garybanz
09-28 12:13 PM
I called up USCIS - Number: 1-800-375-5283, If you don't have a receipt number and want to get one Touch Key options to press are : 1-2-2-6-2-2-1
You need to say that your application is more than 90 days old, else you will be kicked out.
If you say that your application is more than 90 days old then you will be transferred to another person who will give you the receipt numbers.
For the record there should be one receipt number for each applicant (your dependents and you)) for each document (485, 131, 765)
You need to say that your application is more than 90 days old, else you will be kicked out.
If you say that your application is more than 90 days old then you will be transferred to another person who will give you the receipt numbers.
For the record there should be one receipt number for each applicant (your dependents and you)) for each document (485, 131, 765)
wallpaper Desktop Wallpaper
belmontboy
02-15 01:29 PM
If each state in India were a country
There would have been no backlog.
dude people are fighting EB2 Vs Eb3 war.
Why do u want to ignite one state Vs another state war now??
Don't u have better to do with your spare time?
Admin, please delete this useless thread. We have enough topics to crib/fight/backstab about!!!
There would have been no backlog.
dude people are fighting EB2 Vs Eb3 war.
Why do u want to ignite one state Vs another state war now??
Don't u have better to do with your spare time?
Admin, please delete this useless thread. We have enough topics to crib/fight/backstab about!!!
dreamworld
05-05 12:24 PM
Hi
I was under the impression that there would be some talks about the discussed bills on floor this week.I see no signs of any debate or any discussion.I have some read some posts saying that nothing would happen this year. This really confuses me as I had & I think many of us had hopes that coming weeks would decide something.
I would appreciate if someone could give everyone very clear picture of what going on ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
If you think out-off-box.... guess what? If US-govt wants to give employment-based-green card based on priority date. Then there won�t be any new immigration law in place without clearing Backlog center cases/queue and I140.
So what... As per the labor department web site, the DOL needs another 17/18 months to clear all pending labors.
I guess any new bill to become law will take another 19 to 24 months. Keep your spirit going to support the best immigration-bill.
My 2 cents.
I was under the impression that there would be some talks about the discussed bills on floor this week.I see no signs of any debate or any discussion.I have some read some posts saying that nothing would happen this year. This really confuses me as I had & I think many of us had hopes that coming weeks would decide something.
I would appreciate if someone could give everyone very clear picture of what going on ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
If you think out-off-box.... guess what? If US-govt wants to give employment-based-green card based on priority date. Then there won�t be any new immigration law in place without clearing Backlog center cases/queue and I140.
So what... As per the labor department web site, the DOL needs another 17/18 months to clear all pending labors.
I guess any new bill to become law will take another 19 to 24 months. Keep your spirit going to support the best immigration-bill.
My 2 cents.
2011 Perfect red rose - flower,
Raj Iyer
09-13 04:52 PM
Due to the denial of your H-1B extension, you did not have any underlying non-immigrant status at the time of filing the H-1B transfer. IF your petition gets approved, normally USCIS will only approve it with consular processing. Assuming your H-1B extension was successful, they will approve a transfer.
8 months is a long time for a pending H-1B. You should immediately follow up. Since it is a premium processing, you should be able to send an email to the premium processing division. I would be very worried if the case is taking so long.
8 months is a long time for a pending H-1B. You should immediately follow up. Since it is a premium processing, you should be able to send an email to the premium processing division. I would be very worried if the case is taking so long.
more...
NKR
11-11 11:24 AM
I would love to trade places with you if I could buddy, so just relax� on the other hand I sympathize with you, a 2001 PD seems so old to me. Being current is the boon, for you to have to stick with the same employer is the curse.
