sanjay
08-29 12:29 PM
I saw many 2nd July Polls but doesn't have full proof information.
So thaught creating New Poll.
Hope everyone will participate in the Poll.
where is the poll? Any way there more than 5 - 6 polls as of now and there is no way to find a full proof information. We all do more speculations and analysis. So, no need to create new threads with these polls. We got many.
So thaught creating New Poll.
Hope everyone will participate in the Poll.
where is the poll? Any way there more than 5 - 6 polls as of now and there is no way to find a full proof information. We all do more speculations and analysis. So, no need to create new threads with these polls. We got many.
wallpaper pictures Amor Hilton who is amor hilton. amor hilton tumblr. amor
pmat
07-17 09:54 AM
This case is complicated as your I485 is already approved. If you refile your wife's I485, it might get rejected.
I would suggest you to not rely on forums and get an expert lawyer's help ASAP. It will be worth it.
I have to apply for my wife as my derivative of 485. My 485 was approved on July 8th 2010. Below is the timeline
July 1st - Applied Wife's 485
July 8th - My 485 was approved
July 13th - Wife's 485 Denied due to outdated forms
July 14th - My H1, Wife's H4 and I-94 Expired
July 19th - Planning on sending a new 485 application for spouse
I'm mainly concerned about two things
1. Is she out of status for 5 days from July 14th to 19th
2. Can I still apply her as a derivative, as my 485 is already approved.
Thank you,
I would suggest you to not rely on forums and get an expert lawyer's help ASAP. It will be worth it.
I have to apply for my wife as my derivative of 485. My 485 was approved on July 8th 2010. Below is the timeline
July 1st - Applied Wife's 485
July 8th - My 485 was approved
July 13th - Wife's 485 Denied due to outdated forms
July 14th - My H1, Wife's H4 and I-94 Expired
July 19th - Planning on sending a new 485 application for spouse
I'm mainly concerned about two things
1. Is she out of status for 5 days from July 14th to 19th
2. Can I still apply her as a derivative, as my 485 is already approved.
Thank you,
gee_see
04-15 02:22 PM
9 Years, with one employer!!! immmm..
If the employer is good it is ok, what if not?
I don’t know how many of our most productive life time is going to be stagnated because of this GC wait.
Lunch Time (EST), on the lighter note….
Tourists in the Museum of Natural History ...
...were marveling at the dinosaur bones. One of them asks the blonde guard, 'Can you tell me how old the dinosaur bones are?'
The guard replies, 'They are 3 million, four years, and six months old.'
'That's an awfully exact number,' says the tourist. 'How do you know their age so precisely?'
The guard answers, 'Well, the dinosaur bones were three million years old when I started working here, and that was four and a half years ago!'
My employer is horrible to work with. But after hearing horror stories about other consulting companies i decided to stick with known devil... Moreover i did not want to take up permanent job assignment on h1 due to layoff fear...
If the employer is good it is ok, what if not?
I don’t know how many of our most productive life time is going to be stagnated because of this GC wait.
Lunch Time (EST), on the lighter note….
Tourists in the Museum of Natural History ...
...were marveling at the dinosaur bones. One of them asks the blonde guard, 'Can you tell me how old the dinosaur bones are?'
The guard replies, 'They are 3 million, four years, and six months old.'
'That's an awfully exact number,' says the tourist. 'How do you know their age so precisely?'
The guard answers, 'Well, the dinosaur bones were three million years old when I started working here, and that was four and a half years ago!'
My employer is horrible to work with. But after hearing horror stories about other consulting companies i decided to stick with known devil... Moreover i did not want to take up permanent job assignment on h1 due to layoff fear...
2011 amor hilton and john hock.
desibechara
08-02 12:15 AM
depends on what the job required per your labor cert. If it said 2 years, then even if you have 36 years of industry experience you need experience letters for only 2 years.
If you are going for EB2 and your LC says MS+1 year of experience, you need experience for 1 year. If your LC said BS+5 years you need 5 years worth. If your LC said the job requires expertise in VC++, your experience letter must mention VC++.
It is EB3 (PD 2001) and Lc did say that 3 years of experience and my first job almost have 2 years 8-9 months of experience. So I was thinking that USISC should not mind for letter of eperience for 3 remaining months..Current job ..I have been working now for 6.5 years....
Does it matter..Do you think it really matters..
let me know..otherwise I really have to worry about RFE
DB
If you are going for EB2 and your LC says MS+1 year of experience, you need experience for 1 year. If your LC said BS+5 years you need 5 years worth. If your LC said the job requires expertise in VC++, your experience letter must mention VC++.
It is EB3 (PD 2001) and Lc did say that 3 years of experience and my first job almost have 2 years 8-9 months of experience. So I was thinking that USISC should not mind for letter of eperience for 3 remaining months..Current job ..I have been working now for 6.5 years....
