dixie
08-22 01:14 PM
Any US postgraduate degree + 3 years prior to I-140/I-485. Read the text of the bill for more details.
You mean 3 year experience in US no matter from where you got your masters degree or
Only US degree + 3 years experience will get exemption?
You mean 3 year experience in US no matter from where you got your masters degree or
Only US degree + 3 years experience will get exemption?
wallpaper Great Forgiveness Quotes By
setpit_gc
06-07 06:22 PM
I got 1st LUD on 05/31/2009 with message change.
Soft LUDs so far: 06/02/2009, 06/03/2009, 06/05/2009, 06/07/2009
Soft LUDs so far: 06/02/2009, 06/03/2009, 06/05/2009, 06/07/2009
baburob2
05-25 05:59 PM
genearlly you could have it renewed 1 year before.
2011 Great Forgiveness Quotes By
coolvigo
07-12 11:02 PM
Guys,
Looks like a good news here....read following link.....looks like couple ppl have posted that their lawyers advised them to file for 485 in this case :-)
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
:)
Looks like a good news here....read following link.....looks like couple ppl have posted that their lawyers advised them to file for 485 in this case :-)
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
:)
more...
nsync1979
06-18 02:22 PM
Hi,
I came to US in 2004, my H1 visa was sponsored by cognizant technology solutions. H1 was valid from Nov 04 to Dec 06. later on my I 94 was extended from Dec 06 to July 09 .
I changed company and joined wipro in Aug 08 and now my I 94 is now valid till July 2010.
I have never gone back to India for a visit ever since I landed in US (2004)..I now want to go to India for few months and have read that i'll have to get my visa stamped before reentering US...
My question is if i'll have any problems with visa stamping because I was originally working with cognizant and am now working with wipro?..Am I out of status since my original visa expired in 2006 ?...pls help
I came to US in 2004, my H1 visa was sponsored by cognizant technology solutions. H1 was valid from Nov 04 to Dec 06. later on my I 94 was extended from Dec 06 to July 09 .
I changed company and joined wipro in Aug 08 and now my I 94 is now valid till July 2010.
I have never gone back to India for a visit ever since I landed in US (2004)..I now want to go to India for few months and have read that i'll have to get my visa stamped before reentering US...
My question is if i'll have any problems with visa stamping because I was originally working with cognizant and am now working with wipro?..Am I out of status since my original visa expired in 2006 ?...pls help
krishmunn
07-16 04:05 PM
People who do Consular Processing do complete their medical in designated hospitals in India. I know Jaslok and Lilavati in Mumbai are such approved hospitals and medicals from thsoe are accepted by US Consulate in India for Immigrant Visa (Consular Processing). However, will the same be accepted by CIS for AOS is the question. check with your attorney and do mention this information (that CP candidates can do medical overseas in designated hospitals).
more...
kanta80
04-05 11:39 AM
Thank you very very much, sertasheep. I really appreciate your help.
2010 Forgiveness
mzafar125
08-16 04:47 PM
Howdy fellow Aliens,
My wife's EAD just got approved. Now I have to get her a SSN so she can start working part time. Firstly I should ask can she get a SSN provided her I-485 application is filed and she has a valid EAD ? Any idea how long it takes to get the dang SSN ? I appreciate your help as always.
My wife's EAD just got approved. Now I have to get her a SSN so she can start working part time. Firstly I should ask can she get a SSN provided her I-485 application is filed and she has a valid EAD ? Any idea how long it takes to get the dang SSN ? I appreciate your help as always.
more...
vin13
04-08 12:08 PM
I am not trying to be rude. but really we should use some common sense. If you are visiting another state within US why would you need a visa? If you are still not sure check with the cruise ship customer service.
All i am trying to say is do not post a question until you have put some effort to get your answer by yourself.
All i am trying to say is do not post a question until you have put some effort to get your answer by yourself.
hair quotes about forgiveness.
acruix
06-19 12:58 PM
I would like to know if the processing of AOS application is based on first come first processed or is it based on the priority dates ?
