anurakt
01-03 11:12 AM
I think we should give an option for more than $100 too i.e. a blank field with a validation that it cannot be less than 20$. Also instructions should be given on how to cancel the monthly subscription. Also it should be agreed by the patrcipant that he won't ask for money back and in case he does that we should be putting rules around it such as administrative fees. This would make sure that the fees IV pays to paypal for transactions is taken care of.
My suggestions , doesn' mean that these needs to be implemented , also all those who sign of monthly with proven monthly of minimun 50$ should only be allowed to get into members only forum threads etc etc...again $50 is an example....
My suggestions , doesn' mean that these needs to be implemented , also all those who sign of monthly with proven monthly of minimun 50$ should only be allowed to get into members only forum threads etc etc...again $50 is an example....
wallpaper Used Acura MDX 2009 for sale
gcseeker28
07-27 04:24 PM
That was a huge sigh of relief. Thanks and I really appreciate your answers.
Hopefully, I'll get my EAD (PD is April 2007 on EB2) before they respond back with MTR response.
Hopefully, I'll get my EAD (PD is April 2007 on EB2) before they respond back with MTR response.
RNGC
01-26 03:49 PM
The only way to get this CIR is to get full support of Get support of Senator McCain. If we get his support, atleast some republicans will support the bill and it can pass.
2011 Acura MDX
inskrish
08-01 12:04 AM
Love the analogy.
Thanks Coopheal for leaving the IV wiki effort.
Pappu,
Just wanted to clarify, is it 'Leaving' or 'Leading'?
Thanks Coopheal for leaving the IV wiki effort.
Pappu,
Just wanted to clarify, is it 'Leaving' or 'Leading'?
more...
pg~~0_1.JPG%3Fset_id%3D8800005007 "2009 Acura MDX Sport Pkg Sport")
morchu
06-25 10:48 PM
I believe the employer cannot legally penalize you for leaving the job. But some expenses like, "sign on bonus" are legally refundable if you don't agree to the terms mentioned. So it really depends on what exact expense they are asking (or otherwise based on the definition of a "penalty" vs "refund"). Also the employment laws differ between states (for example some allow non-compete agreements and some don't).
zCool
04-05 02:56 PM
So lets understand this..
You joined someone on the promise that they will sponsor your GC with approved labor..
They kept their word and you are gainfully employed.. he's paying you and now you want to purely for your own benefit leave this benefactor and join another company..
So either you paid him before joining and hence feel entitled to this approved I140
Or
You are just too opportunistic and don't deserve this good guy who is doing as he says .. No wonder Desi consulting companies try to get as much leverage on their employees as they can.. guyz like you spoil it for everyone!!
Go eat in some other dust-bin..!
You joined someone on the promise that they will sponsor your GC with approved labor..
They kept their word and you are gainfully employed.. he's paying you and now you want to purely for your own benefit leave this benefactor and join another company..
So either you paid him before joining and hence feel entitled to this approved I140
Or
You are just too opportunistic and don't deserve this good guy who is doing as he says .. No wonder Desi consulting companies try to get as much leverage on their employees as they can.. guyz like you spoil it for everyone!!
Go eat in some other dust-bin..!
more...
PDOCT05
08-15 01:17 PM
Sent on 07/02, reached on 07/03. Notice date is 08/13. Checks were encashed on 08/14. :):)
140 was approved from Nebraska.
Good luck to all of you. You will get it soon.
Congrats.Can you share who signed your packet and what time it reached NSC? I am just curious whether i will have any luck..to get the RN in next couple of days.
140 was approved from Nebraska.
Good luck to all of you. You will get it soon.
Congrats.Can you share who signed your packet and what time it reached NSC? I am just curious whether i will have any luck..to get the RN in next couple of days.
2010 2009 Acura Mdx
ronhira
08-20 02:11 PM
How about an apology from an Indian Prime Minister saying he is sorry that you were born in India and are not able to get greencard.
Why should USCIS apologize to you? Did USCIS force you to apply for Greencard?
I agree with rajuram. We are all tax payers. The whole concept of democracy is taxation with representation. People who get paid from my tax dollars are answerable to me as much as they are to anyone else. Even when cis is not forcing me to file gc, its still equally answerable to me for my tax dollars to tell me why they are not doing their jobs properly. And for that cis owes us all apology. What's wrong with that?
