casinoroyale
01-24 04:38 PM
Yellow Admin Review is usually TAL (Technology Alert List) check. This kind of makes sense with your Chemical background. This is usually faster check compared to other types (like name-check). This used to take 21 days, you are around the same timeframe.
Hello experts,
I had my h1-b interview in Toronto on January 4, 2008 and got 221g yellow for administrative review. I called DOS one week ago for processing status and was told that name check is on pending. I called DOS today and was told that security check is on pending. Could you please let me know usually how many checks the DOS will do? How long the security will be done?
Thanks!
Hello experts,
I had my h1-b interview in Toronto on January 4, 2008 and got 221g yellow for administrative review. I called DOS one week ago for processing status and was told that name check is on pending. I called DOS today and was told that security check is on pending. Could you please let me know usually how many checks the DOS will do? How long the security will be done?
Thanks!
wallpaper Heidi Klum Short Bob
Pagal
09-17 12:50 PM
Hello,
Closing of the sponsoring company may turn out to be a blessing in disguise ... if you show up at Comany A and ask for the employment as listed in your application, Comany A can show its inability to employ you siting the pending closure. As soon as this happens, you are a free agent to work with any other company in same/similar job. I remember reading this advice on murthy last year and you might find some links through IV archives as well.
Good luck!
Closing of the sponsoring company may turn out to be a blessing in disguise ... if you show up at Comany A and ask for the employment as listed in your application, Comany A can show its inability to employ you siting the pending closure. As soon as this happens, you are a free agent to work with any other company in same/similar job. I remember reading this advice on murthy last year and you might find some links through IV archives as well.
Good luck!
jvordar
04-17 11:01 PM
cool thnx guys... it has cleared my confusion...
2011 heidi klum bob hairstyle.
chanduv23
07-11 03:06 PM
I am seriouly looking out for a job as currently on bench from last one month and my employer doesn't pay the bench salary. Currently I am on EAD with my GC sponsering employer. I would appreciate if any of you pls. reply this post. My question is,
If I joined a new employer using EAD-AC21 (as 11 month passed of my I-485) which is very small employer (currently have about 35 employees only), would it cause a problem in my GC process approval? I mean, do you think USCIS may create any RFC as I have join the very small employer, may ask any financial document to declare? Can you pls. tell me what are the potential problems my come in this situation?
Pls. help, your reply will be highly appreciable?
As long as you are employed, and company is paying you decent salary (atleast salary mentioned on the L/C) you are fine, you must be employed at time of RFE/NOID etc..
If I joined a new employer using EAD-AC21 (as 11 month passed of my I-485) which is very small employer (currently have about 35 employees only), would it cause a problem in my GC process approval? I mean, do you think USCIS may create any RFC as I have join the very small employer, may ask any financial document to declare? Can you pls. tell me what are the potential problems my come in this situation?
Pls. help, your reply will be highly appreciable?
As long as you are employed, and company is paying you decent salary (atleast salary mentioned on the L/C) you are fine, you must be employed at time of RFE/NOID etc..
more...
vin13
08-24 11:40 AM
I had 485 interview a month back (previously at the national benefits center) at the local USCIS office. The interview went fine except that they gave me an RFE asking for additional documents verifying employment. Since then I submited documents to the local office a 3 weeks back. Today my supervisor got a call from USCIS Anti Fraud Detection (homeland security) and they left a voice mail that they need to verify my immigration status.
Is this normal? Is there something i need to worry about?
My record is pretty straighforward. I am with the same employer since 2002 first on H1b and then EAD on a permanent postion and no gap in employment and never out of status
My supervisor called back but went to voicemail and left a general message
I have been hearing of more verifications of this kind. But if your records are straightforward, you should not worry. Make sure your immigration attorney is in the loop.
Just wondering what could have triggered this inquiry. Could you give some insight to whether you are working for a small company, consulting, etc that you believe could be a possible reason. Maybe it is just a random pick...
Is this normal? Is there something i need to worry about?
My record is pretty straighforward. I am with the same employer since 2002 first on H1b and then EAD on a permanent postion and no gap in employment and never out of status
My supervisor called back but went to voicemail and left a general message
I have been hearing of more verifications of this kind. But if your records are straightforward, you should not worry. Make sure your immigration attorney is in the loop.
Just wondering what could have triggered this inquiry. Could you give some insight to whether you are working for a small company, consulting, etc that you believe could be a possible reason. Maybe it is just a random pick...
amsgc
04-17 08:36 PM
The word "transfer" is a misnomer. There is no such thing. The new company files a new H-1B petition to hire you, with the request that the new H-1B petition not be counted against the yearly cap. This new application doesn't affect your current H-1B status; in fact if you change your mind about the new offer, you are not even required to go work for the new employer.
It is always good to wait till the new application is approved, and the approval notice has been received, before you give your two weeks notice.
on what basis can i work for old company coz my H1 is already transfered right??? i'm confused... btw this is the new company's lawyers telling me.. i just wanted to see if any one has been in this situation or know of somebody in such a situation..
