go_guy123
06-30 12:43 PM
I think once an I-485 is filed every one should be equally treated based on their category. If country qouta is based on countries interest, there should not be more applications accepted than within the sitpulated visas. That is not the case here. We have thousands of applications stuck at USCIS. Since GC processing puts certain restrictions on ones ability to shape ones career, it is not fair to ask one applicant wait for more time than other applicant purely based on country quota. We should keep in mind that gc processing effects indaviduals not their countries. So, it is discriminating to make one applicant wait while issing visa's to other person with same qualifications (except that he is from another country).
Yes true but why would ROW people be interested in it. They have everything to loose in this change of rules. The change of rules would lead to equal distribution of misery.
Yes true but why would ROW people be interested in it. They have everything to loose in this change of rules. The change of rules would lead to equal distribution of misery.
wallpaper dresses extreme make up.
ita
12-30 07:34 PM
I have many times pondered on the strength/power of dollar value and I feel apart from factors like globalization/petro dollars most important factor is America's politics.
No matter who is in the White House, no matter what their domestic politics are, no matter what their agreement(s)/disagreement(s) are they follow a well established strategic template on the International arena always keeping their focus on fortifying their super power status/dollar strength.
Very fact that dollar value is not as low as it should be amidst the current crisis shows the value that dollar is enjoying(when compared to the value of the currencies of other economies that didn't actually collapse as did American economy) may not be the real value but a strategised value.
Watch this video on globalization (if you have not already watched as it was shared on this forum twice) though it's a bit long and seems like exaggeration at few spots(speaker himself says he may be exaggerating or something like that..) it helps one understand few things.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4343898391323537541&ei=u6taSeqqN4H6qgK7k9WsBA&q=globalization+dollar+&hl=en
Also few facts from this video and some of those youtube videos on terrorism kind of throw another perspective to Iraq war and on the possible Iran strategy.
But as per the disintegration of America I agree with you...it just shows how some of those guys are still kind of smarting from the disintegration of the U.S.S.R and pepping themselves with such stories.
This is a bunch of baloney.
The US has the most trusted currency int he world(sometimes I wonder why, but the fact is it remains such or else its value should rationally be a lot lower right now).
No matter who is in the White House, no matter what their domestic politics are, no matter what their agreement(s)/disagreement(s) are they follow a well established strategic template on the International arena always keeping their focus on fortifying their super power status/dollar strength.
Very fact that dollar value is not as low as it should be amidst the current crisis shows the value that dollar is enjoying(when compared to the value of the currencies of other economies that didn't actually collapse as did American economy) may not be the real value but a strategised value.
Watch this video on globalization (if you have not already watched as it was shared on this forum twice) though it's a bit long and seems like exaggeration at few spots(speaker himself says he may be exaggerating or something like that..) it helps one understand few things.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4343898391323537541&ei=u6taSeqqN4H6qgK7k9WsBA&q=globalization+dollar+&hl=en
Also few facts from this video and some of those youtube videos on terrorism kind of throw another perspective to Iraq war and on the possible Iran strategy.
But as per the disintegration of America I agree with you...it just shows how some of those guys are still kind of smarting from the disintegration of the U.S.S.R and pepping themselves with such stories.
This is a bunch of baloney.
The US has the most trusted currency int he world(sometimes I wonder why, but the fact is it remains such or else its value should rationally be a lot lower right now).
ArkBird
03-10 08:22 PM
Contributed $100 towards Advocacy day Transaction # 3T1561722N075700Y
@indigowiki, You have impressive list of action items in your signature. How about adding one more for becoming donor on IV?
Lead by example! Let the people know you are serious about your IV efforts.
@indigowiki, You have impressive list of action items in your signature. How about adding one more for becoming donor on IV?
Lead by example! Let the people know you are serious about your IV efforts.
2011 2011 extreme makeup ideas.
mugwump
12-11 09:14 PM
We should do 10 & 11 irrespective of the awful VB - all look good
i am not sure if any one of you has tried donating blood in the US, i have, and have been refused a couple of time for reasons ranging from
you have been to india too recently, need 12 months of continued presence in the US
to
our records show that last year India had an outbreak of Malaria and unfortunately you mentioned that you were in India then...
i am not sure if any one of you has tried donating blood in the US, i have, and have been refused a couple of time for reasons ranging from
you have been to india too recently, need 12 months of continued presence in the US
to
our records show that last year India had an outbreak of Malaria and unfortunately you mentioned that you were in India then...
more...
rimzhim
02-07 01:50 PM
I got EB2 140 approval (I have BS + 5 years of experience)
This is becoming very hard now especially at Nebraska. just wanted those sending applications now to know that Nebraska has recently rejected hundreds of (i) EB2 cases with x yrs of experience + BS even when x is 10 and (ii) EB-1 cases even with Ph.Ds (this accding to my lawyer.)
This is becoming very hard now especially at Nebraska. just wanted those sending applications now to know that Nebraska has recently rejected hundreds of (i) EB2 cases with x yrs of experience + BS even when x is 10 and (ii) EB-1 cases even with Ph.Ds (this accding to my lawyer.)
pamith
08-11 04:33 AM
If the site is for Pederson Immigration Law Group, P.C, why does the website URL says
www. usvisainfo. com
Pederson Immigration Law Group, P.C. - Home (http://www.usvisainfo.com/)
I'm not sure if Pederson Immigration Law Group is a real law firm. Anybody know this firm or worked with them. Lets wait for real bulletin.
www. usvisainfo. com
Pederson Immigration Law Group, P.C. - Home (http://www.usvisainfo.com/)
I'm not sure if Pederson Immigration Law Group is a real law firm. Anybody know this firm or worked with them. Lets wait for real bulletin.
more...
vinodp1978
06-28 04:05 PM
Obviously i was wanting to know what the law states...and not a democratic answer. I dont always expect forums to quote the law correctly - use your judgement!
Thanks anyway for that answer. My situation is different beacuse with the I-140 PP going away for now...and my H1B expiring Feb 2008...I am left with approved I-140,Labor and retrogressed dates to be eligible for 3yr extension.
Now that if 140 is pending ...then I am left with EAD as the only option to continue manitaing my status.
Correct my intrepretation of law if wrong..
Thanks anyway for that answer. My situation is different beacuse with the I-140 PP going away for now...and my H1B expiring Feb 2008...I am left with approved I-140,Labor and retrogressed dates to be eligible for 3yr extension.
Now that if 140 is pending ...then I am left with EAD as the only option to continue manitaing my status.
Correct my intrepretation of law if wrong..
2010 wallpaper makeup ideas
dallasdude
06-12 12:32 PM
This is my thought process (also referred by Ron G):
July 2007 brought in approximately 500K 485 cases.
We do not know how many cases were pending as of June 2007.
Fiscal year 2007-2008 USCIS used over 140K EB VISA numbers (I think it was around 155K).
Fiscal year 2008-2009 USCIS will use atleast 140K EB VISA numbers
so, 500K - 300K = 200K.
Assuming USICS approval rate is 85%; 75K of 500K are denied.
200K - 75K = 125K EB cases pending from the July 2007 cases.
Additions: from all current categories - may be 25 K in 2 years?
So, 150 K plus whatever that was pending as of June 2007.
So next fiscal year, 2009 if USCIS uses the quota 140 K, most or all of the 2007 filings will be cleared. If not EB3 I, definitely EB2 I and C, EB3 ROW will be cleared.
Depending on new filings, EB3 I might retrogress but retrogression might come within 3-4 years instead of current 8 years.
I strongly believe, beginning Jan 2010, dates for EB2 (I and C) will move forward heaps and bounds followed by EB3 ROW.
Good analysis.
Additions: from all current categories - may be 25 K in 2 years?
This is the key stat here. It all depends on how many apps that are in the current category now get filed in the next few years. If there are no more new EB applicants, we should see all pending apps to get approved in a year or two max. The 4 current categories now are EB1 ROW, EB1 India/China and EB2 ROW. If there are 140K apps coming in every year from these categories, we'll never see any movement for EB2/EB3. Anybody know the average number of applicants the last few years from these categories? From the recent news, we know that demand for EB1 India and EB1 China has grown substantially. In my opinion, setting a cutoff date for EB1 India/China would be the best thing for USCIS to do now. That will prevent any new visa usage for EB1 India/China and allow EB2 and EB3 categories to catch up.
July 2007 brought in approximately 500K 485 cases.
We do not know how many cases were pending as of June 2007.
Fiscal year 2007-2008 USCIS used over 140K EB VISA numbers (I think it was around 155K).
