freddyCR
January 6th, 2005, 08:13 AM
I shot this pic in the backside of the medieval Torres de Serranos in Valencia. I quite like the symmetry. What do you think?
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/2555doors-1_Medium_.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/2555doors-1_Medium_.jpg
wallpaper 2010 PHOTO: Casey Anthony in
usirit
08-21 10:33 AM
I have applied for my PERM Labor Certification on Aug, 6th'07. My status online shows "IN PROCESS". DOL called my employer's contact to verify submission on Aug, 15th'07.
My Lawyer states that rather than preparing for I-140 / I-485. I would be best served in working on preparing a response to the audit that will be coming, because of the Spanish language requirement.
Is he just getting ready for a "just-in-case" audit...? Should I prepare the I-140 and deal with the audit on the 30-days if DOL sends the Audit letter? How long would it take to receive this letter?
Enjoying the ride....
My Lawyer states that rather than preparing for I-140 / I-485. I would be best served in working on preparing a response to the audit that will be coming, because of the Spanish language requirement.
Is he just getting ready for a "just-in-case" audit...? Should I prepare the I-140 and deal with the audit on the 30-days if DOL sends the Audit letter? How long would it take to receive this letter?
Enjoying the ride....
McBeer
August 21st, 2008, 02:54 PM
Hey.
Im new to photography and am looking into photography for local music venues.
I have a D40 with its standard 18-55mm lens but I'm looking for a lens with a better aperture.
I am looking to get the Nikon 55mm f1.8 which is around �80.
As this is not an AF-S lens and can not focus automatically, will it sitll work with the D40 if I use manual focus?
Regards,
Im new to photography and am looking into photography for local music venues.
I have a D40 with its standard 18-55mm lens but I'm looking for a lens with a better aperture.
I am looking to get the Nikon 55mm f1.8 which is around �80.
As this is not an AF-S lens and can not focus automatically, will it sitll work with the D40 if I use manual focus?
Regards,
2011 casey anthony trial update
sidbee
09-04 11:34 AM
because all dates are already booked ;-)
more...
Blog Feeds
05-17 12:50 PM
Given the Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad�s immigration history, the common refrain of �let�s just close our borders to all immigrants� is (not surprisingly) becoming more vocal. After all, as the argument goes, if someone like Shahzad (who apparently is not one of the �best and brightest�) is able to obtain a student visa, then an H-1B �specialty occupation� work visa, a green card, and the ultimate prize of U.S. citizenship � all in a span of less than 8 years -- then perhaps we need to take a step back, take a deep breath and just close our borders...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2010/05/faisal-shahzad-a-case-for-closing-our-borders.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2010/05/faisal-shahzad-a-case-for-closing-our-borders.html)
Macaca
08-16 05:40 PM
Is the Senate Germane? Majority Leader Reid's Lament (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/procedural_politics/19719-1.html) By Don Wolfensberger | Roll Call, August 13, 2007
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
more...
jest_1
09-23 09:26 PM
I had filed for Advance Parole renewal for me and my wife in July since our APs were expiring in mid October. I got the renewed Advance Parole last week with the expiry date as Oct 2011. My wife got hers today but instead of October, it has the start date of Aug 2010 and expires on Aug 2011. I don't know why the USCIS handled it in this way. She has lost 2 months. The Advance Parole extension was paper filed at the Texas Service Center. Can anyone tell me how I can get this rectified, if at all it is possible.
2010 Casey Anthony personal photos
krishna_brc
08-09 10:13 AM
if PD is not current in VB? One has to wait till PD is current to file 485....
Yes, we have to wiat till PD is current to file 485
Yes, we have to wiat till PD is current to file 485
more...
gcformeornot
01-24 11:36 AM
Hello,
Just wanted to update everybody on this. We went for renewal this morning. Took EAD, Passports and Original 485 receipts with us. When we showed our EADs the lady asked her sup, that these guys have EADs do they need anything else. Sup said with EADs nothing is needed. No Passports, No 485 receipts not even Employer letter. They renewed licenses till validity of EAD. We had 2 year EAD. So we are all set till mid of next year.
