lazycis
02-28 12:42 PM
canu post the USCIS link for these 2 laws
Link to the INA (see chapter 245)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
Link to 8 CFR (see part 274a)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=68ba267609da05e160433ee0f3c73 289
Link to the INA (see chapter 245)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
Link to 8 CFR (see part 274a)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=68ba267609da05e160433ee0f3c73 289
champu
03-09 03:31 PM
start a consulting company. ;)
obviously
12-08 12:52 PM
HELP get us out of our 'Great Depression'.
American businesses are facing a serious crisis: an unprecedented sixteen-month restriction on access to new H-1B visas for temporary professional employees, coupled with an ever-present, continually growing, and now crippling employment-based (EB) green card backlog for permanent hires. I urge you to take immediate steps to fix this problem in the lame duck session after the November elections.
In support of SKIL and other relief measures for High Skilled Immigrants:
A. NATIONAL & ORGANIZATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS - Will a capitalist country like America support the notion that a worker's 'country of origin' matters more on the job than 'meritrocracy, hard work and results'?
HARD TO BELIEVE? Just look at US companies and universities are unable to freely deploy and redeploy high skill knowledge workers that can help them meet the organizations' economic objectives and US competiteveness interests! Knowledge work knows no national boundaries. Preserve high skill work within the US regardless of workers' country of origin and help preserve high tax and social security contribution within the US!
B. CAPITALISM & FREE MARKETS - Will a democracy like America support the notion that 'indentured servitude' by highly skilled labor is acceptable in a nation of the 'brave and free' where notions of indentured servitude was outlawed in the 20th century?
HARD TO BELIEVE? Just look at highly skilled professionals with H1B's stuck in companies and jobs for *years* with uncertainty where they cannot freely participate in the economic development and progress of this country. They are, for all practical purposes, tied to the yoke until their Green Cards are available. They are indentured labor because of retrogression and backlogs with visa numbers.
C. HUMAN RIGHTS & WOMEN RIGHTS - Will a leading Human Rights supporter like America support the notion that 'women should be forced to sit at home' only because they are spouses of highly skilled labor and hence have to be 'forced to have babies because they are on a H4'?
HARD TO BELIEVE? Just look at wives of H1B workers, many with advanced education and work experience, stuck at home and at risk for social, psychological and physiological degradation and abuse only because they are trapped within the 4 walls and cannot participate freely in the land of opportunity and hard work? They are, for all practical purposes, subject to the restrictions of the Middle-Ages women/wives that were forced out of opportunity and development.
It is EASY for us to get misled by hype and hyperbole when talking about immigration. For a land built by immigration, the very title cannot and should not become a lightening rod!
Respected elected official, I urge you, beg you, beseech of you to please consider the net-economic value and social value that we, the highly skilled LEGAL immigrant workforce continue to bring to the USA.
We seek neither entitlement nor social promotion
We seek no social service
We seek no special treatments
We just ask that you be aware of the above pain points and bring much needed relief to legal, law-abiding, tax-paying and country-loving knowledge workers and help retain their passion, energy, jobs and taxes within the USA!
History shows us that the nation was not built on artificial promises of protectionism. The spirit of bold vision, free adventure and hard work built this nation into its pre-eminent position. Will you, respected leader, help continue to cherish and support this hoary tradition?
The lame duck session offers the last chance this year to provide American businesses the relief they urgently need to remain afloat and retain their competitive edge over companies around the world. Only by permanently increasing the H-1B and EB cap numbers, as the SKIL Bill introduced in both the House (H.R. 5744) and Senate (S. 2691) proposes, and as was also passed in the Senate as part of its Comprehensive Immigration Reform package (S. 2611), can American businesses continue to function.
Crisis with EB green cards. Backlogs have resulted for individuals coming from high-demand countries, even when the overall cap has not been reached and regardless of the fact that these high-demand countries are often the only source of individuals capable of filling high-skilled jobs American businesses need. Those caught in the backlog are forced to spend up to seven years waiting, unable to become true stakeholders in our country, putting their lives on hold in the hopes that a green card will eventually become available to them. Not surprisingly, these talented professionals often tire of waiting and leave the U.S. to put their knowledge and skills to use in other countries eager to compete with and surpass the U.S.
Every day that passes without access to these high-skilled workers is a lost opportunity for growth, productivity, and innovation. But this need not be the case.
YOU can make the difference to the lives of thousands of hardworking professionals that love the US of A and their families for generations to come. HELP get us out of our 'Great Depression'.