It is always good to wait till the new application is approved, and the approval notice has been received, before you give your two weeks notice.
on what basis can i work for old company coz my H1 is already transfered right??? i'm confused... btw this is the new company's lawyers telling me.. i just wanted to see if any one has been in this situation or know of somebody in such a situation..
more...
seahawks
09-11 08:02 PM
Congratulations, we have 23 members join the local WA state chapter! Welcome everyone who signed up. Calling all WA state, Oregon members to please sign up with the group link below. We need as much support as we can to support IV initiative.
2010 Heidi Klum Hairstyles
cat555
07-09 12:20 PM
I was in a consulting field with employer taking 30% and me getting 70%.
He supposed to deduct $400 for medical insurance from my paycheck -biweekly, instead deduction was only $200. I never knew that.
My question is why not he acted immediately after knowing the error?
Why should I pay for somebody's mistake?
Am I going to get any tax benefit now?
Why not he deducted single penny in last 2 months before I left?
I didn't sign any paper to pay him back over a period neither did he come up with any plan.
All this proves that he agreed to waive off while I was working for him.
He supposed to deduct $400 for medical insurance from my paycheck -biweekly, instead deduction was only $200. I never knew that.
My question is why not he acted immediately after knowing the error?
Why should I pay for somebody's mistake?
Am I going to get any tax benefit now?
Why not he deducted single penny in last 2 months before I left?
I didn't sign any paper to pay him back over a period neither did he come up with any plan.
All this proves that he agreed to waive off while I was working for him.
more...
atlfp
04-08 03:17 PM
The raw majority definitely counts. The reson S.1932 failed was because it was an extremely republican bill -- it went through without a single democrat vote. A small fraction of republican was able to black mail the visa numbers stuff because of republican can not afford to lose any single republican vote. They needed all of them to get it trhough. In another words, those anti-immigration guys did not build a coalition against legal immigration, as they still can not today, they simply black mailed it.
The situation for PACE act is definitely different. PACE enjoys broad support from both side. It will be very difficult for any of those anti-immigration guy to play the same kind of trick again. It simply won't work.
Your belief in raw majority votes in the conference is touching. ;-) But all it takes is one person -- one Sensenbrenner, or equivalent to build a coalition within the conference, and one house leader to pick and choose the members of the conference.
To reiterate -- 20% of the house is in the House (Anti) Immigration Caucus. The house bill was voted in by a clear majority. Chew on that.
The situation for PACE act is definitely different. PACE enjoys broad support from both side. It will be very difficult for any of those anti-immigration guy to play the same kind of trick again. It simply won't work.
Your belief in raw majority votes in the conference is touching. ;-) But all it takes is one person -- one Sensenbrenner, or equivalent to build a coalition within the conference, and one house leader to pick and choose the members of the conference.
To reiterate -- 20% of the house is in the House (Anti) Immigration Caucus. The house bill was voted in by a clear majority. Chew on that.
hair Heidi Klum Short Bob
simple1
05-12 03:07 PM
Ok, for this Attorney thread, some one is pouring red on me.
more...
harrydr
06-29 06:32 PM
Hello,
Forum Gurus, i have a basic question. Currently i'm employed by a corporation and working full time for them under H1B. Now, i want to work for additional company as part time (approx. 20 hrs/week). This company cannot give me cash but only check. Is it possible to file additional H1B just for this company and start working for them under this new H1B?
My current status is: H1B approved with current company and I-140 approved.
Also, if the answer to my question above is yes, then could this affect my current H1B and approved I-140 in any ways. Thanks in advance.
Forum Gurus, i have a basic question. Currently i'm employed by a corporation and working full time for them under H1B. Now, i want to work for additional company as part time (approx. 20 hrs/week). This company cannot give me cash but only check. Is it possible to file additional H1B just for this company and start working for them under this new H1B?
My current status is: H1B approved with current company and I-140 approved.
Also, if the answer to my question above is yes, then could this affect my current H1B and approved I-140 in any ways. Thanks in advance.
hot heidi klum bob haircut 2010.
add78
08-01 11:54 AM
Shows the power of "phone calls" vs faxes/emails/petitions
Awesome.
Awesome.
more...
house heidi klum bob hairstyle.
deepimpact
09-18 08:53 PM
that is the part of the problem...... uscis has never provided correct and complete size of the backlog..... if backlog size were to be 190,000 then the dates should get current in all of the eb1, eb2 and eb3 categories in around 1 year.... how many here expect the dates to be current for all categories in around 1 year? probably close to zero.... nevertheless, most people think that the size of the backlog is equal to the number of applicants ahead of them..... which is to say that those ahead in line for each one of us is the cause of the backlog and not part of the backlog.... and those behind us do not deserve to be counted with us..... perhaps they should just wait period...... this is the formula most people here seem to use to derive at the size of the backlog.... hence difference versions and different numbers for the size of the backlog.....
USCIS admits to a backlog of 190K but most are in EB2-I/C and EB3 with a PD earlier than Aug 2007. No one knows how many people are waiting in these categories with approved I-140s from Aug2007-Sep2010. It could be another 150-200K. S0 even if the backlog is not 800K, but its around 400K.
