hpandey
07-11 01:59 PM
Thanks. Any input in this tough time is really appreciated. All I am trying to get is , any clue , any information to see the light at the end of this Long Dark Tunnel of EB-3.
Currently the tunnel is closed at the end for EB-3 :mad: and the only way out I see is for us EB-3 folks to dig through. No one cares about EB-3 I folks. That's the way I see it.
Currently the tunnel is closed at the end for EB-3 :mad: and the only way out I see is for us EB-3 folks to dig through. No one cares about EB-3 I folks. That's the way I see it.
wallpaper Shakira #39;She Wolf#39; is the lead
nomi
12-12 04:19 PM
USCIS is not a legislative body, they cannot pass a law. The Congress does. In order to change any existing laws Congress has to pass it and USCIS just implements it. So I do not think meeting USCIS will help. BTW what is DOS ?
I know USCIS is not legislative body and they can`t pass law either. But we need to know what USCIS can do for us to give us temp. relief. We need to know what are under their control. They do lot of rules with out going into Congress. So its nothing to lose to ask them what they can do for us without any bill. We will not lose if they say "They can`t do anything" but this will give us some hope that we did our best and also contact to USCIS too.
I know USCIS is not legislative body and they can`t pass law either. But we need to know what USCIS can do for us to give us temp. relief. We need to know what are under their control. They do lot of rules with out going into Congress. So its nothing to lose to ask them what they can do for us without any bill. We will not lose if they say "They can`t do anything" but this will give us some hope that we did our best and also contact to USCIS too.
Eveready
07-05 02:44 PM
I totally agree we need money to run this website and I also agree that we Desis never pay for quality and never ever for service.
Guess it is time to change. Make it a paid website and only Members should be allowed to post queries etc. Putting advertisments on the site too is not a bad idea and I think we work some thing out.
Guess it is time to change. Make it a paid website and only Members should be allowed to post queries etc. Putting advertisments on the site too is not a bad idea and I think we work some thing out.
2011 Shakira#39;s She Wolf
grinch
03-10 07:31 PM
... OMG...
I'm so pissed at myself. I didn't have time to add anything I wanted, and now my volley looks like crap. But eh, I'm a newb so oh well. I'm gonna keep working on it and posting it in D&D.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
I'm so pissed at myself. I didn't have time to add anything I wanted, and now my volley looks like crap. But eh, I'm a newb so oh well. I'm gonna keep working on it and posting it in D&D.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
more...
pappu
01-16 12:10 PM
I just updated the profile. Could you please confirm?
Sorry about making a commitment for only @ 20.00.
Thanks again for all the effort done by IV Core.
Thanks.
We confirm your contribution commitment for $20 per month. Each $20 is important for us.
Sorry about making a commitment for only @ 20.00.
Thanks again for all the effort done by IV Core.
Thanks.
We confirm your contribution commitment for $20 per month. Each $20 is important for us.
sukhwinderd
02-09 08:43 AM
I would like to join, I live in Orlando area... do you happen to hear from other interested members?
most likely one of my friends will join. so 3 of us till now. i am trying to check with my other friends.
most likely one of my friends will join. so 3 of us till now. i am trying to check with my other friends.
more...
EB2_Jun03_dude
02-21 05:11 PM
I-485: EB2 India with PD June 2003
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
2010 Monday night, Shakira attended
logiclife
04-20 07:05 PM
Hi,
Is there something you need to show for entry at the event ?
Sorry if it is a dumb question..:confused: .I just joined today..
- Naresh
No you dont need to show anything. Just be there on time...
Is there something you need to show for entry at the event ?
Sorry if it is a dumb question..:confused: .I just joined today..
- Naresh
No you dont need to show anything. Just be there on time...
more...
bheemi123
10-03 01:25 PM
Hi friends,
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
u can be in L1 status..just go out of the contry and come back in L1b status..u r status will be autoamtically be L1 again...however u have to remember that u r h1b will be wasted...my friend did same thing last week..
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
u can be in L1 status..just go out of the contry and come back in L1b status..u r status will be autoamtically be L1 again...however u have to remember that u r h1b will be wasted...my friend did same thing last week..
hair The Shakira She Wolf video
GCWish
03-09 07:31 PM
It is the right time to do some concrete action to bring out the facts that
1. Approving the EBs would not add to any significant shift in employment demographics, given that all these people are in the US already
2. The benefit that this would bring on the demand side esp.housing market
Let�s start a letter campaign to the attention of the Obama administration and the USCIS secretary Janet Napolitano
1. Approving the EBs would not add to any significant shift in employment demographics, given that all these people are in the US already
2. The benefit that this would bring on the demand side esp.housing market
Let�s start a letter campaign to the attention of the Obama administration and the USCIS secretary Janet Napolitano
more...
vgayalu
07-24 08:53 AM
I have a same idea like Mr Rpatel. I wrote a Personal message to our moderator Logiclife. But I failed to explain effectively about this to Logiclife.
Now I got some support from Rpatel. This is the very important and bst solution for time being. Rpatel can you send a personal message to logiclife with more clear picture please.
Vgayalu.
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
Now I got some support from Rpatel. This is the very important and bst solution for time being. Rpatel can you send a personal message to logiclife with more clear picture please.
Vgayalu.
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
hot “The she-wolf is a woman who
satishku_2000
08-15 04:30 PM
What do EB cutoff dates in Sept VB mean? All eligible for filing AOS did in July/Aug. Does it mean that USCIS will be giving visa (approving GC) to those within the new cutoff dates?
Some people from BEC are still waiting for their labor approvals , Some of those people should be able to file for 140/485 if their PDs fall in the cut off dates . Hope USCIS will exhaust the numbers in this year by approving 485s for eligible people .
Some people from BEC are still waiting for their labor approvals , Some of those people should be able to file for 140/485 if their PDs fall in the cut off dates . Hope USCIS will exhaust the numbers in this year by approving 485s for eligible people .
more...
house Shakiras much awaited She Wolf
nawlinspoboys
09-28 08:39 AM
Good writeup on your brother's experience in India. My brother went to India (for a visit) after 8 years in USA. What he found was great stuff and real bad stuff going on at the same time. Good stuff includes amazing money and prosperity coming to middle and lower middle class of India(ofcourse the poor are left out of all this and suffer). 10 years back middle and lower middle class kids were suffering and getting a manufacturing or civil job for 1000 Rs (after reference from a company insider). Now they get 30 or 40 thousand to begin with. Thats amazin. Downside is lots of cars, tremendous amount of pollution, congestion and same bureaucracy as before. The infrastucture is getting worse and no relief in sight. Also Indian professionals complain about long hours to support US clients. They have no normal family life. Most people stay in the offices till 10 in the night. So I guess it all depends on what each one of us wants. Returning to India is a good idea if you dont mind all the bad things. If you want to live a easy life stick to USA. Ofcourse you will need to diversify in career in coming years.
DONT EVEN GET ME STARTED ON EU..THEY SUCK A**!!!! TOO LIBERAL (AND RACIST) FOR THEIR OWN DEMISE!!
DONT EVEN GET ME STARTED ON EU..THEY SUCK A**!!!! TOO LIBERAL (AND RACIST) FOR THEIR OWN DEMISE!!
tattoo Shakira : J#39;ai ecrit She Wolf
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
more...
pictures Album she wolf bonus tracks
gcgonewild
06-11 03:22 PM
Sent to NJ Lawmakers
dresses of New Album quot;She Wolfquot; -
like_watching_paint_dry
01-19 04:26 PM
Of course. Judges are the ones who interpret the laws. Officers just do what they are instructed to do. My point was just out of curiosity, how I think this law is being interpreted.
But of course. My opinion is not only not to argue with officers, but don't even talk to them. When I feel that officer wants some "conversation" with me, my favorite response is "sorry officer, me no understand, no speak english". period. Smile to his face, keep saying "sorry". Don't show any extra document - just only what is required, nothing extra. Officer can be asking any questions, just hand him business card of your lawyer, say "my lawyer, talk him". as worse English you will use, as better it will be for you. My experience.
When I first entered United States I was kept at secondary check for 4 hours (1999, IAD, Virginia). They kept asking me all kinda questions, it was no end. Finally I got pissed, I said "Sorry, I don't speak English good" and started playing with them. I took my dictionary and starting looking up every word. My next answer took 5 minutes. In next 5 minutes a woman walked to me, handed my documents and said "Welcome to America".
LOL. That's an interesting approach. I've heard of a story where a hispanic dude who had a beer breath actually get out of a breathalyzer test and eventually get off a potential DUI conviction because of lack of evidence. His excuse was he could not understand the instructions the officer was giving...
"no comprende..."
"put your mouth here and phoo phoo ..."
"no comprende..."
But of course. My opinion is not only not to argue with officers, but don't even talk to them. When I feel that officer wants some "conversation" with me, my favorite response is "sorry officer, me no understand, no speak english". period. Smile to his face, keep saying "sorry". Don't show any extra document - just only what is required, nothing extra. Officer can be asking any questions, just hand him business card of your lawyer, say "my lawyer, talk him". as worse English you will use, as better it will be for you. My experience.
When I first entered United States I was kept at secondary check for 4 hours (1999, IAD, Virginia). They kept asking me all kinda questions, it was no end. Finally I got pissed, I said "Sorry, I don't speak English good" and started playing with them. I took my dictionary and starting looking up every word. My next answer took 5 minutes. In next 5 minutes a woman walked to me, handed my documents and said "Welcome to America".
LOL. That's an interesting approach. I've heard of a story where a hispanic dude who had a beer breath actually get out of a breathalyzer test and eventually get off a potential DUI conviction because of lack of evidence. His excuse was he could not understand the instructions the officer was giving...
"no comprende..."
"put your mouth here and phoo phoo ..."
"no comprende..."
more...
makeup shakira album she wolf.
byeusa
07-13 06:34 PM
you are making very sensible points. lets not trash her work.Agreed her firm sucks with beurocracy and penny pinching ( they asked my friend to send $25 whe he requsted them to send the fex -ex next night service for his LC approval when they had charged him $ 3000 for expedited filing of his H1B case, which they took 3.5 weeks to file). Some of her lawyers do hide behind their paralegals but most of the law firms aren't any different. So please do not blame her for that. She is a good lawyer.
One thing that i noticed though that she was rallying her clients to file 485 after july 2nd so that they can take part in the law suit. Once she was done billing her clients and the client checks cleared, she posted that she does not want to join the lawsuit as it will lead to increased scrutiny of her cleints. Go figure...
One thing that i noticed though that she was rallying her clients to file 485 after july 2nd so that they can take part in the law suit. Once she was done billing her clients and the client checks cleared, she posted that she does not want to join the lawsuit as it will lead to increased scrutiny of her cleints. Go figure...
girlfriend Shakira has the new single
harshalx
04-14 01:00 AM
To get rid of these problems which we face with untrustworthy consultants I've started http://www.goolti.com
<a href="http://www.goolti.com">http://www.goolti.com</a>
where you can read/write reviews about Desi consulting companies.
<a href="http://www.goolti.com">http://www.goolti.com</a>
where you can read/write reviews about Desi consulting companies.
hairstyles shakira album she wolf. from her quot;She Wolfquot; album.
gc28262
07-18 04:50 PM
Keep predicting and calculating. USCIS will prove you wrong once again.:)
satysh
07-17 03:59 PM
NumberUSA removed the fax now.
http://numbersusa.com/faxcenter
Our collective effort worked. Knowledge & truth always wins. We need to put collective effort to research and attack the contents of these kinds of groups.
http://numbersusa.com/faxcenter
Our collective effort worked. Knowledge & truth always wins. We need to put collective effort to research and attack the contents of these kinds of groups.
sandeepsriv
01-18 11:50 AM
I have just contributed $20 and although I have not signed up for recurring but I will try to contribute every month.
Sandeep
Sandeep
No comments:
Post a Comment