Why should USCIS apologize to you? Did USCIS force you to apply for Greencard?
I agree with rajuram. We are all tax payers. The whole concept of democracy is taxation with representation. People who get paid from my tax dollars are answerable to me as much as they are to anyone else. Even when cis is not forcing me to file gc, its still equally answerable to me for my tax dollars to tell me why they are not doing their jobs properly. And for that cis owes us all apology. What's wrong with that?
more...
chnaveen
07-07 05:11 PM
friends,
We are in a process of divorce . Last year I filed employment based 485 with my wife as depended. Now we both have EAD and she is working under EAD. If we divorce while 485 is pending who go out of status? Me or my wife? Is both 485 will be canceled? Or both are safe. If I marry again is it possible to bring my new wife under my filed 485 petition?
Thanks for your help.
balan
I485 Filed on July 2, 2007.
Who ever is dependent, they have to be in the relationship with the Primary until the GC is approved. If the relationship gets broken before the GC approval, the dependent's GC will be denied. But again, if the USCIS is not aware of the divorce and no RFE's then even the dependent also gets approved. But one should always inform USCIS about their change in Status, it may be an Address Change, Employer Change, Marital Status change.
The Primary's GC application will not be affected with the Divorce.
We are in a process of divorce . Last year I filed employment based 485 with my wife as depended. Now we both have EAD and she is working under EAD. If we divorce while 485 is pending who go out of status? Me or my wife? Is both 485 will be canceled? Or both are safe. If I marry again is it possible to bring my new wife under my filed 485 petition?
Thanks for your help.
balan
I485 Filed on July 2, 2007.
Who ever is dependent, they have to be in the relationship with the Primary until the GC is approved. If the relationship gets broken before the GC approval, the dependent's GC will be denied. But again, if the USCIS is not aware of the divorce and no RFE's then even the dependent also gets approved. But one should always inform USCIS about their change in Status, it may be an Address Change, Employer Change, Marital Status change.
The Primary's GC application will not be affected with the Divorce.
hair 2009 Acura MDX 3.7L Technology
small2006
08-31 10:15 AM
Looks like this is only for renewals
A colleague of mine (not India or China) got her EAD card in mail within a month of applying. Her 485 has been pending for more than a year.
Another friend of mine from India got his approved within 60 days of applying.
Doesn't all these mean that the interim EAD (or whatever you want to call it) is still possible and we can get it?
I am confused.
A colleague of mine (not India or China) got her EAD card in mail within a month of applying. Her 485 has been pending for more than a year.
Another friend of mine from India got his approved within 60 days of applying.
Doesn't all these mean that the interim EAD (or whatever you want to call it) is still possible and we can get it?
I am confused.
more...
EdGMan
09-21 03:50 PM
If I were you, I'll follow it closely. Don't rely on your employer and lawyer. I have a friend in Atlanta whose case was closed accidentally. He waited for a year to follow-up with his employer and lawyer only to find out that BEC closed the case because they claim that they never received any response for the 45-day letter. His H1 was also getting close to teh 6 yr. limit.
Good luck.
Good luck.
hot 2009 Acura MDX Sport Pkg Sport
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUj-xdB9a_0n9aHyOoWD8feJNi7Ofk829NhXAuDe-U4ldrAAxrY7lEVYMUXtuslOSsYeywlA-ZHtK4iQ75dyjuXocv4q0mbSDhaiufncizDMZE-WwKhjF7Hta-3xU1MIJ_gJnorUN_qiY/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUj-xdB9a_0n9aHyOoWD8feJNi7Ofk829NhXAuDe-U4ldrAAxrY7lEVYMUXtuslOSsYeywlA-ZHtK4iQ75dyjuXocv4q0mbSDhaiufncizDMZE-WwKhjF7Hta-3xU1MIJ_gJnorUN_qiY/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUj-xdB9a_0n9aHyOoWD8feJNi7Ofk829NhXAuDe-U4ldrAAxrY7lEVYMUXtuslOSsYeywlA-ZHtK4iQ75dyjuXocv4q0mbSDhaiufncizDMZE-WwKhjF7Hta-3xU1MIJ_gJnorUN_qiY/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUj-xdB9a_0n9aHyOoWD8feJNi7Ofk829NhXAuDe-U4ldrAAxrY7lEVYMUXtuslOSsYeywlA-ZHtK4iQ75dyjuXocv4q0mbSDhaiufncizDMZE-WwKhjF7Hta-3xU1MIJ_gJnorUN_qiY/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
more...