Please, Sir, I BEG of you, as a highly skilled professional, I have high hopes and dreams of continuing to contribute to this great economy and nation. Help support legal immigration relief and provide a sliver of hope to people like me, so that we can see our families and next generations become integral contributors to the fabric of this great nation.
We are helpless, but not without hope.
We are powerless, but not without pride.
In God We Trust, In You We Entrust, our lives and livelihood;
American businesses are facing a serious crisis: an unprecedented sixteen-month restriction on access to new H-1B visas for temporary professional employees, coupled with an ever-present, continually growing, and now crippling employment-based (EB) green card backlog for permanent hires. I urge you to take immediate steps to fix this problem in the lame duck session after the November elections.
In support of SKIL and other relief measures for High Skilled Immigrants:
A. NATIONAL & ORGANIZATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS - Will a capitalist country like America support the notion that a worker's 'country of origin' matters more on the job than 'meritrocracy, hard work and results'?
HARD TO BELIEVE? Just look at US companies and universities are unable to freely deploy and redeploy high skill knowledge workers that can help them meet the organizations' economic objectives and US competiteveness interests! Knowledge work knows no national boundaries. Preserve high skill work within the US regardless of workers' country of origin and help preserve high tax and social security contribution within the US!
B. CAPITALISM & FREE MARKETS - Will a democracy like America support the notion that 'indentured servitude' by highly skilled labor is acceptable in a nation of the 'brave and free' where notions of indentured servitude was outlawed in the 20th century?
HARD TO BELIEVE? Just look at highly skilled professionals with H1B's stuck in companies and jobs for *years* with uncertainty where they cannot freely participate in the economic development and progress of this country. They are, for all practical purposes, tied to the yoke until their Green Cards are available. They are indentured labor because of retrogression and backlogs with visa numbers.
C. HUMAN RIGHTS & WOMEN RIGHTS - Will a leading Human Rights supporter like America support the notion that 'women should be forced to sit at home' only because they are spouses of highly skilled labor and hence have to be 'forced to have babies because they are on a H4'?
HARD TO BELIEVE? Just look at wives of H1B workers, many with advanced education and work experience, stuck at home and at risk for social, psychological and physiological degradation and abuse only because they are trapped within the 4 walls and cannot participate freely in the land of opportunity and hard work? They are, for all practical purposes, subject to the restrictions of the Middle-Ages women/wives that were forced out of opportunity and development.
It is EASY for us to get misled by hype and hyperbole when talking about immigration. For a land built by immigration, the very title cannot and should not become a lightening rod!
Respected elected official, I urge you, beg you, beseech of you to please consider the net-economic value and social value that we, the highly skilled LEGAL immigrant workforce continue to bring to the USA.
We seek neither entitlement nor social promotion
We seek no social service
We seek no special treatments
We just ask that you be aware of the above pain points and bring much needed relief to legal, law-abiding, tax-paying and country-loving knowledge workers and help retain their passion, energy, jobs and taxes within the USA!
History shows us that the nation was not built on artificial promises of protectionism. The spirit of bold vision, free adventure and hard work built this nation into its pre-eminent position. Will you, respected leader, help continue to cherish and support this hoary tradition?
The lame duck session offers the last chance this year to provide American businesses the relief they urgently need to remain afloat and retain their competitive edge over companies around the world. Only by permanently increasing the H-1B and EB cap numbers, as the SKIL Bill introduced in both the House (H.R. 5744) and Senate (S. 2691) proposes, and as was also passed in the Senate as part of its Comprehensive Immigration Reform package (S. 2611), can American businesses continue to function.
Crisis with EB green cards. Backlogs have resulted for individuals coming from high-demand countries, even when the overall cap has not been reached and regardless of the fact that these high-demand countries are often the only source of individuals capable of filling high-skilled jobs American businesses need. Those caught in the backlog are forced to spend up to seven years waiting, unable to become true stakeholders in our country, putting their lives on hold in the hopes that a green card will eventually become available to them. Not surprisingly, these talented professionals often tire of waiting and leave the U.S. to put their knowledge and skills to use in other countries eager to compete with and surpass the U.S.
Every day that passes without access to these high-skilled workers is a lost opportunity for growth, productivity, and innovation. But this need not be the case.
YOU can make the difference to the lives of thousands of hardworking professionals that love the US of A and their families for generations to come. HELP get us out of our 'Great Depression'.
Please, Sir, I BEG of you, as a highly skilled professional, I have high hopes and dreams of continuing to contribute to this great economy and nation. Help support legal immigration relief and provide a sliver of hope to people like me, so that we can see our families and next generations become integral contributors to the fabric of this great nation.
We are helpless, but not without hope.
We are powerless, but not without pride.
