akred
07-07 12:57 PM
Rated 5 stars.
wallpaper 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLS 55 AMG
RayP
12-11 02:31 AM
wow !! Good... so you too applied after your EAD had expired... and you continued to work on H1. That gives me a good feeling... thanks. Can you share your situation a little more (or I can give my email seperately). I was also wanting to know if you ae aware whether EAD can be applied from outside the US, just in case I had to do that...
optimystic
04-06 11:41 PM
there is no difference between using AC-21 or not. When you get your GC, the general line of thinking is that you stay with the current sponsoring employer for 6 months or more. AC-21 is merely a way of changing your 'current sponsoring employer'.
I can't say how much weight this statment holds...
I mean, there are ongoing discussions in other posts about some employers reluctant to accept EAD holders (willing to use AC21) since they may have to do some amount of 'sponsorship' for such people and suggestions that these people claim that they don't need any 'sponsorship' theoretically from the employers ...they can file EAD extensions themselves.....
In light of that it seems as if once you invoke AC21 you can choose to support your I-485 status & EAD, attorneys etc completely yourself, and thus the concept of 'sposoring employer' totally vanishes.
Its possible that USCIS can still hold you to the (diluted)intent of "continuing to work in the same job role as originally claimed in I-140/I-485" for a general period of time after getting GC, but not necessarily stick with the same current employer. The AC21 invokers already cut themselves off from the original sponsor....doesn't make much sense to force them to stick to current employer, who may or may not have sponsored anything at all towards the employee's GC.
So AC21 invokers get a degree of freedom ( --can't tell what level of freedom though, with the impending restrictions possibly in future in AC21 -- ) regarding showing the *original intent* after getting GC.
And since people stuck with same original sponsoring employer and get GC while still with them, can not invoke AC21 after getting GC to port their "original intent", it seems they would continue to be stuck with the same employer for 6-12 more months (unless fired/laid off of course, in which case one becomes a free bird :) )
[Not sure if I put my line of thiking properly in the above paragraphs...if you get confused, please ignore the post :) . It would definitely have been worse, if I tried to speak , rather that write this :D )
I can't say how much weight this statment holds...
I mean, there are ongoing discussions in other posts about some employers reluctant to accept EAD holders (willing to use AC21) since they may have to do some amount of 'sponsorship' for such people and suggestions that these people claim that they don't need any 'sponsorship' theoretically from the employers ...they can file EAD extensions themselves.....
In light of that it seems as if once you invoke AC21 you can choose to support your I-485 status & EAD, attorneys etc completely yourself, and thus the concept of 'sposoring employer' totally vanishes.
Its possible that USCIS can still hold you to the (diluted)intent of "continuing to work in the same job role as originally claimed in I-140/I-485" for a general period of time after getting GC, but not necessarily stick with the same current employer. The AC21 invokers already cut themselves off from the original sponsor....doesn't make much sense to force them to stick to current employer, who may or may not have sponsored anything at all towards the employee's GC.
So AC21 invokers get a degree of freedom ( --can't tell what level of freedom though, with the impending restrictions possibly in future in AC21 -- ) regarding showing the *original intent* after getting GC.
And since people stuck with same original sponsoring employer and get GC while still with them, can not invoke AC21 after getting GC to port their "original intent", it seems they would continue to be stuck with the same employer for 6-12 more months (unless fired/laid off of course, in which case one becomes a free bird :) )
[Not sure if I put my line of thiking properly in the above paragraphs...if you get confused, please ignore the post :) . It would definitely have been worse, if I tried to speak , rather that write this :D )
2011 2005 Mercedes-Benz SLR Mclaren
kumarc123
01-16 09:36 AM
We all know about the CIR in 2009. We all need to be assertive in our joint measures, please call Lofgreen's office.
more...
brav
07-31 11:20 AM
After going through all this , now we are hearing discussions that it is safe to maintain a H1B, (just) in case the 485 gets denied.
I for one would take my chances and switch from H1B to EAD.
I for one would take my chances and switch from H1B to EAD.
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
raj2007
02-18 07:12 PM
i did. different lawyers said different thing so i do not know who is right and who is wrong.
should i make an infopass appointment and idscusss it with them?
I will better wait for my I-485 approval than taking the risk. Infopass will not help much b/c everything will depend on Port of entry.
should i make an infopass appointment and idscusss it with them?
I will better wait for my I-485 approval than taking the risk. Infopass will not help much b/c everything will depend on Port of entry.