Please let me know.
Thanks in advance!
~Anil
Please let me know.
Thanks in advance!
~Anil
more...
Macaca
04-22 09:07 AM
Passing On H-1b Costs to the Employee? (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/FeesArticle07.18.2006.pdf) -- Smart Business Practice or DOL Violation?, by Michael F. Hammond and Damaris Del Valle
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
hot Quotes : Quotes from
telekinesis
10-14 07:22 PM
Thanks again! You should get a www.deviantart.com account, I am sure you would get some nice feedback!
more...
house quotes on forgiveness. bible
chanduv23
01-06 07:12 PM
We hope to start the New Year with a new vigor and focus on community building and community participations. A stronger community built on mutual trust and participation is what we need today. Let the New Year be the new beginning, where we don’t feel alone.
We all are anxious about ours and our family’s future, not only from the immigration standpoint but also from the point of view of direction of the economy of the country.
We as a community have a great potential to help each other. Our members are ambitious and work for various prominent companies in the USA at various levels and they are working harder to reach great heights. As someone had eloquently put it, it does not matter what you know but it matters whom you know.
So let us start by building a community so strong that we all feel like a part of a family. Let us get to know each other better. Let our families get to know each other better. Let us leverage each other strength and overcome personal weaknesses.
In that regard, we are organizing a informal social meet and greet lunch at
Akbar Restaurant,
21 Cortlandt St,
Edison, NJ
on
January 26th at 12:30PM.
Everyone will be responsible for their own expenses.
Just in case you were wondering, there is not going to be any particular agenda and absolutely NO money solicitations. It is an informal networking event.
In past, several of us (including myself), naively but with very good intention, had pursued some goals aggressively without giving due thoughts to the after affect on the community. That was a mistake.
We are in process of preparing plan for 2008 that will include several items like Job fairs, Immigration lawyers conferences, Seminars by community leaders (from corporate and entrepreneurs ) , lawmakers meeting etc. These are some loft goals and the Tri State Leads in few days will be sending more details on it. You all will have roles to play in that.
Please RSVP via a private message to IV member id "singhsa3" or email
Sanjeev - email id "sanjiv@immigrationvoice.org"
I am posting this message on behalf of "singhsa3" who is currently coordinating the efforts in the New Jersey Area.
This is a great opportunity for people to get a sense of what is happening and to feel a part of the community. Please bring yiour families, inform your friends, bring as many people as possible. We want members to take up a more committed role and to feel good and strong about being an Immigration Voice member and being a part of this wonderful community.
We all are anxious about ours and our family’s future, not only from the immigration standpoint but also from the point of view of direction of the economy of the country.
We as a community have a great potential to help each other. Our members are ambitious and work for various prominent companies in the USA at various levels and they are working harder to reach great heights. As someone had eloquently put it, it does not matter what you know but it matters whom you know.
So let us start by building a community so strong that we all feel like a part of a family. Let us get to know each other better. Let our families get to know each other better. Let us leverage each other strength and overcome personal weaknesses.
In that regard, we are organizing a informal social meet and greet lunch at
Akbar Restaurant,
21 Cortlandt St,
Edison, NJ
on
January 26th at 12:30PM.
Everyone will be responsible for their own expenses.
Just in case you were wondering, there is not going to be any particular agenda and absolutely NO money solicitations. It is an informal networking event.
In past, several of us (including myself), naively but with very good intention, had pursued some goals aggressively without giving due thoughts to the after affect on the community. That was a mistake.
We are in process of preparing plan for 2008 that will include several items like Job fairs, Immigration lawyers conferences, Seminars by community leaders (from corporate and entrepreneurs ) , lawmakers meeting etc. These are some loft goals and the Tri State Leads in few days will be sending more details on it. You all will have roles to play in that.
Please RSVP via a private message to IV member id "singhsa3" or email
Sanjeev - email id "sanjiv@immigrationvoice.org"
I am posting this message on behalf of "singhsa3" who is currently coordinating the efforts in the New Jersey Area.
