HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ravi@photonics.usc.edu (Ravi)
Newsgroups: alt.visa.us
Subject: J1 Visa - Clarification?
Date: 21 Dec 1992 18:24:09 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: photonics.usc.edu

I am currently having a J1 visa with 2 year residency requirement and
my visa expires (only one year is completed) on 31st Jan. 93. I am going
to India and returning back to USA on 28th Jan. 93 along with my Wife.
By the way, I am carrying appropriate IAP66 form (with an extention) for me
as well as for my wife. Can any one tell me what are the appropriate documents
I need to have for my re-entry as well as for my wife's visa. Do I need to goto
embassy again to get US visa or just the new IAP66 form is sufficient to extent
my stay at the port of entry in United States?
Also I would appreciate if anybody can inform me how to get a waiver of the
2 year residency requirement, and what are the chances of extending the stay.
Thanks in advance.
Please reply to email address : ravi@photonics.usc.edu
RAVI

Newsgroups: alt.visa.us
From: rpatil@nmsu.edu (Raj Patil)
Subject: F-1 to H-1, complicated situation
Organization: Computing Research Lab
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:42:15 GMT

Visa Gurus:

I am in a slightly complicated situation then most of the F-1 to H-1 
change situations. 

I am in the middle of my Ph.D, have M.S from this country. On the basis 
of my M.S i have a job offer from local company. I have decided to do Ph.D
on a part time basis. Employer is wiling to process H-1 in advance without 
me having to go on a practical training as 90 days after my MS (time limit
after MS to apply for EAD) is gone. Now it is the begining of Spring semester,
and I will be still on F-1 till H-1 comes through (say worst case Mar. end).
In Mar. end I will be on H-1 and can still continue my Spring classes (nice
employer ?). I will be on an assistant ship for spring but will have to drop
the assistantship in the middle when H-1 come through. What are the effects
of droping RA in the middle of the semester? (I can find this from our school
but can't wait, school is not in session yet and have to hurry for the H-1).

Also what is the process for coming back to F-1 from H-1 in case if I loose
the job, because in that case i will again like to come back to full time
for my Ph.D.

Thanks in advance

Best Regards and Happy New Year

R Patil
USDA-ARS, NMSU-CRL
Las Cruces, NM 88003
Newsgroups: alt.visa.us
From: bkumar@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Bala Kumar)
Subject: Re: F-1 to H-1, complicated situation
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Urbana Design Center
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:52:00 GMT

In article <RPATIL.92Dec30114215@pylos.nmsu.edu> rpatil@nmsu.edu (Raj Patil) writes:
>Visa Gurus:
	I am not one but I will try to answer
>
>
>I am in the middle of my Ph.D, have M.S from this country. On the basis 
>of my M.S i have a job offer from local company. I have decided to do Ph.D
>on a part time basis. Employer is wiling to process H-1 in advance without 
>me having to go on a practical training as 90 days after my MS (time limit
>after MS to apply for EAD) is gone. Now it is the begining of Spring semester,
>and I will be still on F-1 till H-1 comes through (say worst case Mar. end).
>In Mar. end I will be on H-1 and can still continue my Spring classes (nice
>employer ?). I will be on an assistant ship for spring but will have to drop
>the assistantship in the middle when H-1 come through. What are the effects
>of droping RA in the middle of the semester? (I can find this from our school
>but can't wait, school is not in session yet and have to hurry for the H-1).

	I went from F-1 to H-1 in the middle of the semester and had to
 drop my RA. The effect was I had to pay out-of state fees for that semseter.
 At my university which UT-Austin, if you are not employed as a TA/RA for
 the entire semeseter then you are not eligible for tution waiver.
 
>
>Also what is the process for coming back to F-1 from H-1 in case if I loose
>the job, because in that case i will again like to come back to full time
>for my Ph.D.

 	One of my friends did this - he had no problem - in fact he was not
 even a part-time student. He lost his job and went to school and enrolled
 for a full-time PhD. The school gave him a I-20 and got a F-1 visa by sending
 the forms to INS. In fact the international office did that.
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Best Regards and Happy New Year
>
>R Patil
>USDA-ARS, NMSU-CRL
>Las Cruces, NM 88003
From: cd187@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Aye Naing)
Newsgroups: alt.visa.us
Subject: Question: What is the different between 2A and 2B?
Date: 22 Dec 1992 08:17:07 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Hi 

I have heard there are classes in family base immigrant visa
such as 1st., 2nd.(A), 2nd.(B), 3rd. and 4th.
What I am not clear here is the difference between 2nd(A), say 2A
and 2nd(B), 2B.
The 2nd catagory is for the spouse and children of a PR in general
if I know correctly. 
Also I know that 2A is for younger children of the PR and 2B is for
adult children of the PR. But I think younger (here I don't know
what is the age limit - anybody can fill up please) children can
accompany thier parents since the parent got into U.S with 
immigrant visa. 

So, my question here is which young children that 2A catagory
apply to and what is the age limit that differentiate between
2A and 2B catagories? (this one may be different from the age
limit in above paragraph, or may be not)

I hope somebody will kindly share his/her knowledge.
thanks in advance.

A N

Newsgroups: alt.visa.us,soc.culture.indian
From: wiryaman@riscee.pko.dec.com (Santa Wiryaman)
Subject: Re: US born child of green card holders
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard MA
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 14:32:21 GMT

Will the following work?  Ask your consulate to have your child included in
your wife's passport.  Also get a US passport for your child.  The child can
have dual citizenship until he can decide for himself (18 years old?)

Upon departure from the US, show the US passport, so no I-94 needs to be
surrendered.  At the port of entry in India, show the Indian passport, so no
visa is required.  And upon coming back to the US, show the US passport again.

This at least applies to some country, I don't know if India allows it.
Also, this only works if the child travels with his mom, which should be of
no concern when he is young.  Later on you can ask for a separate passport for
him.


-- 
Santa Wiryaman         I am not only an NFS server expert, I am also a client.

INTERNET : wiryaman@riscee.pko.dec.com
UUCP     : ...!decwrl!riscee.pko.dec.com!wiryaman
From: arkady@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Arkady Lyubarsky)
Newsgroups: alt.visa.us
Subject: PR for scientists from former Soviet Union -- request
Date: 30 Dec 92 15:05:57 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Dear netters,

I heard a rumor that recently some changes in the INS regulations had taken
place which facilitate getting PR for the scientists from the former Soviet
Union. Is there something real behind this rumor? 

Any info will be highly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Please respond to

Arkady L. Lyubarsky
Dept Psychology
University of Pennsylvania
3815 Walnut Str
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6196
                  arkady@cattell.psych.upenn.edu
                  tel  (215)898-0510
Xref: sparky alt.visa.us:796 soc.culture.indian:41844
From: babu@weierstrass.WPI.EDU (Babu Gopalakrishnan)
Newsgroups: alt.visa.us,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: US born child of green card holders
Date: 24 Dec 1992 07:45:09 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: weierstrass.wpi.edu

In article <1992Dec23.230626.1@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> ff76@vaxb.acs.unt.edu (Jhinuk Chowdhury) writes:
>In article <1992Dec21.143221.13377@engage.pko.dec.com>, wiryaman@riscee.pko.dec.com (Santa Wiryaman) writes:

 <stuff about dual citizenship for a child deleted>

>> Upon departure from the US, show the US passport, so no I-94 needs to be
>> surrendered.  At the port of entry in India, show the Indian passport, so no
>> visa is required.  And upon coming back to the US, show the US passport again.

> .... You see, when you depart
>or enter a country, there will be departure and admissions stamps on the
>passport.  If, at the point of entry, an individual's paasport looks like this
>person has *not * come through the departing country's official channels,
>wouldn't that cause red flags to go up all over the place.  


	One thing to remember is that it is the responsibility of the
	airline to make sure that you have the necessary documentation
	to enter the country of your destination.  So when the airline
	staff remove the I-94s from the Indian passport of the mother,
	and then have a look at the US passport of the child, they 
	may notice that the child does not have a visa to enter India.
	This would be grounds for them to refuse to allow the child to
	board the plane.  

	If this phase in the journey is overcome, it shouldn't be too
	difficult to get in and out of India with the child's name
	on the mother's passport. 

	Then the problem arises again upon entering the United States.
	If the Immigration officer is attentive, he may notice that
	the child has returned from India with no Indian visa in the 
	passport.   If the child hasn't travelled much on the US passport,
	arriving back in the US with a blank passport would most probably
	arouse the suspicions of the Immigration Officer.

	Cosidering that the chances for problems occuring are all in
	the US, it may be possible to explain the situation to the US
	officials -- they'd definitely be easier to talk to than
	Indian Immigration Officials.  But that all depends on how the
	laws governing dual cititzenship are written here.

	Babu
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
Subject: YAQOTD
Date: 2 Jan 93 22:05:28 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

"When anyone says `theoretically,' they really mean `not really.'"  --David
Parnas 
-- 
Join the Omnipotent Overlords of the Omniverse today. Add to intelligent    	
political, environmental, and social discussions. Buck the growing trend of 
apathy in the world today, and most importantly have some well earned fun.  
Read all about us on alt.overlords or e-mail : jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu    
Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: jgs1@ra.msstate.edu (jimi strickland)
Subject: Re: Membership Listing
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 08:30:09 GMT

  I looked at the Membership Listing since I haven't in a long time.
  My name has mysteriously disappeared from it!
  How did this happen???


         -jimi-

Newsgroups: alt.overlords
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Subject: Xmas Quote of the day
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 20:30:08 GMT

"Instant gratification is not fast enough."
                        -- Suzanne Vega
-- 
Join the Omnipotent Overlords of the Omniverse today. Add to intelligent    	
political, environmental, and social discussions. Buck the growing trend of 
apathy in the world today, and most importantly have some well earned fun.  
Read all about us on alt.overlords or e-mail : jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu    
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6254 soc.men:22052 soc.women:22071 talk.abortion:53954 alt.feminism:6753
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Reproductive Technologies... (was: Re: Father Notification...)
Date: 3 Jan 93 16:34:03 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) proposed "affirmative 
action" in custody cases.  

gf:
| >However, what I was thinking of was this: insisting that
| >49% of custody go to men may run into the question of
| >whether 49% of the men _want_ custody.  Considering the
| >implacable resistance to paying child support shown here
| >and elsewhere, I have the idea that a good many men might
| >not consider your proposal a boon if the luck of the draw
| >smiled upon them.  Take care: you may be giving ideas to
| >the devious witches on NOW's General Staff for yet 
| >another plot.

kd:
| Yeah, we're upset about the idea of child support.
| 
| Particularly when "support" is grossly in excess of what is required to
| support and raise a child, and is another name for alimony.

Do you have figures on this?  Over the last twenty years,
I've known many people paying or receiving child support,
but in most cases the support was somewhat less than what
it would take to raise a child in roughly the same standard
of living the parents were used to.  Avoid anecdotal
evidence, however; we can both supply that, but you are
making a positive implication that a great injustice is
going on, and need more than anecdotes to back it up.

kd:
| ...
| Particularly when, should the man complain, she can simply use the "nuclear
| bomb" of child custody disputes, sexual abuse allegations, and >even if they
| are false and baseless< walk away scott free -- with the kids -- while the
| man is ruined not only personally for financially as well.

You've been making this charge as well, but as yet you have
not offered any evidence that I have seen.  Again, an
anecdote or two will not do; you are asserting that it is
a general problem.

kd:
| (Feminists, don't bother saying "but some men have custody".  90% of men in
| this situation do not have >meaningful< custody or contact, but they do
| seem to have the bills.)
| 
| Yeah, men are upset.
| 
| I suspect that if men had their kids, and were the ones receiving the
| support checks, you'd hear a lot fewer complaints.

I've seen no evidence of any of this.  Where do you
get your information?
-- 

 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,misc.legal,talk.abortion
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: Embryos as Property?
Keywords: Property rights, abortion, compensation for involuntary loss...?
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:15:47 GMT

In article <lairdb.725057848@crash.cts.com> lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes:
>In <nyikos.724958698@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>In <lairdb.724566025@crash.cts.com> lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes:

			....................

>True.  However, the question at hand (although you keep trying to drag the
>discussion off into the weeds) is on the property/other rights the two
>people might have in the offspring.  Your response would seem to say
>that if your friend gives you a set of sparkplugs for your car, he
>suddenly has some rights to the whole thing.  Please explain further.

>>>Wellll, the non-gestating partner has contributed only a single
>>>chromosome,

>>Go back to high school biology.  The partner contributed 23 chromosomes.

>Okay, okay, mea culpa, a minor thinko.  The point remains the same: the
>partner has contributed to the mix an important component of negligible
>mass (as with the sparkplug analogy above.)

The first question is what is the important part of the content of the 
fertilized ovum.  A fair analogy would be that of aa photograph; here the
non-nuclear part of the protoplasm corresponds to the film or plate, and
this is contributed solely by the mother.  The nuclear part is in small 
part the mitochondrial DNA and some related material; this may be 
compared to the emulsion.  While these are essential, it is generally
recognized that the important part is the effect of the exposure to light,
and this corresponds to the chromosomes, which are contributed in equal
number, and roughly equal content, by the two parents, barring certain
accidents which cannot be ascertained at this point.  The situation is
unusual in this respect; their contributions to the genetic material are
necessarily almost equal.

Then there is the problem of carrying the child.  This corresponds, in
the photographic analogy, to the developing and printing process.  Again,
the photo shop is paid for this, but has no rights from this to the
photograph.  Nor does the photo shop have the right to destroy the
photograph.  While a child is not a photograph, and the analogy is
not perfect, it does point out the problems of joint rights of the
biological parents, at least until these are relinquished.

-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6278 alt.feminism:6779
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Male Choice Revisited
Date: 4 Jan 1993 05:35:37 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:

>peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes...
>>Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>>>peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes...

>Well, Michal, *MEN* have the right to free travel as well, but you seem
>to have a problem with this, in this particular case, as you have
>concluded that his choice to travel freely, indicates a lack of interest
>in his child.

I don't give a damn if he travels or not.  But if he does, and he cares
whether the woman has borne his child, then he can easily find out by 
asking her, or asking her friends, or checking the public registry of 
births.

-- 

                                                --  Michal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course there's no reason!  
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6147 alt.feminism:6451
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Male Choice Revisited
Date: 23 Dec 1992 08:40:19 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:

>you are proposing 
>(pretty loudly and obnoxiously, IMO)  that no man has a right
>to custody of his child if he fails to pursue (HARASS) a woman 
>for 9 months after sleeping with her, to check if she's pregnant.

I am not proposing that he check if she's pregnant. Which, BTW she
would *not* be 9 months later -- she would have given birth.  And
the birth certificate would be in the public record.  *That* is
what I propose that he check.

>(By the way, there is no ban on abortion because other loud obnoxious
>political groups oppose it...)  (And I'm now awaiting the ridiculous 
>conclusions that I want to ban abortion because I made that observation.)

Sorry to disappoint you.  There are certainly constituents in the pro-choice
camp which are "obnoxious".  I almost got beat-up once at a clinic rally 
because I objected to a sign which said "keep your cross out of my crotch".
That kind of slime is totally uncalled for!

-- 

                                                --  Michal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course there's no reason!  
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,misc.legal,talk.abortion
From: kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l)
Subject: Embryos as Property and Viability as a Standard?
Keywords: Property rights, abortion, compensation for involuntary loss...?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 11:52:56 GMT

parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker) writes:

>lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes:

>>In <1h98toINN59@gap.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:

>>>It is not being squelched on the grounds that it's "icky".  It's being
>>>squelched on the grounds that it is patently false.  An embryo is 
>>>*not* a body part of the mother.

>>Based on...?  Few disciplines I'm aware of accept proof-by-assertion; on
>>what basis do you draw the line?  How do you distinguish a few cells of
>>embryo from a few cells of skin?

>Well, the fact that they are genetically distinct is one big way, even though
>*detecting* that may be essentially impossible with current technology.

>On the other hand, the embryo (we're talking pre-viability here) is nowhere
>near being a separate, independent organism; it recieves *all* of its
>sustinence from the mother's blood (after implantation) or from the reserves
>of the egg (before implantation) which also came from the mother.  Without
>the resources of the mother, the embryo would not survive.  It is probably
>in that sense that was meant in the original post that the embryo is "part"
>of the mother.

Which means that you are a rock, since you derive *all* your sustenance
from the earth, or from its reserves, which came from the earth. You would
not survive if you were suddenly thrown into space, thus you're not viable
either.  Therefore, anyone who wishes to kill you is only performing a
Gaia abortion - perfectly acceptable.

>>-- 
>>Laird P. Broadfield     lairdb@crash.cts.com    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

>-Rob, who wonders why people insist on arguing over the obvious and the trivial


Steve Kellmeyer
-- 

Steve Kellmeyer 
kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6170 soc.men:21775 alt.feminism:6520
From: robert@informix.com (Robert Coleman)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: What's really behind this "men's choice" thing?
Date: 21 Dec 92 22:56:08 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: Moral turpitude
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:27:04 GMT

In <1h7q2vINNk17@gap.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:

>beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:

>>Yes!  And you and Bob Blackshaw seem to want to punish
>>"moral turpitude" (eg. not knowing a woman is pregnant!)
>>by denying parental rights to men.

>Not quite right for me. I won't speak for Bob.

It's OK, I just did.

>I'm not out to *punish* anyone.  However, I feel that if
>a man doesn't bother to find out about the *birth* (note: not
>necessarily the pregnancy) then he has forfeited his right
>to stop an adoption.  

Hmm? But as Don said, he took precautions and has little reason
to suppose he is a father. Of course, I haven't quite figured
out how he now suddenly knows he is a father, unless the lady
in questions takes him to court. Then I guess it is up to the
court to make a sensible and humane decision (Yeah, and hell
might freeze over too).

>I am not prepared to apply that claim to *all* parental rights.
>(Happy?  No, probably not.)
>-- 

>                                                --  Michal
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Of course there's no reason!  

Bob.
Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6233 soc.men:21980 soc.women:22002 talk.abortion:53789 alt.feminism:6694
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Reproductive Technologies... (was: Re: Father Notification...)
Date: 1 Jan 93 16:19:16 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
| ...
| I propose as the yardstick of equality the total number of minor children
| under the custodial care of each sex in single parent homes.  When it
| reaches the level of the population dispersion (49% men / 51% women I
| believe) then we have equality.  Until that time men are to be preferred in
| both custody and child support awards.

In many cases, companies say that they cannot get a sufficient
number of applicants from discriminated groups to balance their
hiring or promotion numbers.  In the case of custody, do we know
what the proportion of applicants is?  It may be that the draft
rather than the job market will turn out to be appropriate
analogy.
-- 

 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,alt.feminism