house 2008 Acura MDX 3.7L Technology
renupond
10-04 05:02 PM
My self and my wife both are on H1B. Both are working for different companies.
I filled I 485, EAD and AP through my company, for my self and my wife.
Questions:
1) I am the primary person. After getting the EAD, Is it possible, If my wife can open a consulting company with her name?
2) After opening a consulting company on her name, Is it possible, she can leave her H1B employer and run her own paystubs on her own company.
Your help will be really appreciated. :)
I filled I 485, EAD and AP through my company, for my self and my wife.
Questions:
1) I am the primary person. After getting the EAD, Is it possible, If my wife can open a consulting company with her name?
2) After opening a consulting company on her name, Is it possible, she can leave her H1B employer and run her own paystubs on her own company.
Your help will be really appreciated. :)
tattoo 2009 Acura Mdx Tech Pkg
morchu
04-22 09:48 AM
Yes to both questions.
Priority date can be retained only after 140 approval.
I have seen PERM applications get approved with multiple locations mentioned.
But it is on a case by case basis. You may need to prove the requirement for multiple location.
Thanks Morchu for clarifying this. I do not want to be unlawful at anytime. That's why I am trying to understand this process as best as possible and then plan accordingly. so when you say this "You are NOT loosing "anything" by filing a second LC at the new location. You keep your priority date, and PERM is fast and I-140 processing time is 4 months or so" the only way to retain priority date is with approved I-140 .
Secondly, I read online either at this forum or at Murthy that one can include as part of "ETA form 9089" (Application for Permanent Employment Certification) a clause which states that the person "may be assigned to various, unanticipated sites throughout the United States". Is it true? And is it used widely by employers to retain flexibility?
Thanks a lot!!!!!!!!
Priority date can be retained only after 140 approval.
I have seen PERM applications get approved with multiple locations mentioned.
But it is on a case by case basis. You may need to prove the requirement for multiple location.
Thanks Morchu for clarifying this. I do not want to be unlawful at anytime. That's why I am trying to understand this process as best as possible and then plan accordingly. so when you say this "You are NOT loosing "anything" by filing a second LC at the new location. You keep your priority date, and PERM is fast and I-140 processing time is 4 months or so" the only way to retain priority date is with approved I-140 .
Secondly, I read online either at this forum or at Murthy that one can include as part of "ETA form 9089" (Application for Permanent Employment Certification) a clause which states that the person "may be assigned to various, unanticipated sites throughout the United States". Is it true? And is it used widely by employers to retain flexibility?
Thanks a lot!!!!!!!!
more...
pictures 2009 Acura MDX Technology Pkg
smuggymba
06-23 11:44 AM
I used to work for big4 in IT, they file in EB3 unless you're a Sr. Mgr. I quit and joined another US company just for EB2...hoping for the best.
dresses 2007 Acura Mdx Sport Utility
Cataphract
02-19 07:40 PM
I want to Thank everyone for turning up for today's meeting, it was a good discussion and I am glad that we got to know each other better.
I am summarizing the things that we discussed and the "Next Steps" that we agreed upon.
These ideas can be applied to any region so any of you guys reading this, feel free to implement them for your region.
This is what we are planning to do in the next few days:
Publicize ImmigrationVoice.org in any/all manner possible within the community to raise awareness about our problems and to persuade more people to join. i.e. place materials in grocery stores, temples, or in other high traffic areas
Always monitor the media for any shred of positive stories about legal immigrants and as we find them, send materials from IV.org to the specific reporter highlighting the problems that we are currenty facing.
Contact all of your respective Congressional representatives and request an In-person meeting in order for us to present our case. If meeting reqeust is denied take names of senior aides and send relevant materials and then follow up to check on progress as to what they are doing about it. Keep bugging them, that is the only way they will respond.
