jonty_11
07-16 07:09 PM
It would help if you guys provide ur PDs to get an idea what PD folks are getting CP interview calls?
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson and Marcus Bent
Oct007
11-11 08:53 PM
I have followed what many people suggested and applied for the H1B renewal.
Now I have to travel to India in the last week of November. I have a valid EAD and AP document. My H1B will be expiring and the renewal will be filed but I wont be receiving the approval.
I can use the AP and renter U.S but will that result in a cancellation of my H1B renewal?
Now I have to travel to India in the last week of November. I have a valid EAD and AP document. My H1B will be expiring and the renewal will be filed but I wont be receiving the approval.
I can use the AP and renter U.S but will that result in a cancellation of my H1B renewal?
marcus bent gemma atkinson. marcus bent gemma atkinson. Marcus Bent and Rambo; Marcus Bent and Rambo. Thunderhawks. Apr 5, 08:14 PM. I was praying that the headline was quot;Apple to
calaway42
10-20 02:24 AM
beta! i learned pretty much everything relate to Flash from you! :)
Beta for US Prez!!
Beta for US Prez!!
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson
diptam
09-07 08:14 AM
Which company will create a new PERM and new I-140 for someone in this economy ? The chances of rejection are high , the audit chance is also hanging...
That was exactly my plan 2.5 years ago when i applied for my I-140 and I-485 in 2007 (PD is Mar '05 EB3) however USCIS approved my I-140 in Jan 2009 which was too late. The economy was already in deep recession with unemployment sky rocketing. If my I-140 approval would have come 6 months earlier ( before Lehmann broke) I would have pulled through a new PERM and new I-140.
Anyway , that's what i was destined so I didn't get I-140 in regular time frame. :)
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
That was exactly my plan 2.5 years ago when i applied for my I-140 and I-485 in 2007 (PD is Mar '05 EB3) however USCIS approved my I-140 in Jan 2009 which was too late. The economy was already in deep recession with unemployment sky rocketing. If my I-140 approval would have come 6 months earlier ( before Lehmann broke) I would have pulled through a new PERM and new I-140.
Anyway , that's what i was destined so I didn't get I-140 in regular time frame. :)
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Marcus Bent e Gemma Atkinson
kevinkris
11-03 08:42 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INo69f7f8bo
About CIR.
The CIR bill is definitely coming back. Obama has mentioned it few times that solving the current immigration problem is one of his highest priority. Now we will need to wait and see what changes they can add to the existent CIR bill to help legals. But I would think most of the bill should remain the same since they have wasted a lot of time and effort in coming up with it
About CIR.
The CIR bill is definitely coming back. Obama has mentioned it few times that solving the current immigration problem is one of his highest priority. Now we will need to wait and see what changes they can add to the existent CIR bill to help legals. But I would think most of the bill should remain the same since they have wasted a lot of time and effort in coming up with it
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson and Marcus Bent
manand24
10-22 09:34 AM
See Signature
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson and Marcus Bent
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.
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma AtkinsonBritish
javadeveloper
07-18 10:08 PM
found this one too
http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14653
http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14653
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. In this photo: Marcus Bent,
eb3retro
09-26 12:10 PM
i am a july 2nd filer at NSC , got EAD too. i-140 originally from NSC also.
marcus bent gemma atkinson. City striker Marcus Bent
adi787
12-11 08:15 PM
hi,
sorry to hear the denial.
Was this beyond 6th yr extn based on approved 140?
Or due to small company?
sorry to hear the denial.
Was this beyond 6th yr extn based on approved 140?
Or due to small company?
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson Image
dan19
03-09 02:50 PM
Based on Murthy.com, It's likely that EB3 World will move but India and China will remain stagnant:confused:
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
marcus bent gemma atkinson. marcus bent gemma atkinson
sunny1000
06-19 03:00 PM
My case is already at the embassy since march 2007? Not sure when they schedule interview ?does anyone know the time lines.
Did you check the Embassy website? They post the interview dates for all the applicants scheduled for the following month. You can email them or call them and I am sure they will respond.
Did you check the Embassy website? They post the interview dates for all the applicants scheduled for the following month. You can email them or call them and I am sure they will respond.
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson of Marcus
zephyrr
03-20 11:56 PM
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s I-485 has been pending 180
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal
that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
I pulled this from the Aytes memo:http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
Unless I'm not construing the above correctly, a withdrawl after 180 days has no impact. The only thing that would be a 'death-knell' is if an RFE is issued which the employer does not respond to.
withdrawl in that case would be death-knell to your AOS case..
there is theoretical opening for "approvable" 140 cases in yates memo, but it's more theory than practice, in the world wher USCIS is revoking approved 140s , one can't depend on such a slim glimmer of hope..
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s I-485 has been pending 180
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal
that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
I pulled this from the Aytes memo:http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
Unless I'm not construing the above correctly, a withdrawl after 180 days has no impact. The only thing that would be a 'death-knell' is if an RFE is issued which the employer does not respond to.
withdrawl in that case would be death-knell to your AOS case..
there is theoretical opening for "approvable" 140 cases in yates memo, but it's more theory than practice, in the world wher USCIS is revoking approved 140s , one can't depend on such a slim glimmer of hope..
marcus bent gemma atkinson. marcus bent gemma atkinson
dipu76
06-01 06:16 PM
It is illegal.
It will be great if someone can send me any reference to confirm that it is illegal..
It will be great if someone can send me any reference to confirm that it is illegal..
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Marcus Bent enjoys the
aguy
08-23 01:17 AM
Hi,
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
marcus bent gemma atkinson. and footballer Marcus Bent
ajju
07-23 11:14 AM
Are we supposed to get every year?? did ur friend apply EAD renewal online ?
I remember reading somewhere on USCIS website and this forum that FP taken in late 2007 (probably for all July 2007 filers) will last for the duration of AOS application...
This must be for bad FP or for missing FP for self or any family member...
I remember reading somewhere on USCIS website and this forum that FP taken in late 2007 (probably for all July 2007 filers) will last for the duration of AOS application...
This must be for bad FP or for missing FP for self or any family member...
more...
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson is a
Student with no hopes
12-10 09:55 AM
/
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Gemma Atkinson was once
gemini23
07-27 08:34 AM
Can someone with a EAD be in US without a job (say for 1-2 months). Would he be out of status. Will he have any problemsin renewing ead?
marcus bent gemma atkinson. Most attractive 20 reality
acsouza
03-18 05:08 PM
Hi Euclid,
I am in the exact same situation you were.
It seems to me that Ann is correct.
Did it work out for you?
Thank you,
Allan
I am in the exact same situation you were.
It seems to me that Ann is correct.
Did it work out for you?
Thank you,
Allan
eb3_nepa
11-10 12:27 AM
And shat exactly is the point of this discussion again? More ranting?
You know, maybe few people have noticed this, but when it comes to selecting the "lawyer", you have to pay, if you want your own lawyer. A lot of ppl are very happy that the company pays. So people want their cake and eat it too. They want the company to pay for the lawyer, BUT BUT they want the lawyer to work for them and even let them, when they can leave the employer without negatively affecting their GC process.
The problem is not just the lawyers or the HR ppl guys. The problem is also partly US. If we were to insist that WE pay for the process and we hire our own lawyers, we would have a LOT more control on the process. However, I understand that not all of us have that option, but then those of us who do not have that option, have to thank their stars that they did not end up paying close to $10K for this whole process. Face the facts guys, if your company is paying ur lawyer, ur lawyer is working for them NOT you. Your company and NOT you is the lawyer's client, so he is LEGALLY REQUIRED to serve them and NOT you.
We curse the USCIS everyday (I do too), but we have to admit, they have done an EXCELLENT job these past few months and almost everyone I know has received their EADs, APs and FP notices within the stipulated 90 day period. Let us commend the USCIS for that. We criticized and cursed them when the the time had come to do so. Now they have done a good job so let us commend them for it. Some USCIS centers are even doing actual finger printing on Saturdays (in the state of CT. My friend actually did his on a Saturday). They do not have to do any of this, BUT THEY ARE DOING IT.
About HR, again we all hate them, but they do the best they can. Ah what the heck i'll give you guys this one ;) Go ahead curse away :p. Although I will say this, some HR ppl are rather helpful. I have worked for 2 companies and touch wood both helped me a lot with paperwork and were quite prompt.
You know, maybe few people have noticed this, but when it comes to selecting the "lawyer", you have to pay, if you want your own lawyer. A lot of ppl are very happy that the company pays. So people want their cake and eat it too. They want the company to pay for the lawyer, BUT BUT they want the lawyer to work for them and even let them, when they can leave the employer without negatively affecting their GC process.
The problem is not just the lawyers or the HR ppl guys. The problem is also partly US. If we were to insist that WE pay for the process and we hire our own lawyers, we would have a LOT more control on the process. However, I understand that not all of us have that option, but then those of us who do not have that option, have to thank their stars that they did not end up paying close to $10K for this whole process. Face the facts guys, if your company is paying ur lawyer, ur lawyer is working for them NOT you. Your company and NOT you is the lawyer's client, so he is LEGALLY REQUIRED to serve them and NOT you.
We curse the USCIS everyday (I do too), but we have to admit, they have done an EXCELLENT job these past few months and almost everyone I know has received their EADs, APs and FP notices within the stipulated 90 day period. Let us commend the USCIS for that. We criticized and cursed them when the the time had come to do so. Now they have done a good job so let us commend them for it. Some USCIS centers are even doing actual finger printing on Saturdays (in the state of CT. My friend actually did his on a Saturday). They do not have to do any of this, BUT THEY ARE DOING IT.
About HR, again we all hate them, but they do the best they can. Ah what the heck i'll give you guys this one ;) Go ahead curse away :p. Although I will say this, some HR ppl are rather helpful. I have worked for 2 companies and touch wood both helped me a lot with paperwork and were quite prompt.
prinive
07-17 06:52 PM
Nop
Another silly question.
Do I file again? My packet reached USCIS on July 2nd. It was not returned.
Another silly question.
Do I file again? My packet reached USCIS on July 2nd. It was not returned.
No comments:
Post a Comment