In God We Trust, In You We Entrust, our lives and livelihood;
tor78
08-20 03:22 PM
Just curious, how did they find out?
more...
sk.aggarwal
04-05 04:05 PM
Thanks, just got a call from HR. They have got PWD for me.
cakewalkr7
08-21 08:35 AM
Okay, so the viewbox doesn't work in silverlight? I'm trying to do this type of an animation in silverlight so do you know of another container that would work in the browser? Thanks.
more...
anilsal
12-18 09:03 PM
We were so close to getting the SKIL bill cleared..........
ek_akela
09-08 07:56 PM
When was your I-140 applied? I would assume revoking of 140 should be your only concern, since you already applied for 485, you don't need to bother about your status.Also apply fopr EAD based on proof that you applied for 485(Fedex # should be enough)
One thing I am not sure if not getting paid during 485 processing would have any impact on the case? Gurus, pls chip in..
One thing I am not sure if not getting paid during 485 processing would have any impact on the case? Gurus, pls chip in..
more...
peer123
07-16 08:21 PM
NO, u cannot apply, unless you want GC as principal applicant only
I am not sure if your answering the question on this post..
Husband and wife can be on thier application as principal and dependant applicants on each other's application from their respective company
I am not sure if your answering the question on this post..
Husband and wife can be on thier application as principal and dependant applicants on each other's application from their respective company
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
more...
gctest
10-04 04:03 PM
wow.. u are making it personal... are u sure you wanna take it there?
I think i am not the first one to receive approval on a saturday... countless people have gotten that in the past. Come out of your mobile home and do some research before you make a statement like that.
Good, USCIS is working on saturday for you. You are lying again like you did for your visa?
I think i am not the first one to receive approval on a saturday... countless people have gotten that in the past. Come out of your mobile home and do some research before you make a statement like that.
Good, USCIS is working on saturday for you. You are lying again like you did for your visa?
viswanadh73
01-04 08:47 AM
hi gjoe,
thanks for your reply. now EB3 Priority dates are gone back to 2001. say there is no visa numbers available after the 485 applications processed which are submitted in july and aug 2007. then waht they do? they have to keep the processed applications aside untill the visa numbers available right? so at that time which one become priority is Labour filing date or 485 RD?
thanks for your reply. now EB3 Priority dates are gone back to 2001. say there is no visa numbers available after the 485 applications processed which are submitted in july and aug 2007. then waht they do? they have to keep the processed applications aside untill the visa numbers available right? so at that time which one become priority is Labour filing date or 485 RD?
more...
puddonhead
11-30 11:01 AM
I have filed for and recieved AP twice so far. I have done both paper and e-filing and combinations. When I lawyer files, he e-files. When I do it - I paper file. I have done different combinations. First time, with 485 - lawyer filed both for me and wife. Next year, my company suddenly decided they dont want to pay the lawyer fee for the dependent AP/EAD - so I paper-filed for my wife while mine was e-filed. Next year - my company decided to pay for both and my lawyer did e-filed mine and paper-filed my wife's application (dont know why).
Based on my experience (which is pretty extensive on both modes of filing as explained above for both AP and EAD) - I will always perfer paper filing. It has always been faster, easier and less hassle for me.
It sounds counter-intuitive that paper-filing would be faster/easier than e-filing - but that is USCIS for you.
Based on my experience (which is pretty extensive on both modes of filing as explained above for both AP and EAD) - I will always perfer paper filing. It has always been faster, easier and less hassle for me.
It sounds counter-intuitive that paper-filing would be faster/easier than e-filing - but that is USCIS for you.
Brasco
January 28th, 2008, 12:51 PM
Shannon
Let me qualify by stating I don't have a D40x. There are a bunch of things you can do, depending on the specific problem. However, if you can set the autofocus points, then set the center point as the default. That way the camera will only focus on what's dead center in the lens.
You also need an aperature that will give enough depth of field. You don't necessarily need the whole shot in focus, just the right part of the shot. The exact aperature is going to depend on the size of lens you use. A telephoto will require a higher aperature than a wide angle lens to get more depth of field. There are DOF charts available on the internet. The aperature you use will also depend on whether you are using a flash. Also, are you sure it's a focus issue and not a motion issue. A bounce flash may not be the best way to stop action of a young'n.
It's really hard to diagnoze without specific examples but maybe this gets you started. I'm sure others will contribute as well.
Let me qualify by stating I don't have a D40x. There are a bunch of things you can do, depending on the specific problem. However, if you can set the autofocus points, then set the center point as the default. That way the camera will only focus on what's dead center in the lens.
You also need an aperature that will give enough depth of field. You don't necessarily need the whole shot in focus, just the right part of the shot. The exact aperature is going to depend on the size of lens you use. A telephoto will require a higher aperature than a wide angle lens to get more depth of field. There are DOF charts available on the internet. The aperature you use will also depend on whether you are using a flash. Also, are you sure it's a focus issue and not a motion issue. A bounce flash may not be the best way to stop action of a young'n.
It's really hard to diagnoze without specific examples but maybe this gets you started. I'm sure others will contribute as well.
more...
illusions
08-31 11:57 AM
well I wouldn't classify any company as good or bad, i've only gone to one company and have been with them since 05 and have no issues so far. They have provided me with everything that i needed and have so far been very professional.
I'm not sure if I'm allowed to write company specific information on the forum, so I'll refrain from that. But if you like any specifics you can drop me a PM. Heres what my company offers:
* NO Contracts / Bond what-so-ever.
* I get to choose my own rates (if i get my own contract that is, and i have so far)
* There is a 60:40 ratio. 60 i keep and 40 they keep. - Before taxes of course.(You might think this is high, but it's worthwhile cos i get no headaches)
* I get PPO Blue Cross Blue Shield Medical coverage for me and my wife.
* Upto $1000 in dental coverage in a year, reimbursed.
* Direct contact with the lawyer and i can pay him directly any immigration related fees, or opt to take a fraction off my paycheck. (Hence i know the actual cost and i know they are not charging any overhead costs)
* Direct deposit guaranteed at the end of the month even though they haven't received the payment as yet.
* I can leave them when ever i want, no questions asked nothing.
* If you are with them and you get your spouse in, they will offer up to 80:20 ratio and same benefits.
CONS:
====
* No training, in any related fields.
* You have to find your own contract (although they have affiliations with head hunters who would help in getting u a contract)
* Haven't ever spoken about on-bench pay... but i figure they will pay min for a month if need be.
At first i thought the ratio was too high and was looking to switch, and at the same time my wife was getting her H1B. A company NJ offered her a ratio of 70:30 and min benefits, plus a 1 year contract of which if breached would cost us 20K.
After she got her H1B and $2,500 in legal fees, they changed their minds, and was willing to pay only a fixed pay of 55K. I waited till she finished her training, and said screw you, gave em the finger.
She's now working with my company, and making 97K with a 80:20 ratio. Almost 20K more than me! lol.:eek:
In a nutshell i would watch out for the following no matter which company you choose.
* Make sure you cover all grounds with them 1st.
* Get everything in writing before anything. (In my case the first time it worked out fine, cos 60:40 was a high ratio but they offered all the benefits and no hassle.)
* Make sure you have access to the lawyer directly.
* Always go for a ratio basis, the more you are billed the more you earn, and it motivates you.
Good Luck.
I'm not sure if I'm allowed to write company specific information on the forum, so I'll refrain from that. But if you like any specifics you can drop me a PM. Heres what my company offers:
* NO Contracts / Bond what-so-ever.
* I get to choose my own rates (if i get my own contract that is, and i have so far)
* There is a 60:40 ratio. 60 i keep and 40 they keep. - Before taxes of course.(You might think this is high, but it's worthwhile cos i get no headaches)
* I get PPO Blue Cross Blue Shield Medical coverage for me and my wife.
* Upto $1000 in dental coverage in a year, reimbursed.
* Direct contact with the lawyer and i can pay him directly any immigration related fees, or opt to take a fraction off my paycheck. (Hence i know the actual cost and i know they are not charging any overhead costs)
* Direct deposit guaranteed at the end of the month even though they haven't received the payment as yet.
* I can leave them when ever i want, no questions asked nothing.
* If you are with them and you get your spouse in, they will offer up to 80:20 ratio and same benefits.
CONS:
====
* No training, in any related fields.
* You have to find your own contract (although they have affiliations with head hunters who would help in getting u a contract)
* Haven't ever spoken about on-bench pay... but i figure they will pay min for a month if need be.
At first i thought the ratio was too high and was looking to switch, and at the same time my wife was getting her H1B. A company NJ offered her a ratio of 70:30 and min benefits, plus a 1 year contract of which if breached would cost us 20K.
After she got her H1B and $2,500 in legal fees, they changed their minds, and was willing to pay only a fixed pay of 55K. I waited till she finished her training, and said screw you, gave em the finger.
She's now working with my company, and making 97K with a 80:20 ratio. Almost 20K more than me! lol.:eek:
In a nutshell i would watch out for the following no matter which company you choose.
* Make sure you cover all grounds with them 1st.