2010 MERCEDES BENZ B200 CDI Sport
delhis_007
12-28 11:12 AM
Hi,
I am in a similar position and have decided to go back to school in USA. My PD is Jan 2004 EB2, and I am sure I am not going to hit the jackpot before Sep 07. Is there any possible way I can save my GC?
Thanks in advance.
Vijay
I am in a similar position and have decided to go back to school in USA. My PD is Jan 2004 EB2, and I am sure I am not going to hit the jackpot before Sep 07. Is there any possible way I can save my GC?
Thanks in advance.
Vijay
more...
aristotle
08-08 01:19 PM
San Jose. Courteous, but curt.
hair 2005 Mercedes-Benz AClass
travellertvr
03-22 03:15 PM
smuggymba,
Old I-94 expiration date was January 3, 2010, and new I-94 started from October 18, 2010.
Old I-94 expiration date was January 3, 2010, and new I-94 started from October 18, 2010.
more...
gcnirvana
05-14 09:03 PM
This is a EB3 - General Poll across all countries
Can you create one for EB2, please? Thanks!
Can you create one for EB2, please? Thanks!
hot 16.200 CHF 2005 Mercedes Benz
mahathi
05-11 05:41 PM
Hi,
I have attended for H1b renual in toronto on the 2nd of May. The VO decided to do some additional review on the application. He took the Cleint letter, vendor letter and I129. Still havent heard anything from the consulate.
I am not sure if I should stay in Toronto or travel to India. I have taken only single entry visa to canada.
So, do you know if there is a canadian consulate in Hyderabad. If there is one, how much time do they take to issue a visitor visa.
Also, most importantly, how much time does it take for the 221g processing.
I would really appreciate if someone could share their knowledge.
Thanks
I have attended for H1b renual in toronto on the 2nd of May. The VO decided to do some additional review on the application. He took the Cleint letter, vendor letter and I129. Still havent heard anything from the consulate.
I am not sure if I should stay in Toronto or travel to India. I have taken only single entry visa to canada.
So, do you know if there is a canadian consulate in Hyderabad. If there is one, how much time do they take to issue a visitor visa.
Also, most importantly, how much time does it take for the 221g processing.
I would really appreciate if someone could share their knowledge.
Thanks
more...
house 2005 Mercedes-Benz Bionic
GCard_Dream
09-15 04:31 PM
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs.
Why do you think most of the minorities vote for democrats? One of the reason, amongst various others, is that people think of democrats as pro-immigration party. In fact that's one of the reason I like dems.
Because of this 9/11 case, everyone is kind of worried about the security and it makes sense. Americans want to get a handle on who is coming in and who is going out and I can't and won't argue against that. Everyone wants to live without the fear of terrorism and that's understandable.
To make long story short, there are plenty of people who will vote based on what the candidate's standing is on the immigration. In fact, that's precisely the reason house didn't bring up the immi bill this year because they didn't want to have their candidates vote one way or the other on the immigration issue and have to explain that to voters in couple of months.
Everybody knows about legals and illegals. Will it gain any grounds for them to get big vote this november is important. The SKIL bill or any legal provisions in the CIR will not fetch even a single vote for them. In fact it MAY reduce the vote from anti immigrant groups if they add anything for legals.
Why do you think most of the minorities vote for democrats? One of the reason, amongst various others, is that people think of democrats as pro-immigration party. In fact that's one of the reason I like dems.
Because of this 9/11 case, everyone is kind of worried about the security and it makes sense. Americans want to get a handle on who is coming in and who is going out and I can't and won't argue against that. Everyone wants to live without the fear of terrorism and that's understandable.
To make long story short, there are plenty of people who will vote based on what the candidate's standing is on the immigration. In fact, that's precisely the reason house didn't bring up the immi bill this year because they didn't want to have their candidates vote one way or the other on the immigration issue and have to explain that to voters in couple of months.
Everybody knows about legals and illegals. Will it gain any grounds for them to get big vote this november is important. The SKIL bill or any legal provisions in the CIR will not fetch even a single vote for them. In fact it MAY reduce the vote from anti immigrant groups if they add anything for legals.
tattoo 2005 Mercedes-Benz Bluetec
makemygc
07-11 10:56 PM
Hi Guys,
Based on some recommendations, I have put together the enclosed pamplet.
I am NOT suggesting that this is the pamplet we should use but it could be a starting point. We need to generate more ideas like this to keep momentum going.
http://www.geocities.com/singhsa3/Ghandhigiri.doc
Take a look at it and make suggestions
Great job singhsa with poem and the template. My suggestion. If you can make a color template with gandhiji at the back in light background and your poem on the top.
Based on some recommendations, I have put together the enclosed pamplet.