Does it matter..Do you think it really matters..
let me know..otherwise I really have to worry about RFE
DB
more...
royus77
07-01 03:11 PM
Anyone willing to join the lawsuit should be willing to join by giving full information about themselves and about their application. Yesterday core members asked this question on a thread and only one person out of thousands of people who visited the site said they are interested. Let us see who all are truely willing to join this lawsuit? It is very easy to annonymously post such messages, but when people cannot even give their corect email id , name and phone number in their profile I highly doubt a lawsuit will be possible.
Let us see on this thread how many members are willing to join a lawsuit?
Mostly of the people just think its just giving the annonymous name,phone numbers and getting the benefit of the decision .Please read these point and understand carefully before jumping.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf
Let us see on this thread how many members are willing to join a lawsuit?
Mostly of the people just think its just giving the annonymous name,phone numbers and getting the benefit of the decision .Please read these point and understand carefully before jumping.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf
vedicman
04-28 08:58 AM
The Republican targets for compromise are the usual suspects � Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, George LeMieux of Florida, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Dick Lugar of Indiana � all of whom have expressed willingness to negotiate on immigration. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is planning to meet with several of these GOP senators this week to see whether there�s hope for a bipartisan immigration bill.
Democrats have no specific timetable for immigration, but the next recess � a natural deadline for legislation � begins May 28.
Read more: Arizona jumpstarts immigration bill - Kasie Hunt - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36379.html#ixzz0mP4RlzB8)
Democrats have no specific timetable for immigration, but the next recess � a natural deadline for legislation � begins May 28.
Read more: Arizona jumpstarts immigration bill - Kasie Hunt - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36379.html#ixzz0mP4RlzB8)
more...
JunRN
07-18 10:29 AM
I discussed this to a lawyer. He said that even if I file in August, it will still be accepted since I am qualified to apply in July. This is a bit confusing.
I was thinking of looking for new employer which already has all the paperworks done (10 + 30 days). These are valid until 180 days. I hope to find one so that I can file this July.
I was thinking of looking for new employer which already has all the paperworks done (10 + 30 days). These are valid until 180 days. I hope to find one so that I can file this July.
2010 amor hilton john hock. amor
Since1997
08-13 11:02 AM
Here is the update we were expecting to see on Aug 10th and now available (be first one to see): http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes081007.pdf
I-140(8/3) I-485(8/3)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/30 6/26
I-140(8/10) I-485(8/10)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/31 6/28
NSC no progress at all
TSC 1day for I-140 & 2days fro I-485
PS: None of the centers entered in Jul 2nd....can't imagine the delays after they enter Jul 2nd....mass number of applications....
I-140(8/3) I-485(8/3)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/30 6/26
I-140(8/10) I-485(8/10)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/31 6/28
NSC no progress at all
TSC 1day for I-140 & 2days fro I-485
PS: None of the centers entered in Jul 2nd....can't imagine the delays after they enter Jul 2nd....mass number of applications....
more...
t4930pd
10-20 01:27 PM
4th grader at USCIS decides the future of highly educated people! What a "JOKE".
hair mike fuentes amor hilton.
Googler
02-14 04:24 PM
"Based on a review of the facts and bedrock principles of administrative agency law, the Court finds that USCIS�s name check requirement has
(1) never been authorized by Congress;
(2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and
(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions..."
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the �fingerprint check� described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
(1) never been authorized by Congress;
(2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and
(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions..."
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
What a fabulous ruling this is.
One question for Lazycis:
# (3) actually reads "(3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions for naturalization, particularly because Plaintiffs have already undergone a name check in order to achieve LPR status and will clear the �fingerprint check� described in the Memorandum of January 25, 2008.10 The fingerprint check will show whether an LPR who is applying for naturalization has had any contact with the criminal justice system that would warrant denial of the petition."
As far as I can tell even (1) and (2) only apply to Naturalization applicants.
So the question of the hour is: are (1) and (2) true for AOS cases? I am asking this question because to argue a case for compelling recapture you need an AOS version of Baylson's ruling + the Galvez-Howerton decision (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223315&postcount=121). Only then can you say that there was affirmative misconduct in 2003 and hence compel recapture.
more...
Bodran
05-25 02:04 PM
For some reason mine went the other way ,from Texas to Nebraska. It should have been in process at Texas but now Nebraska has retrogressed me about 5 months to March 10 2007 with my I-140 reeipt date of Aug. 16 2007. Can I complain about this? If so where?
Type : EB3
RD to TSC : Aug 16 th 2007
Concurent Filing : NO
Tranfered to NSC : April 7 th 2008
Last Update : April 15 th 2008
Current Status : This case is now pending at the office to which it was transfered
Approval Date : Pending
Type : EB3
RD to TSC : Aug 16 th 2007
Concurent Filing : NO
Tranfered to NSC : April 7 th 2008
Last Update : April 15 th 2008
Current Status : This case is now pending at the office to which it was transfered
Approval Date : Pending
hot mike fuentes amor hilton.
NikNikon
August 14th, 2006, 11:01 PM
D15, you may find some useful info in this thread as well: http://www.dphoto.us/forum/showthread.php?t=5886