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgs_kxvMYdLo0oH6LF8Tk5UMrn0PMNrnplQu2VNhdeKj3Q4aY8OiGVnCMRCtupLHujztOucxccjANL9nSjCBdOg1_ysCbsfd-VOo-ptJfnMrBRJPWk0AONO-GDw5r-vdJTC_23OA27PnCtK/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgs_kxvMYdLo0oH6LF8Tk5UMrn0PMNrnplQu2VNhdeKj3Q4aY8OiGVnCMRCtupLHujztOucxccjANL9nSjCBdOg1_ysCbsfd-VOo-ptJfnMrBRJPWk0AONO-GDw5r-vdJTC_23OA27PnCtK/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
more...
immiusa
08-14 03:18 PM
You can start Tata Motors car dealership. Once the nano starts hitting roads. there will be a huge demand for nano
2010 red rose flower background.
hiralal
10-08 04:40 PM
Visa Bulletin for November 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5172.html)
more...
ciber.couger
09-23 03:50 PM
I just got a soft LUD on both mine and my wife I-485 too.
I am EB3/ROW, I-140 approved on 09/01/2008,
My Priority Date: 27 Feb 2003
Hopfully it is a good news.
I am EB3/ROW, I-140 approved on 09/01/2008,
My Priority Date: 27 Feb 2003
Hopfully it is a good news.
hair red rose flowers pictures.
randomdude
04-20 09:58 PM
A friend of mine works for a non-profit and has always been with only one employer (employer A) . He had been on H1 for three years and then used his AC21/EAD card for a year now (again employer A - just wanted to save money by using EAD card instead of applying for H1 again). Can he reapply for an H1 again (same employer A again - no caps apply as this is a non-profit) or is it that once one uses an EAD card, H1 is given up forever?
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
more...
swethanjit
07-08 09:49 PM
Hello All,
I am currently on OPT which is valid till July 2009. Also, my H1-B is approved through a company X starting oct 2008. Currently I got a job with company Y on my OPT. Can I continue to work on my OPT with company Y till July 2009? OR Do I need to transfer my H1B to company Y from company X to be able to continue to work after Oct 2008?
Please help. Your guidance is truly appreciated.
Regards
Swetha.
I am currently on OPT which is valid till July 2009. Also, my H1-B is approved through a company X starting oct 2008. Currently I got a job with company Y on my OPT. Can I continue to work on my OPT with company Y till July 2009? OR Do I need to transfer my H1B to company Y from company X to be able to continue to work after Oct 2008?
Please help. Your guidance is truly appreciated.
Regards
Swetha.
hot stock vector : Flower red rose
godbless
05-31 07:46 PM
I'm surprised that with a November 2001 PD that you are getting an interview already, since EB-3 is still retrogressed--EB3 world is only at July 1 2001 for June 2006
The PD fot EB3 is April 07 2001 I think. Anyway.... there should not be a cause for concern. The reason you got an AOS interview is that USCIS is adjudicating cases pending Visa availability. If there had been a concern then there would have been another RFE on it. You should be happy that some progress has taken place.
Cheers!!!!!!
The PD fot EB3 is April 07 2001 I think. Anyway.... there should not be a cause for concern. The reason you got an AOS interview is that USCIS is adjudicating cases pending Visa availability. If there had been a concern then there would have been another RFE on it. You should be happy that some progress has taken place.
Cheers!!!!!!
more...
house Red Rose - beauty, flower,
dealsnet
07-28 11:09 PM
I have got LUD on my AP (approved last year) on 7/27/08 (sunday).
My GC approved on 7/7/08.
I don't know any significance about this LUD'S
My GC approved on 7/7/08.
I don't know any significance about this LUD'S
tattoo red rose flower background
vnsriv
11-14 11:49 AM
There is no such thing as duplicate EAD. Everytime the EAD is lost, USCIS issues a new EAD with new dates of approval and expiry i.e. they treat it as renwal. If you are not using EAD, don't bother to apply for one. It costs around $300+(i am not sure on this) and needs to be renewed every year.
more...
pictures Deep Red Rose on black
gcman2005
10-15 02:47 AM
My wifes EAD got approved today. Still waiting for AP.
dresses Beautiful Red Rose Flower
overhere
07-17 08:50 AM
Please enlighten me. What constitute a proof of immigrant intent?
