Something does not sound right here. How can the employer "misplace" the upper portion of the approval notice? In the first place, why did he even separate the upper portion and the lower portion? He is supposed to give you the entire document as a single piece of paper.
Some thing really does not sound right here. By law, he is required to give you the approval notice.
I believe that Uppoer portion of the notice is to be retained by the mployer but they usually make a copy and give you the entire 797 for stamping ,technically they are not supposed to give you the upper portion.
Some thing really does not sound right here. By law, he is required to give you the approval notice.
I believe that Uppoer portion of the notice is to be retained by the mployer but they usually make a copy and give you the entire 797 for stamping ,technically they are not supposed to give you the upper portion.
here you go kirupa
i put a price for it
i put a price for it
try POJO method to reach IO. You can find in "n" number of threads to reach IO based upon your service center. but it's based on your luck to get polite and cordial IO. Try multiple times and speak politely.
Posting this info. provided by some one in this forum long time back.
Call 1-800-375-5283
Press 1 to select English
Press 2 to skip introduction
Press 2
Press 6 to find case status information
Press 1
Now enter your receipt number SRCxxxxxxxxxx
Voice asks if SRC press 1
Then reads out application number, if correct, press 1 (now listen to the case update info..blah blah)
Part way through the blah blah press 3
Wait a moment and press 4
(now if you hear a male voice telling you that no IO is available, it will redirect it to National Customer Service Center (NCSC) you can cut the phone.. and try the same steps)
You should hear "You have reached the TSC of USCIS�" OTHERWISE you have been bounced to NCSC. NCSC only sees what you see when you login to check case status at https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp i.e. you will not get any useful information out of them.
Once you get an IO, be very polite, and take notes for your records. Ask them for their badge number. That way you can reference each conversation by date and the badge number of the IO.
Some of the standard questions:
1) Name check Status ?
2) Background Check Status ?
3) Has it been assigned to an officer ?
4) When can I expect to get some updates on my case ?
5) Can you help me with a ball park date on when my case will be assigned to an officer?
Ofcourse, we all are aware of the standard response we get.
Posting this info. provided by some one in this forum long time back.
Call 1-800-375-5283
Press 1 to select English
Press 2 to skip introduction
Press 2
Press 6 to find case status information
Press 1
Now enter your receipt number SRCxxxxxxxxxx
Voice asks if SRC press 1
Then reads out application number, if correct, press 1 (now listen to the case update info..blah blah)
Part way through the blah blah press 3
Wait a moment and press 4
(now if you hear a male voice telling you that no IO is available, it will redirect it to National Customer Service Center (NCSC) you can cut the phone.. and try the same steps)
You should hear "You have reached the TSC of USCIS�" OTHERWISE you have been bounced to NCSC. NCSC only sees what you see when you login to check case status at https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp i.e. you will not get any useful information out of them.
Once you get an IO, be very polite, and take notes for your records. Ask them for their badge number. That way you can reference each conversation by date and the badge number of the IO.
Some of the standard questions:
1) Name check Status ?
2) Background Check Status ?
3) Has it been assigned to an officer ?
4) When can I expect to get some updates on my case ?
5) Can you help me with a ball park date on when my case will be assigned to an officer?
Ofcourse, we all are aware of the standard response we get.
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.�
i had the same situation. your friend can apply for H1-B coz he is already counted. He'll loose whatever time that he is used on EAD and get the remaining time that is left on his 6 year period. If 6 years is already passed, he can still file for H1-B based on labor, 140 approval. In my case, my H1-B got denied coz of employer issues and i have an another H1-B with another company. Mean while i have filed AC21 with my new employer to be able to work..Hope this helps..
Hi Sankar,
Can one apply for another h1b if h1b extn not come thru and h1b already expired ?
Hi Sankar,
Can one apply for another h1b if h1b extn not come thru and h1b already expired ?
Yes....you can do all those.... even though I cannot see a DESPERATE reason to "shift" to H1-B or to be in the country on H1-B when your actually work status is infact H1-B (even if enetered on AP) and your immigration status is parolee.
I am holding MCA with 10+ years experience. My degree got evaluated to be equivalent to MS in US.
Just to let you know switching from EB3 to EB2 is not as simple as one would think. I assume you are aware of it.
To switch you need to start from Labor and be careful with the job requirements. And then your educational qualification and work experience.
Here are the EB2 minimum requirement.
JOB should require minimum of Bachelors degree with 5 years experience or Masters with or without experience.
Good luck.:)
Just to let you know switching from EB3 to EB2 is not as simple as one would think. I assume you are aware of it.
To switch you need to start from Labor and be careful with the job requirements. And then your educational qualification and work experience.
Here are the EB2 minimum requirement.
JOB should require minimum of Bachelors degree with 5 years experience or Masters with or without experience.