This is a great opportunity for people to get a sense of what is happening and to feel a part of the community. Please bring yiour families, inform your friends, bring as many people as possible. We want members to take up a more committed role and to feel good and strong about being an Immigration Voice member and being a part of this wonderful community.
tattoo forgiveness music image
aardee
08-20 02:50 PM
Hi ,
I got deported from Chicago when I was travelling back from India because I worked at a gas station with out authorization . I had to admit that I worked and I was deported back by flight same evening . They gave me the ticket .
My visa is cancelled and I was told to go back to consulate and get a new visa .
I want to come back and complete my studies as I have only 1 semester left . Please help what what should I do now .
thanks in advance.
RD
I got deported from Chicago when I was travelling back from India because I worked at a gas station with out authorization . I had to admit that I worked and I was deported back by flight same evening . They gave me the ticket .
My visa is cancelled and I was told to go back to consulate and get a new visa .
I want to come back and complete my studies as I have only 1 semester left . Please help what what should I do now .
thanks in advance.
RD
more...
pictures quote about forgiveness
greyhair
09-30 05:12 PM
I cracked up reading the post. I never really understood why they call us losers and locusts.
Google translation maybe funny but i think the meaning of the post on Chinese forum is serious. When we giving money to IV which is working for everyone in the backlog, Chinese are only thinking for themselves. Scratch the, Chinese are not thinking for even themselves, they are cutting the same branch of the tree on which they are sitting. They are undermining the effort to address the green card backlog. They are trying to use fuzzy match to argue against removal of per country limits in the the process shooting themselves on the foot. If I understand their logic correctly, these Chinese are saying that we are ok if they have to wait in the backlog for years and years, as long as Indian don't get any benefit. That's just plain dumb for them to think like this.
The other day someone posted that Chinese are calling Charles Oppenheim at DOS, asking him to not advance the dates of Indians, and rather only advance the dates of Chinese, which apparently backfired.
I have many good friends from China and they are all very nice. But as a group why do we always see Chinese digging hole everywhere?
Google translation maybe funny but i think the meaning of the post on Chinese forum is serious. When we giving money to IV which is working for everyone in the backlog, Chinese are only thinking for themselves. Scratch the, Chinese are not thinking for even themselves, they are cutting the same branch of the tree on which they are sitting. They are undermining the effort to address the green card backlog. They are trying to use fuzzy match to argue against removal of per country limits in the the process shooting themselves on the foot. If I understand their logic correctly, these Chinese are saying that we are ok if they have to wait in the backlog for years and years, as long as Indian don't get any benefit. That's just plain dumb for them to think like this.
The other day someone posted that Chinese are calling Charles Oppenheim at DOS, asking him to not advance the dates of Indians, and rather only advance the dates of Chinese, which apparently backfired.
I have many good friends from China and they are all very nice. But as a group why do we always see Chinese digging hole everywhere?
dresses Oscar Wilde Famous Quote about Aging, Children, Forgiveness .
Dhundhun
10-02 02:53 PM
As I understand, technically there are different situations - for example,
1. If some one is married to Canadian Citizen, his/her requirement of presence not needed and can hold lifelong Canadian PR, while remainig in USA on GC or as US Citizen.
2. Similarly, if someone is hired by Canadian Company and sent to USA, his/her requirement for presence is not needed.
American Citizen do get Canadian PR, there are some advantage too, such as medical.
1. If some one is married to Canadian Citizen, his/her requirement of presence not needed and can hold lifelong Canadian PR, while remainig in USA on GC or as US Citizen.
2. Similarly, if someone is hired by Canadian Company and sent to USA, his/her requirement for presence is not needed.
American Citizen do get Canadian PR, there are some advantage too, such as medical.
more...
makeup Forgiveness Quotes - 1.0
Rsamuga
07-16 03:03 PM
Hi All-
I have a tricky scenario here, I need some input/guidance.