Filing of:
1. LC
2. I-140
3. Medicals
4. I-485
etc...
I am confuse. Please explain.
in my opinion, the consul will consider lc filing as proof of immigrant intent. remember lc is the first step towards getting a green card so you're intention is to get a green card.
my advise is, if ever you decide you want to push through with your lc plan or change of status from b2 (tourist) to h1 (working), you must stay in the US until you get your gc. never ever visit the US embassy of your home country coz they'll definitely ask you about it and most likely, they'll ban you from entering the US permanently. once again, this is just my opinion. hope this one helps.
Filing of:
1. LC
2. I-140
3. Medicals
4. I-485
etc...
I am confuse. Please explain.
in my opinion, the consul will consider lc filing as proof of immigrant intent. remember lc is the first step towards getting a green card so you're intention is to get a green card.
my advise is, if ever you decide you want to push through with your lc plan or change of status from b2 (tourist) to h1 (working), you must stay in the US until you get your gc. never ever visit the US embassy of your home country coz they'll definitely ask you about it and most likely, they'll ban you from entering the US permanently. once again, this is just my opinion. hope this one helps.
more...
makeup red rose flower background.
purgan
01-06 11:20 PM
What the failure to pass the Appropriations bills means to American science...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK TIMES
January 7, 2007
Congressional Budget Delay Stymies Scientific Research
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
The failure of Congress to pass new budgets for the current fiscal year has produced a crisis in science financing that threatens to close major facilities, delay new projects and leave thousands of government scientists out of work, federal and private officials say.
�The consequences for American science will be disastrous,� said Michael S. Lubell, a senior official of the American Physical Society, the world�s largest group of physicists. �The message to young scientists and industry leaders, alike, will be, �Look outside the U.S. if you want to succeed.� �
Last year, Congress passed just 2 of 11 spending bills � for the military and domestic security � and froze all other federal spending at 2006 levels. Factoring in inflation, the budgets translate into reductions of about 3 percent to 4 percent for most fields of science and engineering.
Representative Rush D. Holt, a New Jersey Democrat and a physicist, said that scientists, in most cases, were likely to see little or no relief. �It�s that bad,� Mr. Holt said. �For this year, it�s going to be belt tightening all around.�
Congressional Democrats said last month that they would not try to finish multiple spending bills left hanging by the departed Republican majority and would instead keep most government agencies operating under their current budgets until next fall. Except for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, the government is being financed under a stopgap resolution. It expires Feb. 15, and Democrats said they planned to extend a similar resolution through Sept. 30.
Some Republicans favored not finishing the bills because of automatic savings achieved by forgoing expected spending increases. Democrats and Republicans alike say that operating under current budgets, in some cases with less money, can strap federal agencies and lead to major disruptions in service.
Scientists say that is especially true for the physical sciences, which include physics, chemistry and astronomy. When it comes to federal financing, such fields in recent years have fared poorly compared with biology. The National Institutes of Health, for instance, spend more than $28 billion annually on biomedical programs, five times more than all federal spending for physical sciences.
For 2007, Congress and the Bush administration agreed that the federal budget for the physical sciences should get a major increase. A year ago, in his American Competitiveness Initiative, President Bush called for doubling the money for science over a decade. That prompted schools and federal laboratories to prepare for long-deferred repairs and expansions, plans that appear now to be in jeopardy.
Among the projects at risk is the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, on Long Island. The $600 million machine � 2.4 miles in circumference � slams together subatomic particles to recreate conditions at the beginning of time, some 14 billion years ago, so scientists can study the Big Bang theory. It was already operating partly on charitable contributions, officials say, and now could shut down entirely, throwing its 1,069 specialists into limbo.