Good luck.:)
Hi, my 485 was rejected initially for "misisng or incorrect fee", per the rejection notice my attorney refiled the app. When refiling the app he sent two checks, one for old fee and the other to make up the difference for new fee. So, USCIS has an option to choose. Now, the Supervisor is insisting us to show evidence of a check being sent (or cashed) in the first place. The Supervisor has asked my attorney to take the time he needs and respond via fax once he's done reconciling. Now, that all the applications have been processed, my attorney has been able to reconcile the check register and confirm that they missed to send the check with my application. He is planning on writing an aplology letter to the Supervisor, do you folks think that Sprvr might receipt the app or reject ?
Given, the July fiasco, Fee increase, and the number of applications attorney's had to process these clerical errors are bound to happen I doubt if USCIS will show any leniency in this. Please let me know if any one is in a similar situation.
If the supervisor rejects the application (as its incomplete) what would be options ? Can I write a letter to USCIS director and explain him the situation and ask him to reconsider it ? Bottom line, why cannot they give us a second chance. It's evident that USCIS has done mistakes as well (improper fee rejections etc). I do understand that there is no law requiring them to return my app on time (in fact they kept it for 95 days before they rejected), if they returned my app on time I would have had a chance to return it back with fee. Any thoughts ? Thanks.
Given, the July fiasco, Fee increase, and the number of applications attorney's had to process these clerical errors are bound to happen I doubt if USCIS will show any leniency in this. Please let me know if any one is in a similar situation.
If the supervisor rejects the application (as its incomplete) what would be options ? Can I write a letter to USCIS director and explain him the situation and ask him to reconsider it ? Bottom line, why cannot they give us a second chance. It's evident that USCIS has done mistakes as well (improper fee rejections etc). I do understand that there is no law requiring them to return my app on time (in fact they kept it for 95 days before they rejected), if they returned my app on time I would have had a chance to return it back with fee. Any thoughts ? Thanks.
Hi mattresscoil,
<<<<<<<
I think you are positioned well with a full time position and income.
Here is what I would suggest. Continue with your full time job and on the side start looking for a job and make sure that you get hold of good consulting company(ies). If they find you a position, they will/may file for the H1B Xfer. Once the H1b exfer is complete, you can go an join them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
I completely agree with you on the above. Can you give some more head on "get hold of good consulting company(ies)" that you mentioned above? What should be the way?
Thanks
<<<<<<<
I think you are positioned well with a full time position and income.
Here is what I would suggest. Continue with your full time job and on the side start looking for a job and make sure that you get hold of good consulting company(ies). If they find you a position, they will/may file for the H1B Xfer. Once the H1b exfer is complete, you can go an join them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
I completely agree with you on the above. Can you give some more head on "get hold of good consulting company(ies)" that you mentioned above? What should be the way?
Thanks
I am one of the July 2nd filer, EB2 India, PD is April 2005. There is problem if you filed 485 at NSC but got a receipt# starting with WAC we must address it asap.
I called up NSC with my Receipt that starts with WAC as it was send to CSC by NSC that processed the application send me the first notice with RD 07/02/2007. I again got the second I-485 transfer notice in September with RD 09/26/2007 saying my case has been transferred back to NSC office as they have jurisdiction over it. The IO says as my application receipt# starts with WAC it will processed by the CSC processing dates that is dead at May 2006 rather than the NSC processing dates that is at 10th August 2007 making my 485 eligible for processing.
If we do not solve this problem we could be lingering in CSC for years.
If there has been cases where someone had I-485 Receipt# starting with WAC but got processed by NSC processing dates as it was filed there please come forward.
Looks like there has been some TSC approvals for EAC receipts but no news on NSC, anybody please post here.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/168256035
I called up NSC with my Receipt that starts with WAC as it was send to CSC by NSC that processed the application send me the first notice with RD 07/02/2007. I again got the second I-485 transfer notice in September with RD 09/26/2007 saying my case has been transferred back to NSC office as they have jurisdiction over it. The IO says as my application receipt# starts with WAC it will processed by the CSC processing dates that is dead at May 2006 rather than the NSC processing dates that is at 10th August 2007 making my 485 eligible for processing.
If we do not solve this problem we could be lingering in CSC for years.
If there has been cases where someone had I-485 Receipt# starting with WAC but got processed by NSC processing dates as it was filed there please come forward.
Looks like there has been some TSC approvals for EAC receipts but no news on NSC, anybody please post here.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/168256035
eb3retro,
You changed on h1b transfer right? not on EAD?
I am just curious if a new employer can keep extending h1b based on previous employers I140 (and the fact that 180 days have passed since 485).
thanks
You changed on h1b transfer right? not on EAD?
I am just curious if a new employer can keep extending h1b based on previous employers I140 (and the fact that 180 days have passed since 485).
thanks
Yahoo has a program to basically field questions to various congressmen and senators (most of them are prominent).
On Oct 26th, Rep. Tom Davis is going to answer questions.
I have comment #170 at:
http://news.yahoo.com/b/judy_woodruff/j_woodruff11183?rf=166#comments
In the future, there will be more law makers.
Good work janilsal. A correction though, your question number is 169. I read 170 and was initially horrified at the hate in that question. Thankfully, I looked at the author information and was thankful that it was not an IV member who posted #170. Just a small correction. You may want to go and edit your original post accordingly.