Just wanted to update everybody on this. We went for renewal this morning. Took EAD, Passports and Original 485 receipts with us. When we showed our EADs the lady asked her sup, that these guys have EADs do they need anything else. Sup said with EADs nothing is needed. No Passports, No 485 receipts not even Employer letter. They renewed licenses till validity of EAD. We had 2 year EAD. So we are all set till mid of next year.
hair 2011 Casey Anthony Trial
chriskalani
11-01 02:18 PM
Actually just money.
www.ChrisKalani.com (http://www.ChrisKalani.com)
www.ChrisKalani.com (http://www.ChrisKalani.com)
more...
vpn
03-11 07:53 PM
any advice on this, anyone?
hot casey anthony trial update
pappu
11-09 10:45 AM
http://www.legalactioncenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/lac/Badrawi-amicus-brief.pdf
more...
house Casey Anthony Update:
Lisap
09-10 12:08 PM
It depends on which state you are in and where your labor was filed. No matter where you send your application there is a possibility that they can transfer it to another center. I sent mine to NSC and it was transfered to Texas.
tattoo Anthony case update: Judge throws out In other Casey Anthony news,
jcrajput
05-25 12:38 PM
We are planning to renew our EADs and I am looking for following information. I would appriciate if someone can please put this at one place...
1. Latest application forms
2. Current fees
3. Mailing address
Thanks in advance.
1. Latest application forms
2. Current fees
3. Mailing address
Thanks in advance.
more...
pictures Casey Anthony Jury Will See
notsure
03-03 02:54 PM
Hi,
I have applied my H1 extension in Sep 2008 and got RFE in Dec. RFE was about my work address and we have sent the details. On March 2 2009 I have received the email saying Denial Notice Sent. Not sure the reason yet. I wanted to check my options. I do have EAD. But not used. What is my visa status now? I am planning to resubmit my application based on the denial notice. If I resubmit will I have status in US? Or should I work on EAD. If I work on EAD what should i do? I mean do I need to file AC21?
Please help
Thanks
I have applied my H1 extension in Sep 2008 and got RFE in Dec. RFE was about my work address and we have sent the details. On March 2 2009 I have received the email saying Denial Notice Sent. Not sure the reason yet. I wanted to check my options. I do have EAD. But not used. What is my visa status now? I am planning to resubmit my application based on the denial notice. If I resubmit will I have status in US? Or should I work on EAD. If I work on EAD what should i do? I mean do I need to file AC21?
Please help
Thanks
dresses dresses In Casey Anthony Trial
Blog Feeds
11-22 03:21 AM
As we prepare to extend healthcare insurance to another 40 million people in the U.S., do we have enough physicians to care for them? According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, over 25% of our population lives in medically-underserved areas where there is less than one primary-care physician for every 3,500 patients. Even under our present healthcare system, the Association of American Medical Colleges projects a deficit of 159,000 physicians by 2025. At least 15 medical specialty societies have released studies projecting shortages in their fields. The American Academy of Family Physicians predicts a shortage of 40,000...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/11/universal-healthcare-without-physicians-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/11/universal-healthcare-without-physicians-.html)
more...
makeup Casey Anthony Trial Update:
gc28262
04-16 11:35 AM
Yes, you have to file a change of address form.
Also make sure your employer files an LCA for the new location.
Change of Address Regulation (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1305.html)
Online change of address link (https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa)
Also make sure your employer files an LCA for the new location.
Change of Address Regulation (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1305.html)
Online change of address link (https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa)
girlfriend Casey Anthony#39;s trial is set
hsadan
09-16 03:57 AM
how to bend and twist?
e.g. make a spring or a screw
e.g. make a spring or a screw
hairstyles 2010 Casey Anthony Trial Day
dan19
03-22 10:44 PM
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/03/22/kennedy_mccain_partnership_falters/
redddiv
07-23 02:04 PM
For those who filed after July2, 2007.
Did your checks get encashed. :(
Did your checks get encashed. :(
raysaikat
01-29 12:33 AM
1)
I am working on EAD for a company A (I have approved H1 with company B). i want to maintain both the statuses, can i do that by running the paycheck with H1 company?
You cannot be on H1-B if you are working using EAD.
2)
my fiancee is on H1 status and i want to change her status from H1 to H4 (H1 getting expired). will it be ok as long as i maiting H1 status?
Thanks
In order to qualify for H-4, the person has to be a legal dependent on the person holding H1-B. AFAIK, fiancee is not legally a dependent.
I am working on EAD for a company A (I have approved H1 with company B). i want to maintain both the statuses, can i do that by running the paycheck with H1 company?
You cannot be on H1-B if you are working using EAD.
2)
my fiancee is on H1 status and i want to change her status from H1 to H4 (H1 getting expired). will it be ok as long as i maiting H1 status?
Thanks
In order to qualify for H-4, the person has to be a legal dependent on the person holding H1-B. AFAIK, fiancee is not legally a dependent.
No comments:
Post a Comment