I am NOT suggesting that this is the pamplet we should use but it could be a starting point. We need to generate more ideas like this to keep momentum going.
http://www.geocities.com/singhsa3/Ghandhigiri.doc
Take a look at it and make suggestions
Great job singhsa with poem and the template. My suggestion. If you can make a color template with gandhiji at the back in light background and your poem on the top.
more...
pictures 2008 Mercedes-enz A170 5 Door
whattodo
07-27 02:01 PM
If NSC had put all applications from July 2nd to July 17th on hold.
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
How stupid a person has to be to even ask a question like this???
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
How stupid a person has to be to even ask a question like this???
dresses 2005 Mercedes-Benz SL-class
anurakt
01-03 11:13 AM
I pledge $120 every month as soon as it is available......
more...
makeup 14.200 2005 Mercedes Benz
anandrajesh
08-15 01:46 PM
Absolutely right, how otherwise do you explain that they issued card production for people with PD's in 2004, (Dates not current in June) on July 2nd and in an hour and then said the visas are unavailable.
NO FIFO whatsoever.
They just saved themselves by retracting the VB of JULY, or else they would have faced lawsuits, and investigation which would have shown all irregularities and fraud.
One of my buddies got his GC approved yesterday and his Priority Date is June 2005, EB2 India. I am here waiting since 2004 March to file for my I485. There are no methods to USCIS Madness.
NO FIFO whatsoever.
They just saved themselves by retracting the VB of JULY, or else they would have faced lawsuits, and investigation which would have shown all irregularities and fraud.
One of my buddies got his GC approved yesterday and his Priority Date is June 2005, EB2 India. I am here waiting since 2004 March to file for my I485. There are no methods to USCIS Madness.
girlfriend MERCEDES BENZ B200 CDI Sport
dionysus
01-29 06:19 PM
True. We are all turning amateur lawyers by now. Our resumes should have a line saying experience includes, but not limited to, decoding complex USCIS regulations, preparing legal communications etc.
Able/willing!!
Look how EB process affected our life.. Labor certification terminology now feels so natural to us
Able/willing!!
Look how EB process affected our life.. Labor certification terminology now feels so natural to us
hairstyles 2005 Mercedes Benz Aclass.
Kodi
06-03 09:16 AM
How does it work?
According to the list an Accountant position requires a STEM discipline in Computer Science.
So an MS in Computer Science falls under STEM but an MS in Accounting does not?
Could some please verify this?
According to the list an Accountant position requires a STEM discipline in Computer Science.
So an MS in Computer Science falls under STEM but an MS in Accounting does not?
Could some please verify this?
snathan
03-03 01:29 PM
Well, I am not a fake profile. What happened to us is real. That is what the guy told us. He was basing his decision in the fact that the original company which filed for the LC was no longer in business and that they created a new company. Reality is that they only changed the company's name but they still do the same and have same employees. We believe he didn't want to ask his new partner about signing the I-140 petition. That is our guess.
Honestly, we disconnected ourselves from the whole thing, we were really depressed that after waiting for 5 years we finally got the LC approved and then we got that response. That is why I am looking for help in the forum, I really disconnected myself from the whole process and was not sure how have things changed since in terms of new immigration policies etc etc.
What ever it is...you need to file I-140 within 180 days of approvel. Its two years and gone.
Honestly, we disconnected ourselves from the whole thing, we were really depressed that after waiting for 5 years we finally got the LC approved and then we got that response. That is why I am looking for help in the forum, I really disconnected myself from the whole process and was not sure how have things changed since in terms of new immigration policies etc etc.
What ever it is...you need to file I-140 within 180 days of approvel. Its two years and gone.
arnab221
03-18 10:32 AM
Hello :
Does the core team who have their boots in Washington have any knowledge of the date when the CIR will be introduced by Mr Kennedy . Days have turned to weeks then to months and we have been just hearing stories of the bill getting introduced "Next Week ".The press is spilling gallons of ink and the onliners are creating Gigabytes of forum data on Immigration Legislation and its outcomes, but nothing seems to come out of Capitol Hill , they are just going around in circles .Are they actually going to do something this year or is it just another eyewash ?
Does the core team who have their boots in Washington have any knowledge of the date when the CIR will be introduced by Mr Kennedy . Days have turned to weeks then to months and we have been just hearing stories of the bill getting introduced "Next Week ".The press is spilling gallons of ink and the onliners are creating Gigabytes of forum data on Immigration Legislation and its outcomes, but nothing seems to come out of Capitol Hill , they are just going around in circles .Are they actually going to do something this year or is it just another eyewash ?
No comments:
Post a Comment