Fiscal year 2008-2009 USCIS will use atleast 140K EB VISA numbers
so, 500K - 300K = 200K.
Assuming USICS approval rate is 85%; 75K of 500K are denied.
200K - 75K = 125K EB cases pending from the July 2007 cases.
Additions: from all current categories - may be 25 K in 2 years?
So, 150 K plus whatever that was pending as of June 2007.
So next fiscal year, 2009 if USCIS uses the quota 140 K, most or all of the 2007 filings will be cleared. If not EB3 I, definitely EB2 I and C, EB3 ROW will be cleared.
Depending on new filings, EB3 I might retrogress but retrogression might come within 3-4 years instead of current 8 years.
I strongly believe, beginning Jan 2010, dates for EB2 (I and C) will move forward heaps and bounds followed by EB3 ROW.
Good analysis.
Additions: from all current categories - may be 25 K in 2 years?
This is the key stat here. It all depends on how many apps that are in the current category now get filed in the next few years. If there are no more new EB applicants, we should see all pending apps to get approved in a year or two max. The 4 current categories now are EB1 ROW, EB1 India/China and EB2 ROW. If there are 140K apps coming in every year from these categories, we'll never see any movement for EB2/EB3. Anybody know the average number of applicants the last few years from these categories? From the recent news, we know that demand for EB1 India and EB1 China has grown substantially. In my opinion, setting a cutoff date for EB1 India/China would be the best thing for USCIS to do now. That will prevent any new visa usage for EB1 India/China and allow EB2 and EB3 categories to catch up.
more...
CrazyBoys
07-20 04:16 PM
confirmed with Federal Express that submission package was delivered to the Service Center at 9:00am CST on July 2nd 2007.
hair and extreme makeup ideas.
rockstart
08-03 09:36 AM
The only thing that can help us predict Sep bulletin is how many visa # have been used so far from 2009 quota. Since USCIS will be rushing to use up all visa # the quantity can least give us an idea if dates will move few months or few years. USCIS should not have trouble with either since they have so many pre-adjudicated applications to take care of both scenario's. I am pretty optimistic (realistically confident) that there will be a forward movement.
more...
waitingnwaiting
05-31 08:26 AM
(c) Grants- Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor (referred to in this section as the ‘Secretary’) shall establish a partnership grant program to award grants to eligible entities to carry out comprehensive programs to provide education to nurses and create a pipeline to nursing for incumbent ancillary healthcare workers who wish to advance their careers, and to otherwise carry out the purposes of this section.
(d) Eligible Entities- To be eligible to receive a grant under this section an entity shall--
(1) be--
(A) a healthcare entity that is jointly administered by a healthcare employer and a labor union representing the healthcare employees of the employer and that carries out activities using labor management training funds as provided for under section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947 (18 U.S.C. 186(c)(6));
(B) an entity that operates a training program that is jointly administered by--
(i) one or more healthcare providers or facilities, or a trade association of healthcare providers; and
(ii) one or more organizations which represent the interests of direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses and in which the direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses have direct input as to the leadership of the organization; or
(C) a State training partnership program that consists of non-profit organizations that include equal participation from industry, including public or private employers, and labor organizations including joint labor-management training programs, and which may include representatives from local governments, worker investment agency one-stop career centers, community based organizations, community colleges, and accredited schools of nursing; and
(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(e) Additional Requirements for Healthcare Employer Described in Subsection (d)- To be eligible for a grant under this section, a healthcare employer described in subsection (d) shall demonstrate--
(1) an established program within their facility to encourage the retention of existing nurses;
(2) it provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization; and
(3) support for programs funded under this section through 1 or more of the following:
(A) The provision of paid leave time and continued health coverage to incumbent healthcare workers to allow their participation in nursing career ladder programs, including Certified Nurse Assistants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses, and Registered Nurses.
(B) Contributions to a joint labor-management or other jointly administered training fund which administers the program involved.
(C) The provision of paid release time, incentive compensation, or continued health coverage to staff nurses who desire to work full- or part-time in a faculty position.
(D) The provision of paid release time for staff nurses to enable them to obtain a bachelor of science in nursing degree, other advanced nursing degrees, specialty training, or certification program.
(E) The payment of tuition assistance to incumbent healthcare workers.
(f) Other Requirements-
(1) MATCHING REQUIREMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may not make a grant under this section unless the applicant involved agrees, with respect to the costs to be incurred by the applicant in carrying out the program under the grant, to make available non-Federal contributions (in cash or in kind under subparagraph (B)) toward such costs in an amount equal to not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided in the grant. Such contributions may be made directly or through donations from public or private entities, or may be provided through the cash equivalent of paid release time provided to incumbent worker students.
(B) DETERMINATION OF AMOUNT OF NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION- Non-Federal contributions required in subparagraph (A) may be in cash or in kind (including paid release time), fairly evaluated, including equipment or services (and excluding indirect or overhead costs).
(C) SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT- Funds made available under this section shall supplement, and not supplant, resources dedicated by an entity, or other Federal, State, or localfunds available to carry out activities described in this section.
(2) REQUIRED COLLABORATION- Entities carrying out or overseeing programs carried out with assistance provided under this section shall demonstrate collaboration with accredited schools of nursing which may include community colleges and other academic institutions providing associate, bachelor’s, or advanced nursing degree programs or specialty training or certification programs.
(g) Activities- Amounts awarded to an entity under a grant under this section shall be used for the following:
(d) Eligible Entities- To be eligible to receive a grant under this section an entity shall--
(1) be--
(A) a healthcare entity that is jointly administered by a healthcare employer and a labor union representing the healthcare employees of the employer and that carries out activities using labor management training funds as provided for under section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947 (18 U.S.C. 186(c)(6));
(B) an entity that operates a training program that is jointly administered by--
(i) one or more healthcare providers or facilities, or a trade association of healthcare providers; and
(ii) one or more organizations which represent the interests of direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses and in which the direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses have direct input as to the leadership of the organization; or
(C) a State training partnership program that consists of non-profit organizations that include equal participation from industry, including public or private employers, and labor organizations including joint labor-management training programs, and which may include representatives from local governments, worker investment agency one-stop career centers, community based organizations, community colleges, and accredited schools of nursing; and
(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(e) Additional Requirements for Healthcare Employer Described in Subsection (d)- To be eligible for a grant under this section, a healthcare employer described in subsection (d) shall demonstrate--
(1) an established program within their facility to encourage the retention of existing nurses;
(2) it provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization; and
(3) support for programs funded under this section through 1 or more of the following:
(A) The provision of paid leave time and continued health coverage to incumbent healthcare workers to allow their participation in nursing career ladder programs, including Certified Nurse Assistants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses, and Registered Nurses.
(B) Contributions to a joint labor-management or other jointly administered training fund which administers the program involved.
(C) The provision of paid release time, incentive compensation, or continued health coverage to staff nurses who desire to work full- or part-time in a faculty position.
(D) The provision of paid release time for staff nurses to enable them to obtain a bachelor of science in nursing degree, other advanced nursing degrees, specialty training, or certification program.
(E) The payment of tuition assistance to incumbent healthcare workers.
(f) Other Requirements-
(1) MATCHING REQUIREMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may not make a grant under this section unless the applicant involved agrees, with respect to the costs to be incurred by the applicant in carrying out the program under the grant, to make available non-Federal contributions (in cash or in kind under subparagraph (B)) toward such costs in an amount equal to not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided in the grant. Such contributions may be made directly or through donations from public or private entities, or may be provided through the cash equivalent of paid release time provided to incumbent worker students.
(B) DETERMINATION OF AMOUNT OF NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION- Non-Federal contributions required in subparagraph (A) may be in cash or in kind (including paid release time), fairly evaluated, including equipment or services (and excluding indirect or overhead costs).
(C) SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT- Funds made available under this section shall supplement, and not supplant, resources dedicated by an entity, or other Federal, State, or localfunds available to carry out activities described in this section.
(2) REQUIRED COLLABORATION- Entities carrying out or overseeing programs carried out with assistance provided under this section shall demonstrate collaboration with accredited schools of nursing which may include community colleges and other academic institutions providing associate, bachelor’s, or advanced nursing degree programs or specialty training or certification programs.
(g) Activities- Amounts awarded to an entity under a grant under this section shall be used for the following:
hot hot Hair and Makeup Ideas
NKR
05-13 05:30 PM
I am talking about a person (like 485mbe - the one who has posted next to yr post) who has a PD of 2001 ..I am not saying that they should give Eb2's quota to EB3 ..but they should try to pull the category that is worst affected..or atleast give EB3 something ..
my question to you is ..say in the year 2010, would u support a situation where all categories are current or at 1 year difference ...while a particular category (eb3 I in this case) is at 2001 ??.. even if you do ..my feeling is that USCIS will try to pull EB3 - I (if something like above happens)..but then they are just a govt agency ..and in the end they are similar to govt agency in India ..only difference is that maybe little better
can I force them to do something just --No. can I pray for it -- maybe ..should I be ready for it (i.e. Eb3 - still in 2001 - 2002) - definitely !!
actually Eb3 - I should try and see something positive from this (I know it is difficult) ..maybe this long queue may motivate them to work harder or to get additional certifications (as I do ..) ...also, in my case, this delay in GC ..prevented me from buying a house when the prices were at peak ..(there is no doubt ..that had I got GC in 2006 ,..then I would have rushed to buy a house at inflated prices --far away from the city)
Just curious, why are you not porting your PD?. Nowadays Perm takes less than 2 months and with premium, 140 takes a few months.
my question to you is ..say in the year 2010, would u support a situation where all categories are current or at 1 year difference ...while a particular category (eb3 I in this case) is at 2001 ??.. even if you do ..my feeling is that USCIS will try to pull EB3 - I (if something like above happens)..but then they are just a govt agency ..and in the end they are similar to govt agency in India ..only difference is that maybe little better
can I force them to do something just --No. can I pray for it -- maybe ..should I be ready for it (i.e. Eb3 - still in 2001 - 2002) - definitely !!
actually Eb3 - I should try and see something positive from this (I know it is difficult) ..maybe this long queue may motivate them to work harder or to get additional certifications (as I do ..) ...also, in my case, this delay in GC ..prevented me from buying a house when the prices were at peak ..(there is no doubt ..that had I got GC in 2006 ,..then I would have rushed to buy a house at inflated prices --far away from the city)
Just curious, why are you not porting your PD?. Nowadays Perm takes less than 2 months and with premium, 140 takes a few months.
more...
house hair When I did the nude makeup extreme makeup ideas. ideas for hair and
gcseeker2002
12-06 11:58 AM
I was at USCIS this morning, followed every thing you suggested. My IO officer was actually a desi guy.
1) They completely refused to look at the received date, I had my EAD (765) receipt, but the IO said he only cares about the receipt date. I even has the print out from USCIS.gov in which they have mentioned that they will honor the date on which applications were received in the mail room but he did not budge. His argument was " That update is in the over all scheme of things, but for EAD they have specific instruction to follow only the date they entered the data in the system"
2) I was not allowed to see a supervisor, the IO did talk to the supervisor but did not let me see her.
I am probably waiting for the longest here for EAD, my app received on July 2nd at NCS. Called numerous times, sent form 7001, emailed senators twice, 3 infopass appointments, still no progress. I submitted expedite request based on humanitarian grounds last week, have been calling daily to check status of expedite and still remains pending. My case now pending about 157 days. Anything more that I need to do ?
1) They completely refused to look at the received date, I had my EAD (765) receipt, but the IO said he only cares about the receipt date. I even has the print out from USCIS.gov in which they have mentioned that they will honor the date on which applications were received in the mail room but he did not budge. His argument was " That update is in the over all scheme of things, but for EAD they have specific instruction to follow only the date they entered the data in the system"
2) I was not allowed to see a supervisor, the IO did talk to the supervisor but did not let me see her.
I am probably waiting for the longest here for EAD, my app received on July 2nd at NCS. Called numerous times, sent form 7001, emailed senators twice, 3 infopass appointments, still no progress. I submitted expedite request based on humanitarian grounds last week, have been calling daily to check status of expedite and still remains pending. My case now pending about 157 days. Anything more that I need to do ?
tattoo extreme makeup ideas. extreme
Imigrait
05-21 04:44 PM
These processing times are crap. My received date i 140 is July 24 2007 which is not even in this dates, but it got approved on May 5th 2008
can anybody paste here if they see new dates?
PD Jan 24, 2004- EB2
I140 aproved May 5th 2008
RD I140 and 485 concurrent July 24 2007
I agree. My I140 also got approved. See my signature for details.
can anybody paste here if they see new dates?