* Get everything in writing before anything. (In my case the first time it worked out fine, cos 60:40 was a high ratio but they offered all the benefits and no hassle.)
* Make sure you have access to the lawyer directly.
* Always go for a ratio basis, the more you are billed the more you earn, and it motivates you.
Good Luck.
sk.aggarwal
05-22 11:26 PM
This is because, you dont need to file two I-129s. Don't worry, USCIS hope fully will give you one year+ 4 days extension... provided you have client letter for such.
BTW, last year, I specifically asked my attorney, if we need to file two h1s - one for recapture and another one for 7th year extension. And she told me only one is enough...
BTW, last year, I specifically asked my attorney, if we need to file two h1s - one for recapture and another one for 7th year extension. And she told me only one is enough...
more...
bandhu
02-04 04:22 PM
I entered US in 2001 on H1B and have not left the country since then. Unfortunately within few months of coming to US, I had a fight with my wife and was charged of domestic violence. This charge was later reduced and I was convicted of a simple battery.
Now if I travel overseas and come back on AP (I intend to use my approved AP instead of going for H1B stamping), can I be denied entry to US at port of entry because of my criminal charge?
Anyone in the same situation or know someone in this situation? Was there any issue in there re entry into US?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Now if I travel overseas and come back on AP (I intend to use my approved AP instead of going for H1B stamping), can I be denied entry to US at port of entry because of my criminal charge?
Anyone in the same situation or know someone in this situation? Was there any issue in there re entry into US?
Thanks a lot in advance.
rock581
07-18 01:38 AM
We filed I-140 on july 16th thru labour substitution. Expecting a receipt by july ending.Now I have a very serious concern regarding I-485 filing before Aug 17 2007, pls advice !!
My spouse is in india from August 17 2006 after already staying in US on H1B for 6 years.He's planning to come back here on dependant visa(L2) after 1 year out of country stay as he wants to reset his H1B clock (He plans to apply H1B in April 2008 quota).
If we want to apply for I-485 he needs to come here atleast by Aug 10 2007- to fulfill the medicals & sign the documents, to file by Aug 17th 2007 deadline. We are afraid to take chances this time, that if he just enters US before 1 year out of country stay, he may not be eligible for new H1B in 2008, if somthing happens to current filing.
Pls sincerely advice if he can still apply for H1B in April 2008, if he just missed 365 days out of country rule by 6 or 7 days (incase he comes back on Aug 10th 2007 for filing, he would fulfill 360 days out of country and not 365 as needed) ?
My spouse is in india from August 17 2006 after already staying in US on H1B for 6 years.He's planning to come back here on dependant visa(L2) after 1 year out of country stay as he wants to reset his H1B clock (He plans to apply H1B in April 2008 quota).
If we want to apply for I-485 he needs to come here atleast by Aug 10 2007- to fulfill the medicals & sign the documents, to file by Aug 17th 2007 deadline. We are afraid to take chances this time, that if he just enters US before 1 year out of country stay, he may not be eligible for new H1B in 2008, if somthing happens to current filing.
Pls sincerely advice if he can still apply for H1B in April 2008, if he just missed 365 days out of country rule by 6 or 7 days (incase he comes back on Aug 10th 2007 for filing, he would fulfill 360 days out of country and not 365 as needed) ?
imm_check
11-06 06:34 PM
From what you have mentioned, the answer to your question lies in the notice that USCIS has sent to your attorney....The letter should have exactly the steps needed and the time to respond....Your best bet is to request the attorney to send you a copy of the letter....
Personally, I think USCIS would request the empoyer to sign the check or re-issue a new one and send it within 30 days....it is not a big deal....
All the best....
Do they send a 797 Notice of action?
Personally, I think USCIS would request the empoyer to sign the check or re-issue a new one and send it within 30 days....it is not a big deal....
All the best....
Do they send a 797 Notice of action?
needhelp!
10-19 05:07 PM
Thats exactly exact..
Are you talking about the Diwali Mela event on November 10th?
Are you talking about the Diwali Mela event on November 10th?
ItIsNotFunny
09-23 09:10 AM
I don't get it - where are the rest of the 2468 members?
Can we send out a blast (through Pappu) to everyone on this forum?
Our need will be felt much more strongly is ALL of us participate - right guys? I'm kind of shocked that the number is only 32!!!!
North East guys, please keep doing now!
Can we send out a blast (through Pappu) to everyone on this forum?
Our need will be felt much more strongly is ALL of us participate - right guys? I'm kind of shocked that the number is only 32!!!!
North East guys, please keep doing now!
No comments:
Post a Comment