCuOzKlQzOX_zeYds6jlyccKvAmTImXXQSOtJ8Vdq4yS6pUhZk5j1mOmeQoss9X0VQC0wZntOFXnXfwG5LvR0LpkqGevYNjjcUJdrGptupZnMZlDo/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
hair Lindsay Lohan
ivar
11-05 10:01 AM
Case resolved!!
All is well that ends well. Well my case got reopened, new RFE sent, and case is approved once the RFE resposne is submitted.
Reason given for the denial of the case is abadonded RFE, even though no RFE was sent in the first place.
Good to hear that you got your approval. Very few people come back and give update about their case. Thanks for updating IV about the final result.
All is well that ends well. Well my case got reopened, new RFE sent, and case is approved once the RFE resposne is submitted.
Reason given for the denial of the case is abadonded RFE, even though no RFE was sent in the first place.
Good to hear that you got your approval. Very few people come back and give update about their case. Thanks for updating IV about the final result.
more...
Rb_newsletter
12-22 02:19 PM
I just saw this posting in murthy site and thought of sharing the info here.
MurthyDotCom : 221(g) Visa Stamp is Considered a Visa Refusal (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_221gst.html)
It looks completely ridiculous for me. Why should it be considered refusal after approval stamping?
MurthyDotCom : 221(g) Visa Stamp is Considered a Visa Refusal (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_221gst.html)
It looks completely ridiculous for me. Why should it be considered refusal after approval stamping?
hot Lindsay emerged from her hair
shreekhand
10-04 11:33 PM
:p...I loved that you just gave a name....and then the choice of the name is just hilarious ! (not that it may not be a true name...but still!!!)
more...
house One Response to “lindsay-lohan
vinzak
01-02 12:07 PM
You will need to switch to an F1 (Student Visa). You cannot enroll for a full time MBA course on an H1. The college you enroll in will insist on an F1.
As for the GC application, it is for future employment. Meaning that if you company is willing to hire you back once you get your GC and they don't withdraw the I-140, then the application can continue.
However, I think that if and when yr GC gets approved, you will mostly likely have to abandon full time studies and go back to working full time for yr company right away. I only think this and I'm not sure.
As for the GC application, it is for future employment. Meaning that if you company is willing to hire you back once you get your GC and they don't withdraw the I-140, then the application can continue.
However, I think that if and when yr GC gets approved, you will mostly likely have to abandon full time studies and go back to working full time for yr company right away. I only think this and I'm not sure.
tattoo Lindsay Lohan - Great
sands_14
07-26 10:55 AM
i guess it wa
more...
pictures Lindsay Lohan Hairstyle
chi_shark
06-29 07:42 PM
As per H1B you cannot do this.. the second job will be illegal
you can do it... you have to file an addtional H1... its just like the regular h1 except it is for part-time work... dont know any further specifics...
you can do it... you have to file an addtional H1... its just like the regular h1 except it is for part-time work... dont know any further specifics...
dresses liked Lindsay Lohan#39;s new
actaccord
01-26 11:46 AM
Pls start the effort to team up and meet the lawmakers.
more...
makeup Lindsay Lohan gets hair colour
perm
12-27 04:43 PM
You do have to use AC21 if you want to keep GC process alive and yes, may get RFE. You do not have to notify the USCIS about the job change, but keep your employment offer handy in case RFE will follow. If you notify them, most likely RFE will follow, if not, you may never get RFE. Some people think it's safer to notify the USCIS, but I think it's better not to. It's up to you to decide.
Do you have to use / file AC-21 if your I-140 is approved (long back in 2005) and you have passed 180 days of i485 received date?
Do you have to use / file AC-21 if your I-140 is approved (long back in 2005) and you have passed 180 days of i485 received date?
girlfriend hot lindsay lohan lindsay
asterix
02-22 05:45 PM
Not sure if people understood the question. Based on this data it shows India got much more then what was in the quota and there were more GC given than the yearly total limit. If this is true, why do I keep hearing that in forums that there were 250K visa's over the last 5 years that were lost because they GC's were not processed in time? If anything there were more visa's given and a disproportionately higher # for India.
hairstyles lindsay lohan hair
god_bless_you
08-15 09:39 AM
they will make any statement only if they are pounded by letters from us. if you want you can post their contacts on the forum and everyone can write letters to them.
we can ask support from
http://www.usinpac.com/
let us register with USINPAC from here
http://www.usinpac.com/register.asp
another wikipedia which has lot of info on Indian Americans!!
check Politics section on this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American
another interesting item ..