�For us, it�s quite serious,� said Sam Aronson, the Brookhaven director. For the nation, Dr. Aronson added, the timing is especially bad because the collider has given the United States a head start on European rivals, who hope to build a more powerful machine.
�Things are pretty miserable for a year in which people talked a lot about regaining our competitive edge,� Dr. Aronson said. �I think all that�s stalled.�
Another potential victim is the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois, where a four-mile-long collider investigates the building blocks of matter. Its director, Piermaria Oddone, said the laboratory would close for a month as most of the staff of 4,200 are sent home.
Congress and the Bush administration could restore much of the science financing in the 2008 budget. Scientists say it would help enormously, but add that senior staff members by that point may have already abandoned major projects for other jobs that were more stable.
Other projects affected by the budget freeze include:
�A $1.4 billion particle accelerator at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee meant to probe the fine structure of materials and aid in cutting-edge technologies. Its opening might be delayed a year.
�A $30 million contribution to a global team designing an experimental reactor to fuse atoms rather than break them apart. Controlled fusion, if successful, would offer a nearly inexhaustible source of energy.
�A $440 million X-ray machine some two miles long at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in California that would act like a microscope to peer inside materials, aiding science and industry. Construction, begun last year, would slow.
�It�s pretty bad,� said Burton Richter, a Nobel laureate in physics. �There�s going to be another year of stagnation. That hurts a lot.�
The National Science Foundation, which supports basic research at universities, had expected a $400 million increase over the $5.7 billion budget it received in 2006. Now, the freeze is prompting program cuts, delays and slowdowns.
�It�s rather devastating,� said Jeff Nesbit, the foundation�s head of legislative and public affairs. �While $400 million in the grand scheme of things might seem like decimal dust, it�s hugely important for universities that rely on N.S.F. funding.�
The threatened programs include a $50 million plan to build a supercomputer that universities would use to push back frontiers in science and engineering; a $310 million observatory meant to study the ocean environment from the seabed to the surface; a $62 million contribution to a global program of polar research involving 10 other nations; and a $98 million ship to explore the Arctic, including the thinning of its sheath of floating sea ice.
Missions at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration are also threatened, with $100 million in cuts. Paul Hertz, the chief scientist at NASA�s science mission directorate, said potential victims included programs to explore Mars, astrophysics and space weather.
Physicists said a partial solution to the crisis would let the Energy Department do what it wanted to do all along for 2007: move $500 million left over from environmental cleanup accounts into the physical sciences. That would require Congressional approval but no budget increase.
Raymond L. Orbach, the department�s under secretary for science, in a recent statement seemed to call for such legislative relief.
�A yearlong continuing resolution takes away many of the opportunities for advancing science,� Dr. Orbach said. �We urge Congress to continue critical investments in America�s scientific leadership.�
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK TIMES
January 7, 2007
Congressional Budget Delay Stymies Scientific Research
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
The failure of Congress to pass new budgets for the current fiscal year has produced a crisis in science financing that threatens to close major facilities, delay new projects and leave thousands of government scientists out of work, federal and private officials say.
�The consequences for American science will be disastrous,� said Michael S. Lubell, a senior official of the American Physical Society, the world�s largest group of physicists. �The message to young scientists and industry leaders, alike, will be, �Look outside the U.S. if you want to succeed.� �
Last year, Congress passed just 2 of 11 spending bills � for the military and domestic security � and froze all other federal spending at 2006 levels. Factoring in inflation, the budgets translate into reductions of about 3 percent to 4 percent for most fields of science and engineering.
Representative Rush D. Holt, a New Jersey Democrat and a physicist, said that scientists, in most cases, were likely to see little or no relief. �It�s that bad,� Mr. Holt said. �For this year, it�s going to be belt tightening all around.�
Congressional Democrats said last month that they would not try to finish multiple spending bills left hanging by the departed Republican majority and would instead keep most government agencies operating under their current budgets until next fall. Except for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, the government is being financed under a stopgap resolution. It expires Feb. 15, and Democrats said they planned to extend a similar resolution through Sept. 30.