USCIS admits to a backlog of 190K but most are in EB2-I/C and EB3 with a PD earlier than Aug 2007. No one knows how many people are waiting in these categories with approved I-140s from Aug2007-Sep2010. It could be another 150-200K. S0 even if the backlog is not 800K, but its around 400K.
tattoo Heidi Klum, ob hairstyle
serg
12-21 01:10 PM
They could be a couple (husband and wife) sharing same computer with same IP Address and with same PD (cross-chargeability).
We are in democratic country. Why not ask them first? Give them due process.
They could be guys from the same company, thay could even be neighbors using the same wireless router, has he ever heard about NAT?
We are in democratic country. Why not ask them first? Give them due process.
They could be guys from the same company, thay could even be neighbors using the same wireless router, has he ever heard about NAT?
more...
pictures More Heidi Klum Hairstyles
pappu
05-05 12:02 PM
Thank you
dresses Heidi Klum Hairstyles
ilwaiting
06-15 03:19 PM
Thats your A number, Its not the I-94 number. Some people have it some don't. If you have it you need to include it. If you don't it would be assigned once you file you 485
Initially I thought its the number on I-94, but apparantly not. This is required to be filled on almost all forms which are required to be filed now that the dates are current. I485, 131, 765 etc.
Is this the number which is on my approved I-140 (A099 XXX XXX) ?
Initially I thought its the number on I-94, but apparantly not. This is required to be filled on almost all forms which are required to be filed now that the dates are current. I485, 131, 765 etc.
Is this the number which is on my approved I-140 (A099 XXX XXX) ?
more...
makeup heidi klum bob hairstyle.
kawosa
08-19 12:59 PM
Thanks, I work in the credit derivatives area. Developing IT infrastructure for pricing and doing risk analysis for single names and multi-names credit derivatives. What about you?
started teaching in the same uni after my MBA... thought will get into a phD prog or fninsh the CFA the get into investment analysis,...
5 years have passed, CFA was over long ago.... but just waiting for GC...
started teaching in the same uni after my MBA... thought will get into a phD prog or fninsh the CFA the get into investment analysis,...
5 years have passed, CFA was over long ago.... but just waiting for GC...
girlfriend heidi klum hairstyles bob.
pappu
06-17 04:11 PM
/\/\/
hairstyles Heidi Klum#39;s Haircut at
imm_pro
05-20 01:13 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26605
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
sledge_hammer
04-15 07:46 AM
See my answer in blue ...
All,
I know as you all have reached 485 stage so you might be experts who can help answering few of my questions...
1) I work with a company who applied for my labor last year, its approved and now they are filling 140
2) Am applied in EB3 so not sure how many years it will take to get 485 dates to priority dates of 2008 ... am thinking abt 5-8 yrs
3) My wife works in a company who wont apply for her Green Card they dont have a policy
4) Her visa expires after 2 yrs ...
5) If I ask one of the consulting companies X to apply for her green card for future employment and pay all the cost for the green card.
6) Assuming she gets 140 in next 2 yrs before her visa is expired.
Questions .....
a) Can she renew her visa for 3 yrs with her current employer based on 485 filling pending with company X ?
No
b) How much would it cost to apply a green card upto phase 1 and phase 2 ...I might not actually require 485 stage. I just need her processing upto 140 stage so that she can keep renewing the visa until I get my 485 cleared ...in case I leave my job then we might think for her to apply 485 but chances are less.
Depends largely on the attorneys. Anywhere from $2,000 to $7,000
Experts please guide me if this plan would work and if yes how much would it cost me ...
Thanks in advance ..
Lalit
All,
I know as you all have reached 485 stage so you might be experts who can help answering few of my questions...
1) I work with a company who applied for my labor last year, its approved and now they are filling 140
2) Am applied in EB3 so not sure how many years it will take to get 485 dates to priority dates of 2008 ... am thinking abt 5-8 yrs
3) My wife works in a company who wont apply for her Green Card they dont have a policy
4) Her visa expires after 2 yrs ...
5) If I ask one of the consulting companies X to apply for her green card for future employment and pay all the cost for the green card.
6) Assuming she gets 140 in next 2 yrs before her visa is expired.
Questions .....
a) Can she renew her visa for 3 yrs with her current employer based on 485 filling pending with company X ?
No
b) How much would it cost to apply a green card upto phase 1 and phase 2 ...I might not actually require 485 stage. I just need her processing upto 140 stage so that she can keep renewing the visa until I get my 485 cleared ...in case I leave my job then we might think for her to apply 485 but chances are less.
Depends largely on the attorneys. Anywhere from $2,000 to $7,000
Experts please guide me if this plan would work and if yes how much would it cost me ...
Thanks in advance ..
Lalit
anilsal
03-17 04:29 PM
From http://www.murthy.com/eb1opr.html
if employment is from an academic institution, it needs to be a tenure or tenure-track position. If from a company, the employer should have in its employ at least three full-time researchers and have documented achievements by the company or its research personnel.
if employment is from an academic institution, it needs to be a tenure or tenure-track position. If from a company, the employer should have in its employ at least three full-time researchers and have documented achievements by the company or its research personnel.
No comments:
Post a Comment