I came to USA during Dec 2003 through a California based Indian Consulting firm. I worked for him for 2 years. In between, he
applied the petition for my labor in April 2005 on eB2 Category and my responsibility was to pay for the GREEN CARD expenses.
During Oct 2005, I joined an American company as permanent employee. Even after that, due to the good terms with my previous employer he agreed to apply for my I-140 during 2007 June and I took care of the financial aspect of it. The known understanding was that I will join his company in near future, apply the I-485 and get the GC.
Two months back my I-140 got approved and I was waiting for the priority date to be current. Last week, I came back from my India trip. I got engaged during my trip and my marriage has been fixed in Nov'08. Today when I checked the UCSIS site, the priority date for the eB2 category is current.
My questions are:
1) At this point of time, I do not want to join my old employer.Working with the current American company, can I still proceed and apply for the I-485 through my previous employer ??.
2) If not, Can I use the earlier priority date(April 2005) by applying for a fresh GC(perm labor/ I-140) from my current employer?
3) To use the earlier priority date(April 2005), do I need to take approval letter from my previous employer ? Is there any chance that the old priority date can be revoked by the employer ??
If any of you guys have had/come across the same kind of scenario, please do let me know what would be the best way to proceed.
I really appreciate your response in this regard.
Thanks!!
I have a tricky scenario here, I need some input/guidance.
I came to USA during Dec 2003 through a California based Indian Consulting firm. I worked for him for 2 years. In between, he
applied the petition for my labor in April 2005 on eB2 Category and my responsibility was to pay for the GREEN CARD expenses.
During Oct 2005, I joined an American company as permanent employee. Even after that, due to the good terms with my previous employer he agreed to apply for my I-140 during 2007 June and I took care of the financial aspect of it. The known understanding was that I will join his company in near future, apply the I-485 and get the GC.
Two months back my I-140 got approved and I was waiting for the priority date to be current. Last week, I came back from my India trip. I got engaged during my trip and my marriage has been fixed in Nov'08. Today when I checked the UCSIS site, the priority date for the eB2 category is current.
My questions are:
1) At this point of time, I do not want to join my old employer.Working with the current American company, can I still proceed and apply for the I-485 through my previous employer ??.
2) If not, Can I use the earlier priority date(April 2005) by applying for a fresh GC(perm labor/ I-140) from my current employer?
3) To use the earlier priority date(April 2005), do I need to take approval letter from my previous employer ? Is there any chance that the old priority date can be revoked by the employer ??
If any of you guys have had/come across the same kind of scenario, please do let me know what would be the best way to proceed.
I really appreciate your response in this regard.
Thanks!!
girlfriend titlequot;Forgiveness Quotesquot;
kirupa
08-20 12:36 PM
Hi cakewalkr7!
For your first question, the reason is that when animating, the height of an element is not what gets changed by default when you use the adorners. A RenderTransform with ScaleY changes instead.
What you want to do is set the actual Height property to 0 on the properties inspector at a given keyframe. That should give you the effect that you want. Here is a small XAML snippet that allows you to do that:
<Window.Resources>
<Storyboard x:Key="Storyboard1">
<DoubleAnimationUsingKeyFrames BeginTime="00:00:00" Storyboard.TargetName="grid" Storyboard.TargetProperty="(FrameworkElement.Height)">
<SplineDoubleKeyFrame KeyTime="00:00:00.5000000" Value="0"/>
</DoubleAnimationUsingKeyFrames>
</Storyboard>
</Window.Resources>
<Window.Triggers>
<EventTrigger RoutedEvent="FrameworkElement.Loaded">
<BeginStoryboard Storyboard="{StaticResource Storyboard1}"/>
</EventTrigger>
</Window.Triggers>
<Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot">
<StackPanel>
<Grid Height="100" Background="#FFF5FF00" x:Name="grid"/>
<Grid Height="100" Background="#FF00B3FF"/>
</StackPanel>
</Grid>
For your second question, there isn't an easy way to do that without writing code. This tutorial should help: http://www.kirupa.com/blend_wpf/modifying_animations_pg1.htm What you would vary is the Storyboard.TargetName, and that would point to the appropriate Grid that you are interested in animating.