Some Republicans favored not finishing the bills because of automatic savings achieved by forgoing expected spending increases. Democrats and Republicans alike say that operating under current budgets, in some cases with less money, can strap federal agencies and lead to major disruptions in service.
Scientists say that is especially true for the physical sciences, which include physics, chemistry and astronomy. When it comes to federal financing, such fields in recent years have fared poorly compared with biology. The National Institutes of Health, for instance, spend more than $28 billion annually on biomedical programs, five times more than all federal spending for physical sciences.
For 2007, Congress and the Bush administration agreed that the federal budget for the physical sciences should get a major increase. A year ago, in his American Competitiveness Initiative, President Bush called for doubling the money for science over a decade. That prompted schools and federal laboratories to prepare for long-deferred repairs and expansions, plans that appear now to be in jeopardy.
Among the projects at risk is the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, on Long Island. The $600 million machine � 2.4 miles in circumference � slams together subatomic particles to recreate conditions at the beginning of time, some 14 billion years ago, so scientists can study the Big Bang theory. It was already operating partly on charitable contributions, officials say, and now could shut down entirely, throwing its 1,069 specialists into limbo.
�For us, it�s quite serious,� said Sam Aronson, the Brookhaven director. For the nation, Dr. Aronson added, the timing is especially bad because the collider has given the United States a head start on European rivals, who hope to build a more powerful machine.
�Things are pretty miserable for a year in which people talked a lot about regaining our competitive edge,� Dr. Aronson said. �I think all that�s stalled.�
Another potential victim is the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois, where a four-mile-long collider investigates the building blocks of matter. Its director, Piermaria Oddone, said the laboratory would close for a month as most of the staff of 4,200 are sent home.
Congress and the Bush administration could restore much of the science financing in the 2008 budget. Scientists say it would help enormously, but add that senior staff members by that point may have already abandoned major projects for other jobs that were more stable.
Other projects affected by the budget freeze include:
�A $1.4 billion particle accelerator at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee meant to probe the fine structure of materials and aid in cutting-edge technologies. Its opening might be delayed a year.
�A $30 million contribution to a global team designing an experimental reactor to fuse atoms rather than break them apart. Controlled fusion, if successful, would offer a nearly inexhaustible source of energy.
�A $440 million X-ray machine some two miles long at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in California that would act like a microscope to peer inside materials, aiding science and industry. Construction, begun last year, would slow.
�It�s pretty bad,� said Burton Richter, a Nobel laureate in physics. �There�s going to be another year of stagnation. That hurts a lot.�
The National Science Foundation, which supports basic research at universities, had expected a $400 million increase over the $5.7 billion budget it received in 2006. Now, the freeze is prompting program cuts, delays and slowdowns.
�It�s rather devastating,� said Jeff Nesbit, the foundation�s head of legislative and public affairs. �While $400 million in the grand scheme of things might seem like decimal dust, it�s hugely important for universities that rely on N.S.F. funding.�
The threatened programs include a $50 million plan to build a supercomputer that universities would use to push back frontiers in science and engineering; a $310 million observatory meant to study the ocean environment from the seabed to the surface; a $62 million contribution to a global program of polar research involving 10 other nations; and a $98 million ship to explore the Arctic, including the thinning of its sheath of floating sea ice.
Missions at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration are also threatened, with $100 million in cuts. Paul Hertz, the chief scientist at NASA�s science mission directorate, said potential victims included programs to explore Mars, astrophysics and space weather.
Physicists said a partial solution to the crisis would let the Energy Department do what it wanted to do all along for 2007: move $500 million left over from environmental cleanup accounts into the physical sciences. That would require Congressional approval but no budget increase.
Raymond L. Orbach, the department�s under secretary for science, in a recent statement seemed to call for such legislative relief.