Merrill Lynch recently revealed that there are nearly 200,000 Indian American millionaires. One in every nine Indians in the US is a millionaire, comprising 10% of US millionaires. (Source: 2003 Merrill Lynch SA Market Study).
we can ask support from
http://www.usinpac.com/
let us register with USINPAC from here
http://www.usinpac.com/register.asp
another wikipedia which has lot of info on Indian Americans!!
check Politics section on this page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American
another interesting item ..
Merrill Lynch recently revealed that there are nearly 200,000 Indian American millionaires. One in every nine Indians in the US is a millionaire, comprising 10% of US millionaires. (Source: 2003 Merrill Lynch SA Market Study).
bondgoli007
08-01 12:59 PM
Now that H.R 5582 has cleared Judiciary sub - commitee and moves to Judiciary Full Commitee, I think we all need to focus our "Call/Fax" campaign and overwhelm the fence sitters with calls etc .
1. At Full judiciary commitee the list of congressman would be more than 10-15 .Probably 30-40??. Size wise it might be prohibitive.
2 No point in 1000 of us calling Steve Kings ....He will never change his mind . Spare this effort to convince fence sitters instead. No point in calling the one who we know already support either.
This leaves us with plenty of time to repeatedly call the fence sitters and force them to jump our way
Hi chmur,
Yes the Full commitee had 40 members, 23 democrats and 17 Republicans including Congressman Sensenbrenner who is a co sponsor.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?id=HSJU
I got a hold of 5 of my friends at work who are in the same GC boat as I and spent 20 mins explaining the whole process and got them to make the calls. Afterwards they were all surprised to notice it took up just 15-20 mins. Now seeing the result they are further motivated to participate in forthcoming action items....maybe this is one way we can get others to participate....
All the best IV!!
1. At Full judiciary commitee the list of congressman would be more than 10-15 .Probably 30-40??. Size wise it might be prohibitive.
2 No point in 1000 of us calling Steve Kings ....He will never change his mind . Spare this effort to convince fence sitters instead. No point in calling the one who we know already support either.
This leaves us with plenty of time to repeatedly call the fence sitters and force them to jump our way
Hi chmur,
Yes the Full commitee had 40 members, 23 democrats and 17 Republicans including Congressman Sensenbrenner who is a co sponsor.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?id=HSJU
I got a hold of 5 of my friends at work who are in the same GC boat as I and spent 20 mins explaining the whole process and got them to make the calls. Afterwards they were all surprised to notice it took up just 15-20 mins. Now seeing the result they are further motivated to participate in forthcoming action items....maybe this is one way we can get others to participate....
All the best IV!!
desi3933
06-30 01:56 PM
....
I can work in the Software company fulltime but at the same time can work in a motel part time, now when I get lay off from the software company ..I'll be in status but working for motel, also not full filling the condition of Highly skilled labor etc.
Can someone please explain all this. So far I know you cannot have this and this is what my attorney told me when I thought of doing that to open up a company and work as an employee partitme in it.
Mr./Ms. P. Saxena -
Each H-1B must be for specialty occupation, whether job is full time or part time. Beyond that, it does not matter whether job is classified as "Highly Skilled Labor" or not.
USCIS - What is a specialty occupation? (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=6408ec897643f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4b18dc4d88889010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Hopefully this clears your confusion,
Have a good day!
desi3933
I can work in the Software company fulltime but at the same time can work in a motel part time, now when I get lay off from the software company ..I'll be in status but working for motel, also not full filling the condition of Highly skilled labor etc.
Can someone please explain all this. So far I know you cannot have this and this is what my attorney told me when I thought of doing that to open up a company and work as an employee partitme in it.
Mr./Ms. P. Saxena -
Each H-1B must be for specialty occupation, whether job is full time or part time. Beyond that, it does not matter whether job is classified as "Highly Skilled Labor" or not.
USCIS - What is a specialty occupation? (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=6408ec897643f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4b18dc4d88889010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Hopefully this clears your confusion,
Have a good day!
desi3933