Let me know if that helps or if you need more info.
Cheers!
Kirupa :)
For your first question, the reason is that when animating, the height of an element is not what gets changed by default when you use the adorners. A RenderTransform with ScaleY changes instead.
What you want to do is set the actual Height property to 0 on the properties inspector at a given keyframe. That should give you the effect that you want. Here is a small XAML snippet that allows you to do that:
<Window.Resources>
<Storyboard x:Key="Storyboard1">
<DoubleAnimationUsingKeyFrames BeginTime="00:00:00" Storyboard.TargetName="grid" Storyboard.TargetProperty="(FrameworkElement.Height)">
<SplineDoubleKeyFrame KeyTime="00:00:00.5000000" Value="0"/>
</DoubleAnimationUsingKeyFrames>
</Storyboard>
</Window.Resources>
<Window.Triggers>
<EventTrigger RoutedEvent="FrameworkElement.Loaded">
<BeginStoryboard Storyboard="{StaticResource Storyboard1}"/>
</EventTrigger>
</Window.Triggers>
<Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot">
<StackPanel>
<Grid Height="100" Background="#FFF5FF00" x:Name="grid"/>
<Grid Height="100" Background="#FF00B3FF"/>
</StackPanel>
</Grid>
For your second question, there isn't an easy way to do that without writing code. This tutorial should help: http://www.kirupa.com/blend_wpf/modifying_animations_pg1.htm What you would vary is the Storyboard.TargetName, and that would point to the appropriate Grid that you are interested in animating.
Let me know if that helps or if you need more info.
Cheers!
Kirupa :)
hairstyles Forgiveness is the key to
drirshad
07-01 06:20 PM
For all the nights of no sleep and days of uncertainty. Ready to go to the end of the tunnel this time .....
WaitingForMyGC
01-30 03:18 PM
How reliable is this Tracker(or any) data? I don't think all the registered people who gets their GC would come back and change the status of their application to 'Approved' in the Tracker. Though its better than nothing but still data is too vague to derive any real conclusion.
LostInGCProcess
02-11 04:09 PM
I-485 RFE details.
Needed evidences:
1. 2 Passport size photos in USCIS specs.
2. Form I-693 completed by civil surgeon.
We did submit all these requested I-693 and photos during the initial filing. My question is, does USCIS request for new I-693 if the original one submitted is older than one year or more?
Seems to me (I am taking a wild guess) USCIS must have "misplaced" the I-693 of your spouse. It is unfair to ask again to submit the I-693 especially if its going to cause another dent of $400 to your pocket. However, if the surgeon can issue another one without any charges and without any tests again, then go for it and re-submit.
Otherwise, call USCIS Customer care and inquire about it (as to why they are asking again for the medicals).
EDIT: This to answer your question "does USCIS request for new I-693 if the original one submitted is older than one year or more?"
The Rule is, Form I-693 must be submitted within one year of taking the medical examination.
Needed evidences:
1. 2 Passport size photos in USCIS specs.
2. Form I-693 completed by civil surgeon.
We did submit all these requested I-693 and photos during the initial filing. My question is, does USCIS request for new I-693 if the original one submitted is older than one year or more?
Seems to me (I am taking a wild guess) USCIS must have "misplaced" the I-693 of your spouse. It is unfair to ask again to submit the I-693 especially if its going to cause another dent of $400 to your pocket. However, if the surgeon can issue another one without any charges and without any tests again, then go for it and re-submit.
Otherwise, call USCIS Customer care and inquire about it (as to why they are asking again for the medicals).
EDIT: This to answer your question "does USCIS request for new I-693 if the original one submitted is older than one year or more?"
The Rule is, Form I-693 must be submitted within one year of taking the medical examination.