�A yearlong continuing resolution takes away many of the opportunities for advancing science,� Dr. Orbach said. �We urge Congress to continue critical investments in America�s scientific leadership.�
girlfriend MySpace Red Rose Reflecting In
bidhanc
07-30 07:03 AM
Brasil,
You should contact your local Congressman and Senator ASAP.
Seeing that you are a legal immigrant paying taxes and being put thru obstacles, they should surely be willing to help you out.
Getting the driver's license is not the problem, I know it will come. Problem here is why I cannot drive outside SC for up to 60 days waiting for the DL card? Remember I've to surrender my old SC license. This is serious limitation to my work, e.g. I need to go to Atlanta on 08/19 and I cannot drive there.
In September I will go to Italy, what if I don�t get my DL till then?
And you say �Not sure why you thought of it as being punished�
This is ridiculous
You should contact your local Congressman and Senator ASAP.
Seeing that you are a legal immigrant paying taxes and being put thru obstacles, they should surely be willing to help you out.
Getting the driver's license is not the problem, I know it will come. Problem here is why I cannot drive outside SC for up to 60 days waiting for the DL card? Remember I've to surrender my old SC license. This is serious limitation to my work, e.g. I need to go to Atlanta on 08/19 and I cannot drive there.
In September I will go to Italy, what if I don�t get my DL till then?
And you say �Not sure why you thought of it as being punished�
This is ridiculous
hairstyles Beautiful Dark Red Rose
PD_Dec2002
07-26 08:40 AM
Yes, it won't be a rejection or a denial either...just a simple RFE. Since both the names on the marriage certificate are different from the applicant (you) and the beneficiary (your wife), USCIS should be able to deduce that it's a mistake.
Thanks,
Jayant
Thanks,
Jayant
StuckInTheMuck
04-28 06:40 PM
Pretty interesting ... usually you see such writeups for developed countries... I am happily amazed to see India taking such steps... Mera Bharat Mahan!
Traditionally there used to be, and still is, a high degree of correlation between the so-called "hunger map" and the map of disease "hotspots", the idea being that most common infections originate in areas of low sanitation and poverty, and they are unlikely to be found in rich countries (malaria and cholera continue to infect, and kill, millions in India and Africa, but are non-existent in USA and most of Europe). Even the recent bird flu hotspots are confined mostly in Asia. In this sense, swine flu seems to have turned this perception on its head, at least for now, and countries like USA, CANADA, and some in Europe suddenly find themselves somewhat "untouchable" (to be fair, USA is guilty only by association, by sharing border with Mexico, the genuine swine flu hotspot).
Traditionally there used to be, and still is, a high degree of correlation between the so-called "hunger map" and the map of disease "hotspots", the idea being that most common infections originate in areas of low sanitation and poverty, and they are unlikely to be found in rich countries (malaria and cholera continue to infect, and kill, millions in India and Africa, but are non-existent in USA and most of Europe). Even the recent bird flu hotspots are confined mostly in Asia. In this sense, swine flu seems to have turned this perception on its head, at least for now, and countries like USA, CANADA, and some in Europe suddenly find themselves somewhat "untouchable" (to be fair, USA is guilty only by association, by sharing border with Mexico, the genuine swine flu hotspot).
usgc07
02-17 11:01 PM
Hi,
I have a question.
An applicant has an Indian Bsc degree + 3years specific industry experience+training . The applicant is in Final Sem MBA. Will the applicant qualify for H1B this year. The MBA is slated to cpmlete in August this year.
Gurus , please advise.
Thanks
USGC07
I have a question.
An applicant has an Indian Bsc degree + 3years specific industry experience+training . The applicant is in Final Sem MBA. Will the applicant qualify for H1B this year. The MBA is slated to cpmlete in August this year.
Gurus , please advise.
Thanks
USGC07
No comments:
Post a Comment