PD Jan 24, 2004- EB2
I140 aproved May 5th 2008
RD I140 and 485 concurrent July 24 2007
I agree. My I140 also got approved. See my signature for details.
more...
pictures extreme makeup ideas.
laborpains
08-05 12:47 PM
If your application is an SRC then:
call (800) 375 � 5283 then 1-2-1-recpt number-1-1-wait for recorded status-3-4 speak with customer service.
Hi docwa,
Do you know the number for an LIN application?
Thanks!
call (800) 375 � 5283 then 1-2-1-recpt number-1-1-wait for recorded status-3-4 speak with customer service.
Hi docwa,
Do you know the number for an LIN application?
Thanks!
dresses Extreme+makeup+ideas
Jaime
09-22 06:46 PM
Yeah.. what next? shower caps? then groceries? C'mon man. Overdose of anything can be detrimental.
Just conveying a message is not sufficent. It should be the RIGHT message in a proper way. Flowers was good, because it was the first time something like that happened and it was unique.
No, we are not going to abuse this and we won't be sending stuff over and over. But stoppers have a very Specific significance: to educate and differentiate between legal and illegal. A stopper says "Stop the reverse brain drain"...A stopper would pique people's interest becase we are typically lumped in with illegals, and a stopper does not exemplify what illegals are. Illegal immigration's message is: "legalize us and help new guest workers come", our stopper says "We are already legal and are already leaving, fix this before we all leave"
Just conveying a message is not sufficent. It should be the RIGHT message in a proper way. Flowers was good, because it was the first time something like that happened and it was unique.
No, we are not going to abuse this and we won't be sending stuff over and over. But stoppers have a very Specific significance: to educate and differentiate between legal and illegal. A stopper says "Stop the reverse brain drain"...A stopper would pique people's interest becase we are typically lumped in with illegals, and a stopper does not exemplify what illegals are. Illegal immigration's message is: "legalize us and help new guest workers come", our stopper says "We are already legal and are already leaving, fix this before we all leave"
more...
makeup makeup extreme make up.
belmontboy
03-15 10:01 PM
Thank you La_guy and others....
Do they ask me regarding this at the POE? In what forms do I have to fill the info? I am not sure, as one of you suggested, if they ask we will tell them. But does this record appear in their computer screen and if we did not mention to them, will it be treated as another crime?
God please help me , It's THE WORST thing ever I did and been trhu a painful experience
Thank you guys........
Any visa form or I-94 form at POE will contain a section for declaring these.
Yes, you have to indicate. If you don't and they findout it would constitute perjury leading to revocation and possibly complicate your life further.
Do they ask me regarding this at the POE? In what forms do I have to fill the info? I am not sure, as one of you suggested, if they ask we will tell them. But does this record appear in their computer screen and if we did not mention to them, will it be treated as another crime?
God please help me , It's THE WORST thing ever I did and been trhu a painful experience
Thank you guys........
Any visa form or I-94 form at POE will contain a section for declaring these.
Yes, you have to indicate. If you don't and they findout it would constitute perjury leading to revocation and possibly complicate your life further.
girlfriend at the extreme make up of
hebron
06-30 12:43 PM
Only when the democratic party weakens things can move forward for the skilled (EB- GC ) folks. Democratic party is never for skilled immigratiion, it is all for illegal masses only.
Agree 100%. Atleast when Bush was in office there were bills introduced that encouraged skilled immigration Eg: Those who have been around for a while would remember the Cornyn-Kyl bill from 2005.
Everybody likes to talk about the Clinton era, but don't forget that Republicans had majority then. So we may see good things happen after the November 2010 elections if dems lose majority in both house and senate. And it will be good for Mr.Bamster to govern from the center going forward than to hang out with the far-left, may even fetch him another 4 years.
Agree 100%. Atleast when Bush was in office there were bills introduced that encouraged skilled immigration Eg: Those who have been around for a while would remember the Cornyn-Kyl bill from 2005.
Everybody likes to talk about the Clinton era, but don't forget that Republicans had majority then. So we may see good things happen after the November 2010 elections if dems lose majority in both house and senate. And it will be good for Mr.Bamster to govern from the center going forward than to hang out with the far-left, may even fetch him another 4 years.
hairstyles extreme makeup ideas.
bkr
08-26 02:07 PM
Thank you, I will try this approach.
