LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
Ashland Inc. (NYSE: ASH) said Tuesday it lost $119 million in its first fiscal quarter, and plans to cut its work force by 1,300 jobs, freeze wages and adopt a two-week furlough program.The chemical company blamed the loss in the first quarter on a severance charge, writedown and the acquisition of Hercules Inc. It said [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1256&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/27/ashland-posts-1q-loss-plans-1300-job-cuts/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/27/ashland-posts-1q-loss-plans-1300-job-cuts/)
wallpaper Vintage Bamp;L Ray Ban Wayfarer
tnite
08-06 04:06 PM
bump
theperm
08-08 06:40 PM
where ever u r getting ur info from shree19772000 ...I soooooooooooooooo hope it is true !!! :D
2011 ray ban wayfarer glasses
NikNikon
June 16th, 2005, 03:54 PM
Hey Anders, I gave a go at lightening your shot. Would be interested in how yours came out as well.
more...
pappu
01-07 07:18 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/
Please stay tuned for a massive IV campaign coming up. We will be announcing it tonight on the forums.
Contact your chapter leaders for various state chapter action items.
Please stay tuned for a massive IV campaign coming up. We will be announcing it tonight on the forums.
Contact your chapter leaders for various state chapter action items.
kumar1
12-08 01:23 PM
bump
I have received EAD/AP. Need to know if I have need to go for EAD renewal in USCIS office or it comes by post
I have received EAD/AP. Need to know if I have need to go for EAD renewal in USCIS office or it comes by post
more...
rb_248
04-01 12:05 PM
Congrats to GreenGuru. and thanks for sharing all the information.
IV admin, can we have a separate option on the details to show that GC is already received. Like rb_248 got it last september and he/she still comes here and shares his knowledge. so having that option display would be gr8.
cheers/
Yes. I agree. There should be a category for I485 approved date. But, I could have also inserted that in my signature.
IV admin, can we have a separate option on the details to show that GC is already received. Like rb_248 got it last september and he/she still comes here and shares his knowledge. so having that option display would be gr8.
cheers/
Yes. I agree. There should be a category for I485 approved date. But, I could have also inserted that in my signature.
2010 Cheap Ray Ban Wayfarer
nandakumar
01-18 12:59 PM
Bump
more...
beemboy
10-31 10:33 AM
Guys, I need to reschedule visa appointment through the vfs website. I understand we have to cancel our appointment to reschedule; However, I am not sure if we have to fill out all the applications ( DS-156 & DS-157 ) again?
Did anyone go through this? Please let me know.
Did anyone go through this? Please let me know.
hair MFJ Rayban Wayfarer
don840
04-03 06:06 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
more...
lacrossegc
12-21 01:20 PM
Its in the Visa Bulletin itself
First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.
Second: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.
Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second
preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
Fourth: Certain Special Immigrants: 7.1% of the worldwide level.
Fifth: Employment Creation: 7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000 of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional centers by Sec. 610 of P.L. 102-395.
First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.
Second: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.
Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second
preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
Fourth: Certain Special Immigrants: 7.1% of the worldwide level.
Fifth: Employment Creation: 7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000 of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional centers by Sec. 610 of P.L. 102-395.
hot RAY BAN WAYFARER SUNGLASSES
kaskar
06-19 02:02 PM
My case is already at the embassy since march 2007? Not sure when they schedule interview ?does anyone know the time lines.
more...
house ray ban wayfarer sunglasses
veni001
03-31 12:40 PM
What happens if your previous employer cancel the approved I140 before the new company files the for I140. I think you need at least 7-8 months to get Labor approved. I am pretty sure by that time, the old employer will cancel the approved I140. I am taking about big Consulting companies here where you can not negotiate to keep the I140 open after you resign.
Thanks in advance
If the old employer withdraw his petition (that's what most employers do to be on safe side, in this economy) before new employer's i-140 approval then you can not port old priority date.
Thanks in advance
If the old employer withdraw his petition (that's what most employers do to be on safe side, in this economy) before new employer's i-140 approval then you can not port old priority date.
tattoo Vintage Bamp;L Ray Ban Wayfarer
vallabhu
07-03 03:35 PM
First question
Is your existing H1 still valid and how many days you you have on that.