Also, let us know if you get a reply.
On Oct 26th, Rep. Tom Davis is going to answer questions.
I have comment #170 at:
http://news.yahoo.com/b/judy_woodruff/j_woodruff11183?rf=166#comments
In the future, there will be more law makers.
Good work janilsal. A correction though, your question number is 169. I read 170 and was initially horrified at the hate in that question. Thankfully, I looked at the author information and was thankful that it was not an IV member who posted #170. Just a small correction. You may want to go and edit your original post accordingly.
Also, let us know if you get a reply.
Dear All,
I just received a FP notice for my wife scheduled for Sep 19, 2007. I have not received mine yet (I am the primary applicant), I have a few questions regarding this. Please help me if you have any information.
1. Is it normal for the primary applicant to not receive FP notice at the same time as dependent?
2. Can my wife get it done without me getting an FP notice?
3. Can I get my FP done on the same day as my wife even though I did not receive my FP notice?
4. I have filed for I-485, EAD and AP, will we both receive an FP notice for all 3 applications or it is just one FP for all applications?
Please help us with your expertise. Thank you very much for all your time.
PD: Aug 2005
EB3 INDIA
Nebraska
I just received a FP notice for my wife scheduled for Sep 19, 2007. I have not received mine yet (I am the primary applicant), I have a few questions regarding this. Please help me if you have any information.
1. Is it normal for the primary applicant to not receive FP notice at the same time as dependent?
2. Can my wife get it done without me getting an FP notice?
3. Can I get my FP done on the same day as my wife even though I did not receive my FP notice?
4. I have filed for I-485, EAD and AP, will we both receive an FP notice for all 3 applications or it is just one FP for all applications?
Please help us with your expertise. Thank you very much for all your time.
PD: Aug 2005
EB3 INDIA
Nebraska
Thank you Ganguteli and Elaine for your responses.
It appears there was a problem with the website status update. Today my attorney received a letter that my MTR has been approved. I guess my I-485 is back on track now.
Thank you once again for your replies.
Congrats - there was no need to go through this. Unfortunately the system has been this way and in some way or the other most of us get into these situations.
It appears there was a problem with the website status update. Today my attorney received a letter that my MTR has been approved. I guess my I-485 is back on track now.
Thank you once again for your replies.
Congrats - there was no need to go through this. Unfortunately the system has been this way and in some way or the other most of us get into these situations.
desimass77, thanks a lot for your response! Congratulations on your loan approval.
My wife's school insists that AP document from USCIS is not a valid document unless it has been stamped by customs, which forces us to re-enter US :mad:
I will argue with school again. Thanks a lot for your information.
My wife's school insists that AP document from USCIS is not a valid document unless it has been stamped by customs, which forces us to re-enter US :mad:
I will argue with school again. Thanks a lot for your information.
there you go! I really like that one! :A+:
Call USCIS and give them your A# see if they can look it up...
good luck (try at least twice)!
Let us know if it works...
good luck (try at least twice)!
Let us know if it works...
assuming you don't have all your I-94s and I797s,
having W-2s/paystubs for all the years is enough to prove that you have always been in status?
having W-2s/paystubs for all the years is enough to prove that you have always been in status?
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.�
Hi,
I am in a similar position, but slight variations.
H1B from Jul 2003. Already on 7th year extension which expires in Oct 2010. My Priority date is Jun 2007 and I-140 is already approved but, I could not apply for I-485 in Jul 2007 window.
I have the following questions.
1. Can I change a job ? If so, for how long will the H1-B be valid.
2. If the H1-B is valid, can the USCIS reject the application if the my current employer decides to revoke the I-140.
3. If I-140 is revoked, is there is possibility to port the priority date or will it be an entirely new priority date based on new application.
I have been getting conflicting opinions from different people. A particular immigration lawyer I consulted adviced me against a job change, though I might get a new 3 year H1B, he feared CIS might revoke it if I-140 is revoked (it is quiet clear my employer will revoke the I-140). Is there any guidance/cases regarding the same from CIS ?
Thanks very much for your advice.
Much appreciated.
I am in a similar position, but slight variations.
H1B from Jul 2003. Already on 7th year extension which expires in Oct 2010. My Priority date is Jun 2007 and I-140 is already approved but, I could not apply for I-485 in Jul 2007 window.
I have the following questions.
1. Can I change a job ? If so, for how long will the H1-B be valid.
2. If the H1-B is valid, can the USCIS reject the application if the my current employer decides to revoke the I-140.
3. If I-140 is revoked, is there is possibility to port the priority date or will it be an entirely new priority date based on new application.
I have been getting conflicting opinions from different people. A particular immigration lawyer I consulted adviced me against a job change, though I might get a new 3 year H1B, he feared CIS might revoke it if I-140 is revoked (it is quiet clear my employer will revoke the I-140). Is there any guidance/cases regarding the same from CIS ?
Thanks very much for your advice.
Much appreciated.
very useful perspectives from other organizations - thanks pappu... this election season will be very interesting.... i hope more rational.