Go to the Trenton DMV . Take your ORIGINAL receipt and a letter from your employer . They will give you extension for 240 days . I got it done in May 2007.The draft of the employer's letter is as follows
To,
The Motor Vehicle Commission
I hereby certify that ________________ is currently employed by ____________ and has been employed since ______________.
I certify that, on ______________, I filed an H1B petition extension and application for extension of stay on behalf of this individual (see attached receipt notice from the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)).
Pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20), this individual is authorized to continue employment with ____________ for a period not to exceed 240 days beginning on the date of the expiration of the authorized period of stay (as indicated on the immigration documentation).
I further certify that if I receive that the USCIS had denied the application prior to the 240 day period and if <name, Driver license number>, ceases to be employed by ________________ during the 240 day period, I will notify the Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC), in writing as soon as practicable. I will send such notice to:
Legal & Regulatory Affairs Unit
Motor Vehicle Commission
PO Box 162
Trenton, NJ 08666-0162
Sincerely,
Signature of
individual certifying
the information
Print Name & Title
Go to the Trenton DMV . Take your ORIGINAL receipt and a letter from your employer . They will give you extension for 240 days . I got it done in May 2007.The draft of the employer's letter is as follows
To,
The Motor Vehicle Commission
I hereby certify that ________________ is currently employed by ____________ and has been employed since ______________.
I certify that, on ______________, I filed an H1B petition extension and application for extension of stay on behalf of this individual (see attached receipt notice from the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)).
Pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(b)(20), this individual is authorized to continue employment with ____________ for a period not to exceed 240 days beginning on the date of the expiration of the authorized period of stay (as indicated on the immigration documentation).
I further certify that if I receive that the USCIS had denied the application prior to the 240 day period and if <name, Driver license number>, ceases to be employed by ________________ during the 240 day period, I will notify the Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC), in writing as soon as practicable. I will send such notice to:
Legal & Regulatory Affairs Unit
Motor Vehicle Commission
PO Box 162
Trenton, NJ 08666-0162
Sincerely,
Signature of
individual certifying
the information
Print Name & Title
gcpadmavyuh
03-17 12:06 PM
Sahaayam:
My personal advice - you should consult with an experienced attorney with the specifics of your case. This is not a very typical case, and what you hear on this forum may not be very useful for you.
Gurus,
Need your valuable advice on this serious issue. Involved in shoplifting case, got arrested and plead guilty. Served the community service, and paid fine. Got the �Court Disposition Document� which states that I am all clear. My status is I-485 pending and have EAD, AP documents.
1. Is it safe to travel to India and come back on AP?
2. What are the possible chances that visa officer may not let me into the USA?
3. Do I need to carry any letters from my criminal attorney explaining the situation?
4. Any one in similar situation, please update me on this?
5. Please list of documents I need to carry during my travel
Please reply and post your valuable opinions/suggestions/advices.
Appreciate all your inputs.
Have a nice day!!!
Thank you,
Sahaayam.
My personal advice - you should consult with an experienced attorney with the specifics of your case. This is not a very typical case, and what you hear on this forum may not be very useful for you.
Gurus,
Need your valuable advice on this serious issue. Involved in shoplifting case, got arrested and plead guilty. Served the community service, and paid fine. Got the �Court Disposition Document� which states that I am all clear. My status is I-485 pending and have EAD, AP documents.
1. Is it safe to travel to India and come back on AP?
2. What are the possible chances that visa officer may not let me into the USA?
3. Do I need to carry any letters from my criminal attorney explaining the situation?
4. Any one in similar situation, please update me on this?
5. Please list of documents I need to carry during my travel
Please reply and post your valuable opinions/suggestions/advices.
Appreciate all your inputs.
Have a nice day!!!
Thank you,
Sahaayam.
jsb
03-19 02:09 PM
[QUOTE=sri1309;...Isnt it a shame that a greencard holder cannot get his wife immediately wheras H1s and others can. They have to be told very loudly... .[/QUOTE]
This favours temporary workers on H1, L1 etc. An H1/L1 spouse can move to the US easily, but not that of a GC holder. If you want to bring out this "discrimination", that would mean to discontinue H4 visas, as seeminlgly it is a discrimination against a GC holder. Is that you are looking for?
This favours temporary workers on H1, L1 etc. An H1/L1 spouse can move to the US easily, but not that of a GC holder. If you want to bring out this "discrimination", that would mean to discontinue H4 visas, as seeminlgly it is a discrimination against a GC holder. Is that you are looking for?