You have two scenarios here
1) H1 approved while u r in Mexico
2) H1 approved after comming back to US
1)
if your h1 is approved when you are in Mexico, you will have new I94 when returning to the country with the validity date of existing H1 and you have to go out country again and get it stamped or get that document over to you get your passport stammped and then come back
Second is safest bet for you.
Is your existing H1 still valid and how many days you you have on that.
You have two scenarios here
1) H1 approved while u r in Mexico
2) H1 approved after comming back to US
1)
if your h1 is approved when you are in Mexico, you will have new I94 when returning to the country with the validity date of existing H1 and you have to go out country again and get it stamped or get that document over to you get your passport stammped and then come back
Second is safest bet for you.
more...
pictures Hot Ray Ban Wayfarer Rb 2…
dammu
04-14 08:44 PM
Hi,
I am on H1B without job and no paystubs.
My employer has been trying to find a project for me but till now he couldnt get anything.
Its been 6 months alreay since I am on H1B visa.
He made me modify my actual experience to include fake projects .
Now I am thinking of filing a complaint to DOL.
I have my H1B petition and offer letter from the employer.
But I am worried that if I file complaint ,my employer will threaten me telling that I faked my experience and submitted fake resumes.
What should I do? Will DOL take any action against me?
Any success stories of DOL complaint filing?
I am on H1B without job and no paystubs.
My employer has been trying to find a project for me but till now he couldnt get anything.
Its been 6 months alreay since I am on H1B visa.
He made me modify my actual experience to include fake projects .
Now I am thinking of filing a complaint to DOL.
I have my H1B petition and offer letter from the employer.
But I am worried that if I file complaint ,my employer will threaten me telling that I faked my experience and submitted fake resumes.
What should I do? Will DOL take any action against me?
Any success stories of DOL complaint filing?
dresses New-ray-an-wayfarer
sundar99
05-03 11:34 AM
Instead of picking holes in the system, all that we need to do is to ensure the reporter gets the message " How legal immigrants are stuck so deeply for following rules" . This will help them put it out in press and debate on it, that way, there will be a larger awareness. You got to look at it from a larger perspective. The more awareness the better are the chances. The time is now to call reporters and highlight the plight of EB Retro folks. That way, they get to seperate legal and illegals (or Mex Citizens) inorder not to confuse the public.
I am of the opinion, it will help the legal immigrants cause by calling, no harm in trying it.
I am of the opinion, it will help the legal immigrants cause by calling, no harm in trying it.
more...
makeup Ray-an-wayfarer-sunglasses-
gc_on_demand
09-06 12:04 PM
Congratulation to all EB2 who are getting their approvals. Have a wonderful post-GC life :)
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
girlfriend ray ban wayfarer glasses
gcisadawg
04-07 05:06 PM
sam_gc,
Thanks for the response! Fear and hope compete against each other in this dilemma! Seems like the decision rests with the IO whenever she enters next time.
There is a provision for extending B2 visa. If they dont allow, they wouldnt have it in the first place. I understand getting Immigration benefit is a privilege and not a right! The question is how to balance our needs without overreaching it!
Rgds,
gcisadawg
Thanks for the response! Fear and hope compete against each other in this dilemma! Seems like the decision rests with the IO whenever she enters next time.
There is a provision for extending B2 visa. If they dont allow, they wouldnt have it in the first place. I understand getting Immigration benefit is a privilege and not a right! The question is how to balance our needs without overreaching it!
Rgds,
gcisadawg
hairstyles and Sunglasses. Vintage
boston_gc
01-26 04:07 PM
I think it will be follish for any political party to not pay attention to Latino power. Mr. Obama won election with their support. For some reason, Latino group has not come forward so far to say that no CIR would mean no support to the party. I think if Latinos and all other interest groups come together, we may have a chance. Otherwise, I agree it is going tobe a while....:mad:
The only way to get this CIR is to get full support of Get support of Senator McCain. If we get his support, atleast some republicans will support the bill and it can pass.
The only way to get this CIR is to get full support of Get support of Senator McCain. If we get his support, atleast some republicans will support the bill and it can pass.
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
eb3retro
09-09 05:23 PM
can you show me a single post in IV that states that they have travelled after applying for AP, and come back with an AP. May be I missed it.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét