lecter
February 2nd, 2004, 11:49 PM
I have no direct knowledge, but I amsure there are those that do. I'd be surprised if it doesn't work, but I know in Canons case there are certainlenses that need some sort of "re-chipping". Before you buy I'd certainly take it into the shop and try it out and check the EXIF info that it produces (most likely place it will fail, or omit data)
Dunno if that helps.
Rob
I am looking forward to this camera hitting the streets, another excellent sub $1,000 camera is sure to put the competition on notice. I love competition (unless I am bidding.. hehe)
Rob
Dunno if that helps.
Rob
I am looking forward to this camera hitting the streets, another excellent sub $1,000 camera is sure to put the competition on notice. I love competition (unless I am bidding.. hehe)
Rob
vnsriv
10-26 03:36 PM
I am also one of those, who received the EAD while the online case status reads as "Case Received and Pending"
Wish that's true for my spouse's GC :)
Wish that's true for my spouse's GC :)
gc2
09-22 05:24 PM
Do the following job descriptions qualify for AC21 provided all other factors such as salary and 485 pending for 180+ days have been met
Job A: Techincal Consultant
- Configures and implements risk management solutions using ASP.NET, VB.NET, XML, XSLT/XPATH.
- Basic working understanding of SQL Server, Oracle and related query language and tools
- Consulting development experience in IT or Systems Integration
- Excellent communication skills; written and verbal.
Job B: Project Manager
- Accomplishes project objectives by planning and evaluating project activities.
- Creates and executes project work plans and revises as appropriate to meet changing needs and requirements
- Identifies resources needed and assigns individual responsibilities.
- Manages day-to-day operational aspects of a project and scope.
- Reviews deliverables prepared by team before passing to client.
etc etc.
On promotion with the same employer, i will have responsibilities for job B but i am looking to change employers. can i join new employer with job B and use AC21 ?
Job A: Techincal Consultant
- Configures and implements risk management solutions using ASP.NET, VB.NET, XML, XSLT/XPATH.
- Basic working understanding of SQL Server, Oracle and related query language and tools
- Consulting development experience in IT or Systems Integration
- Excellent communication skills; written and verbal.
Job B: Project Manager
- Accomplishes project objectives by planning and evaluating project activities.
- Creates and executes project work plans and revises as appropriate to meet changing needs and requirements
- Identifies resources needed and assigns individual responsibilities.
- Manages day-to-day operational aspects of a project and scope.
- Reviews deliverables prepared by team before passing to client.
etc etc.
On promotion with the same employer, i will have responsibilities for job B but i am looking to change employers. can i join new employer with job B and use AC21 ?
GoneSouth
03-14 05:48 PM
You can only file a second LC for the same employee at the same company, if the new position is "substantially different" from the old position. [ I am happy to report, that I just received my PERM approval for doing exactly this :) ]
If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.
- gs
If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.
- gs
more...
siravi
08-06 04:38 PM
will be there as well.
gc4me
07-30 11:50 AM
I guess you meant 'Spouse related difficult GC question'. :D
I liked the joke.. the title originally was: "Difficult Spouse related GC question" ;)
I will definitely consider doing that. I am just afraid that I might get my GC even before I get a chance to do a court marriage.
Thanks for the input.
I liked the joke.. the title originally was: "Difficult Spouse related GC question" ;)
I will definitely consider doing that. I am just afraid that I might get my GC even before I get a chance to do a court marriage.
Thanks for the input.
more...
sledge_hammer
07-16 08:33 AM
Hi,
Why would notification be necessary? Isn't an I-9 form (w/ EAD as proof of work permit) being present at the employer's location sufficient?
I haven't heard of any employer "notifying" USCIS about an employee's EAD status!
Thanks!
It is an error on USCIS part, may be because you (or your spouse's employer) have not notified the USCIS about your spouse using the EAD for employment.
Why would notification be necessary? Isn't an I-9 form (w/ EAD as proof of work permit) being present at the employer's location sufficient?
I haven't heard of any employer "notifying" USCIS about an employee's EAD status!
Thanks!
It is an error on USCIS part, may be because you (or your spouse's employer) have not notified the USCIS about your spouse using the EAD for employment.
kosu
09-15 09:18 PM
After seeing your post I checked mine. On my 485 Receipt notice the section says: Adjustment as direct beneficiary of immigrant petition.
more...
Pria
01-06 04:25 PM
Thanks so much for taking time to respond. I have e-filed my application and am sending all supporting documents today. It appears that the processing time is about 90 days, so I might not be able to leave in Feb afterall. But at least I will have my Travel document ready for any future travel plans.
Best,
Pria
Best,
Pria
ita
10-26 10:28 AM
Hi ,
Cna someone give me the customer Servcie #s to call For TSC
Are they by service center?
Wat is Second Level Support and what is the # to call them?
Cna someone give me the customer Servcie #s to call For TSC
Are they by service center?
Wat is Second Level Support and what is the # to call them?
more...
getgreensoon1
04-07 01:26 PM
Tech firms warn of impacts of tight visa quota - MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tech-firms-warn-of-impacts-of-tight-visa-quota-2011-04-07?siteid=rss&rss=1)
The problem is most of the visas are taken by indian bodyshops such as infosys, TCS, LT to bring underskilled computer operators to the US. Intel, MS and other good companies that hire from reputed US universities have hard time getting the visas due to the cap. The cap should work the other way round. 20K for bodyshops and 65K for people from US universities.
The problem is most of the visas are taken by indian bodyshops such as infosys, TCS, LT to bring underskilled computer operators to the US. Intel, MS and other good companies that hire from reputed US universities have hard time getting the visas due to the cap. The cap should work the other way round. 20K for bodyshops and 65K for people from US universities.
sparky_jones
03-12 09:34 PM
Received a mail for myself and my wife. welcome to USA. But no email from CRIS.
:):):):):):)
Congratulations!
:):):):):):)
Congratulations!
more...
kannan
01-10 05:27 PM
Mine is still in CA only.no transfer and no FP
ghost
02-07 03:31 PM
Thank for the reply. I hope the suggestions will be acted on and implemented at the earliest. It's frustrating to see that the priority dates haven't moved by a single day in last 6 months, something really needs to be done and I will do my support IV with anything.
Thanks for your commitment...if you are frustrated by no movement in 6 months then imagine the plight of folks on this forum who have no priority date movement since Jan 2002 (9 years and counting)....most of them have literally became dormant with the long wait and some of them have become cynical and skeptical of the entire process and quite frankly about IV...it's hard to motivate and make them commit to supporting IV. There are few brave souls who refuse to give up and are fighting for the greater benefit of the entire community!
Thanks for your commitment...if you are frustrated by no movement in 6 months then imagine the plight of folks on this forum who have no priority date movement since Jan 2002 (9 years and counting)....most of them have literally became dormant with the long wait and some of them have become cynical and skeptical of the entire process and quite frankly about IV...it's hard to motivate and make them commit to supporting IV. There are few brave souls who refuse to give up and are fighting for the greater benefit of the entire community!
more...
go_guy123
11-03 06:57 PM
I disagree. I think that we will see an another attempt at CIR bill. Dems will want to capitalize on their surge among the hispanic bloc; see the comments by Nancy Palosi [sp?]. An attempt will be made to cast it as an aid for economy: to bring people out of shadows so that they can buy houses etc.
But then this is just my opinion which, like yours, is just an opinion. Heck even my 5 year old these days does not seem to hold my opinion in any regard :)
Thats the concern. CIR pits illegals vs legals. The CIR bill allocates quotas from legals to illegals.
But then this is just my opinion which, like yours, is just an opinion. Heck even my 5 year old these days does not seem to hold my opinion in any regard :)
Thats the concern. CIR pits illegals vs legals. The CIR bill allocates quotas from legals to illegals.
desi485
09-26 05:38 PM
My application reached NSC (as per FedEx tracking) on July 24.
My co-workers who filed to NSC thru' same lawyer all got receipts and FP notices. Many of them filed weeks after.
My checks have NOT been encashed yet. Neither I have received any updates on receipts or any kind of processing.
USCIS offers no help and told me to wait for 90 days. Lawyer has the same opinion. Last USCIS receipting update shows that all centers have processed upto July 29 applications.
My last name starts with 'z' and my co-workers are making fun of me that USCIS processes AOS applications alphabetically based on last name :o
what could be the reason??? This is killing me.
My co-workers who filed to NSC thru' same lawyer all got receipts and FP notices. Many of them filed weeks after.
My checks have NOT been encashed yet. Neither I have received any updates on receipts or any kind of processing.
USCIS offers no help and told me to wait for 90 days. Lawyer has the same opinion. Last USCIS receipting update shows that all centers have processed upto July 29 applications.
My last name starts with 'z' and my co-workers are making fun of me that USCIS processes AOS applications alphabetically based on last name :o
what could be the reason??? This is killing me.
more...
mr_aryan
10-19 01:50 PM
If the annonation says, you came to U.S for the liecensing exam & and you got any employment offer in correspondece to that after passing it.
I dont think it would be considered as a VISA fraud.
I dont think it would be considered as a VISA fraud.
Munna Bhai
01-10 02:46 PM
I filed my I-140 and I-485 concurrently on July 6th, 2007
Not sure how long it will take to get I-140 and _-485 approved. My lawyer says I should hang in there and try to be patient.
My I-140 and I-485 were transferred from Nebraska to California and back to Nebraska in September 2007. September 2007 is the last time that they were transferred, as far as I know.
When I called the USCIS number, the automatic voice operated system said that if my case is still unapproved afer 180 days from the date of the last transfer, then I should call to speak to a customer representative.
So I guess I will have to wait to March 2008 before I can get to speak to anyone about my I-140, if it has not been approved by then.
I am in the EB-3 category.
bump
Not sure how long it will take to get I-140 and _-485 approved. My lawyer says I should hang in there and try to be patient.
My I-140 and I-485 were transferred from Nebraska to California and back to Nebraska in September 2007. September 2007 is the last time that they were transferred, as far as I know.
When I called the USCIS number, the automatic voice operated system said that if my case is still unapproved afer 180 days from the date of the last transfer, then I should call to speak to a customer representative.
So I guess I will have to wait to March 2008 before I can get to speak to anyone about my I-140, if it has not been approved by then.
I am in the EB-3 category.
bump
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
saurav_4096
10-02 03:08 PM
the RFE was on Ability to Pay
If the company is making profit and they are paying salary as specified in LC. I think you be good after appealing.
If the company is making profit and they are paying salary as specified in LC. I think you be good after appealing.
Lasantha
07-17 04:41 PM
Screw Murthy !!! I have never seen him picking up any good news.
Kumar, you better get ready face two law suites from Sheila Murthy. First for misrepresentig her as a Man and second for sexual harrasment. You are in big trouble boy!!!
Kumar, you better get ready face two law suites from Sheila Murthy. First for misrepresentig her as a Man and second for sexual harrasment. You are in big trouble boy!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment