Ramba
10-05 05:01 PM
getting rejected in EB2 does not impact your case for EB3 (they might look up that older file and see that it was rejected because of education qualification for EB2, but does qualify for EB3).
You will probably get an RFE at I-140 time. USCIS will either reject this case, in which case you will lose this complete GC process and need to restart from scratch (so you'll lose maybe 1 years worth of place in the queue). Or they might ask you to accept this in EB3, in which case you dont lose your LC and the PD that goes with it.
If it is certain that he/she is not eligible for EB2, why should apply in EB2 and get denied. It is better to apply in EB3 to get it approved. The best option is apply in EB3 now. After few years (once he got 5 year exp), apply new LC and 140 with EB2 and transfer the PD. That will be the wise decision. In the current situation, it is funny to talk about EB2 and EB3 for a persion with PD 2007, particularly Indian orgin.
You will probably get an RFE at I-140 time. USCIS will either reject this case, in which case you will lose this complete GC process and need to restart from scratch (so you'll lose maybe 1 years worth of place in the queue). Or they might ask you to accept this in EB3, in which case you dont lose your LC and the PD that goes with it.
If it is certain that he/she is not eligible for EB2, why should apply in EB2 and get denied. It is better to apply in EB3 to get it approved. The best option is apply in EB3 now. After few years (once he got 5 year exp), apply new LC and 140 with EB2 and transfer the PD. That will be the wise decision. In the current situation, it is funny to talk about EB2 and EB3 for a persion with PD 2007, particularly Indian orgin.
wallpaper Emanuel#39;s 2005 Nissan Altima
spicy_guy
08-10 06:40 PM
You can read the details of the bill at
Text of H.R.5658 as Introduced in House: SKIL Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5658/text)
Apart from the provisions mentioned in my previous post, there are other favorable provisions too.
does it have any impact, if a lot of people vote this bill on this site?
Also, there is no time lines on when its going to be set for voting in House.
Text of H.R.5658 as Introduced in House: SKIL Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5658/text)
Apart from the provisions mentioned in my previous post, there are other favorable provisions too.
does it have any impact, if a lot of people vote this bill on this site?
Also, there is no time lines on when its going to be set for voting in House.
cram
08-23 09:55 PM
bumping^^^^^
2011 Altima SE-R
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...
sweet23guyin
02-13 12:47 PM
Don't be LAZZY...activity on IV is easy
Almond
06-17 09:57 PM
I have been to Infopass at least four times in last two years. It depends on service rep on the window. Some of them are very cooperative and will try to answer most of your questions but others may not answer anything. I has an appointment yesterday to figure out about Background check which has been pending for last six months. Service rep on window only told me that it is still pending, she won't say when was it ordered which part of it is pending.. I tried to impress upon her but, she got up and walk away. It was such a waste of my time...
It is pure luck.. Couple of times, I got a rep who had helped me with AP stuff...
Same thing here. I've been to infopass a million times already. Some of them will tell you straight up that it's on someone's desk and to wait and come back in 1-2 months. Others will feel sorry for you and make some copies of your stuff and fill up some paperwork to "put it on the officer's desk"-you know, just to give you some hope. I've even gone with a lawyer's letter. Nada. Basically, you're at the system's mercy and the infopass people are just customer service reps that are there to answer your most basic questions. Get beyond basic and you're out of shit luck.
It is pure luck.. Couple of times, I got a rep who had helped me with AP stuff...
Same thing here. I've been to infopass a million times already. Some of them will tell you straight up that it's on someone's desk and to wait and come back in 1-2 months. Others will feel sorry for you and make some copies of your stuff and fill up some paperwork to "put it on the officer's desk"-you know, just to give you some hope. I've even gone with a lawyer's letter. Nada. Basically, you're at the system's mercy and the infopass people are just customer service reps that are there to answer your most basic questions. Get beyond basic and you're out of shit luck.
more...
WeShallOvercome
08-05 11:05 AM
Hello,
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
Yes, you need to send another G-28 with a cover letter and a copy of your receipt notice.
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
Yes, you need to send another G-28 with a cover letter and a copy of your receipt notice.
2010 2005 Nissan Altima SE-R Brake
sushilup
11-14 09:53 AM
Good question...any one experienced
If this work, it will put you on better negotiation table also.:)
If this work, it will put you on better negotiation table also.:)
more...
abhaykul
12-31 01:03 PM
Has IV explored or conveyed DOS about considering the First Arrival date on H1B or the first day on H1B job after graduating to be the priority date ? If DOS can implement this without change in law ?
The Ideal Scenario would be First Arrival Date or Labor Filing Date which ever comes first should be the priority date after I 140 is approved. What do you think IV core?
If DOS implements this it will be a boon for long time GC hopefuls !
The Ideal Scenario would be First Arrival Date or Labor Filing Date which ever comes first should be the priority date after I 140 is approved. What do you think IV core?
If DOS implements this it will be a boon for long time GC hopefuls !
hair of owning an SER Altima.
STAmisha
11-14 02:36 PM
s
more...
glus
04-07 09:03 AM
There is no law that says that you need to work for your employer for such and such nr of moths after getting GC. However, it is advisable to work for as long as you can for the original employer to avoid issues at naturalization stage.
hot 2005 Nissan Altima SE-R with
frostrated
09-09 03:33 PM
Me and my wife are on pending I-485 AOS. Mine is employment based (EB3) and my wife's is derivative.
I-140 is approved.
I work here on EAD. My wife had to travel to India urgently. She applied for Advance Parole, but had to leave before she received the Advance Parole.
Now she wants to return back, but as she has not yet received Advance Parole, will she need to apply for Visa?
Or is it better to wait for Advance pArole decision?
If Visa, under what category?
Thanks
As you are already working on EAD, you are no longer in H1 status. Therefore, the only option for your wife to return is to wait for the approval of the AP.
If AP is denied, your have to request a Motion To Reopen the denial and hope that it is approved.
If it is still denied, then you will have to wait for your green card to be approved.
I-140 is approved.
I work here on EAD. My wife had to travel to India urgently. She applied for Advance Parole, but had to leave before she received the Advance Parole.
Now she wants to return back, but as she has not yet received Advance Parole, will she need to apply for Visa?
Or is it better to wait for Advance pArole decision?
If Visa, under what category?
Thanks
As you are already working on EAD, you are no longer in H1 status. Therefore, the only option for your wife to return is to wait for the approval of the AP.
If AP is denied, your have to request a Motion To Reopen the denial and hope that it is approved.
If it is still denied, then you will have to wait for your green card to be approved.
more...
house Nissan Altima SER 2005 poster NC181976
.jpg "#39;06 Nissan Altima SE-R.")
pappu
03-06 11:51 AM
Dear members,
If you have received letters from USCIS asking for $5K for your FOIA request, Please fax a copy of that letter to Immigration Voice.
We want to collect those letters and proceed with some big effort on this issue. It is thus important that we have lots of such letters from members.
Please note the fax number
Fax : (202) 403-3853
or email the scanned copy to info at immigrationvoice.org
Time is short and we need letters in the next couple of days if possible.
If you have received letters from USCIS asking for $5K for your FOIA request, Please fax a copy of that letter to Immigration Voice.
We want to collect those letters and proceed with some big effort on this issue. It is thus important that we have lots of such letters from members.
Please note the fax number
Fax : (202) 403-3853
or email the scanned copy to info at immigrationvoice.org
Time is short and we need letters in the next couple of days if possible.
tattoo of Nissan#39;s Altima SER and
v2neha
04-07 05:50 PM
When we applied for B2 extension for my parents-in-laws (for their second visit - not the first one), we did not have a decision until few days before expiry of their original I-94. I called the USCIS (it was INS or CIS at that time) and the customer rep told me that while a visa extension application is pending, their stay is authorized by the attorney general and their presence in the USA is not unlawful. If the application was denied, they would need to leave USA immediately to avoid accruing unlawful presence. The extension got approved eventually and they left the country before expiry of new I-94. Since then, they visited us three more times and we extended their stay one more time.
However, please note that we had a very compelling reason, my son, their grandson was in critical condition undergoing a complex surgery both times their extensions were requested.
However, please note that we had a very compelling reason, my son, their grandson was in critical condition undergoing a complex surgery both times their extensions were requested.
more...
pictures 2005 Black Nissan Altima SER
SunnySurya
08-03 08:32 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
dresses 2005 Nissan Altima 3.5 / SE R
pa_arora
03-26 04:38 PM
This sustain act is total BS. They want to increase H1-B numbers without reforming the EB system. They do not want to increase EB numbers. They do not want to do away with country quotas. They don't have country quotas in H1-B. This just creates more and more backlogs for everyone. I HOPE THIS BILL DOESN'T PASS. The companies and lawmakers just want cheap labor without "paying" for it. Just a bunch of self-serving bigots !
I disagree with u, i think this bill should pass which lets the EB pipeline inflates so much that it explodes.
I disagree with u, i think this bill should pass which lets the EB pipeline inflates so much that it explodes.
more...
makeup Nissan Altima SER 2005-
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:59 PM
I agree - the post is a little erroneous. I'll try change it.
Cant change the thread title ... Sorry
Cant change the thread title ... Sorry
girlfriend This is a 05 altima SE-R. She
abhijitp
06-21 11:26 AM
for your quick responses!
I am not SURE that my 140 will be rejected, but historically the attorney/paralegal has made mistakes in almost every stage-- which is why I would not want to take chances.
The best option right now seems to be to premium process the I-140, and see what happens to it before applying for the 485. There can be issues doing this for ME, bcos of the thing I said here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5199
Doea anyone have any advice on the situation I tried to explain in the above thread?
As a general rule, I am beginning to think that the idea of concurrent filing is a bit misleading. Your 485 can be rejected bcos of your 140 being denied. This is not well understood by people (it was not by me) when the think about concurrent filing.
Thanks!
I am not SURE that my 140 will be rejected, but historically the attorney/paralegal has made mistakes in almost every stage-- which is why I would not want to take chances.
The best option right now seems to be to premium process the I-140, and see what happens to it before applying for the 485. There can be issues doing this for ME, bcos of the thing I said here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5199
Doea anyone have any advice on the situation I tried to explain in the above thread?
As a general rule, I am beginning to think that the idea of concurrent filing is a bit misleading. Your 485 can be rejected bcos of your 140 being denied. This is not well understood by people (it was not by me) when the think about concurrent filing.
Thanks!
hairstyles 2005 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE-R
rb_248
04-01 12:05 PM
Congrats to GreenGuru. and thanks for sharing all the information.
IV admin, can we have a separate option on the details to show that GC is already received. Like rb_248 got it last september and he/she still comes here and shares his knowledge. so having that option display would be gr8.
cheers/
Yes. I agree. There should be a category for I485 approved date. But, I could have also inserted that in my signature.
IV admin, can we have a separate option on the details to show that GC is already received. Like rb_248 got it last september and he/she still comes here and shares his knowledge. so having that option display would be gr8.
cheers/
Yes. I agree. There should be a category for I485 approved date. But, I could have also inserted that in my signature.
smuggymba
12-05 09:37 AM
Hi All,
We wish to apply for PIO card for our 5 month old baby at the Washington DC Indian Embassy.
The application and the supporting documents are all in place.
We have to drive 3 hrs to the Indian Embassy.
Since the weather is not very co-operative, i was wondering if it's absolutely required to take the kid to the Embassy? I would like to avoid taking him if possible.
Also, a minor question - how do you manage to get the thumb impression. Where can we get the ink pads required for the thumb impression?
Thanks All.
If in no hurry, mail the docs and pay the tatkal type fees. I used the office marker for the thumb impression, try on some other piece of paper first.
We wish to apply for PIO card for our 5 month old baby at the Washington DC Indian Embassy.
The application and the supporting documents are all in place.
We have to drive 3 hrs to the Indian Embassy.
Since the weather is not very co-operative, i was wondering if it's absolutely required to take the kid to the Embassy? I would like to avoid taking him if possible.
Also, a minor question - how do you manage to get the thumb impression. Where can we get the ink pads required for the thumb impression?
Thanks All.
If in no hurry, mail the docs and pay the tatkal type fees. I used the office marker for the thumb impression, try on some other piece of paper first.
OlgaJ
February 20th, 2004, 07:25 AM
Don't you worry, Scott, my toes can take it. LOL!
Yes, you are right. I calculated that wrong. So let's see:
Assuming 12inch distance:
38mm (9.7) at f8, near 9.99, far 15
28mm (7.3) at f8, near 8.84, far 18.7
That does sound more reasonable given it's a digicam.
Olga
Yes, you are right. I calculated that wrong. So let's see:
Assuming 12inch distance:
38mm (9.7) at f8, near 9.99, far 15
28mm (7.3) at f8, near 8.84, far 18.7
That does sound more reasonable given it's a digicam.
Olga