Spread the word to your friends who are still waiting to join us, ask them to contribute to the site or devote their time to this cause. I suggest each of us make a goal of sending an email to atleast 10 people in the next week.
Meet with other resources and networking groups that are sympathetic to our plight (i.e. Indian CEO's council, www.usinpac.com, Indian ambassadaor in DC etc.... ) and ask for their support.
One of the strategic point that was discussed was about the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill and I along with some of the other members am of the opinion that this bill is such a behemoth and contains some radical; provisions on illegal immigration which may eventually hurt it and it may even die.
Since some of the relief measure that we are seeking are part of this bill, if it dies we will be hurt as well. We think we need to work with Quinn-Gillespie to strategize about how we can insert (if possible) provisions related to legal immigration to a bill that has a very good chance of passing. i.e. the PACE bill by Senator Pete Domenici - we need to put pressure on him, flood his office with our emails/faxes and also at the same time talk to our lobbyists to insert our provisions in his bill as it is almost guaranteed to pass.
That is all from me for now. We plan to take action and meet again soon.
Anyone with other ideas, suggestions is welcome to post them and we can incorporate them as well.
Thanks Everybody for your support and time.
I am summarizing the things that we discussed and the "Next Steps" that we agreed upon.
These ideas can be applied to any region so any of you guys reading this, feel free to implement them for your region.
This is what we are planning to do in the next few days:
Publicize ImmigrationVoice.org in any/all manner possible within the community to raise awareness about our problems and to persuade more people to join. i.e. place materials in grocery stores, temples, or in other high traffic areas
Always monitor the media for any shred of positive stories about legal immigrants and as we find them, send materials from IV.org to the specific reporter highlighting the problems that we are currenty facing.
Contact all of your respective Congressional representatives and request an In-person meeting in order for us to present our case. If meeting reqeust is denied take names of senior aides and send relevant materials and then follow up to check on progress as to what they are doing about it. Keep bugging them, that is the only way they will respond.
Spread the word to your friends who are still waiting to join us, ask them to contribute to the site or devote their time to this cause. I suggest each of us make a goal of sending an email to atleast 10 people in the next week.
Meet with other resources and networking groups that are sympathetic to our plight (i.e. Indian CEO's council, www.usinpac.com, Indian ambassadaor in DC etc.... ) and ask for their support.
One of the strategic point that was discussed was about the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill and I along with some of the other members am of the opinion that this bill is such a behemoth and contains some radical; provisions on illegal immigration which may eventually hurt it and it may even die.
Since some of the relief measure that we are seeking are part of this bill, if it dies we will be hurt as well. We think we need to work with Quinn-Gillespie to strategize about how we can insert (if possible) provisions related to legal immigration to a bill that has a very good chance of passing. i.e. the PACE bill by Senator Pete Domenici - we need to put pressure on him, flood his office with our emails/faxes and also at the same time talk to our lobbyists to insert our provisions in his bill as it is almost guaranteed to pass.
That is all from me for now. We plan to take action and meet again soon.
Anyone with other ideas, suggestions is welcome to post them and we can incorporate them as well.
Thanks Everybody for your support and time.
more...
makeup 2009 Acura Mdx Tech Pkg
chanduv23
08-08 08:52 PM
I'll be there and will try to bring friends.
U definitely and and will :)
U definitely and and will :)
girlfriend 2009 Acura MDX Black Exterior
GCBy3000
09-15 05:03 PM
My argument is it better to take a side on immigration issue or not. Maintaining status quo is better than including some releif for legal immigrants. I bet people in US like legal immigrants to legal immigrants, but how many people is ?. Will this favor any politicians to garner some votes or will it back fire? No one knows and that is why I said at this time of election period, it is better for them to maintain status quo than favoring legal immigrants.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
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. ............
.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
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. ............
.
hairstyles 2009 Acura MDX 3.7L Technology
Munna Bhai
01-07 11:23 AM
can Employer with draw I-140 if they want after 180 days of pending 485 if any body changes his/her job with out notifying USCIS(AC21).
thanks for your replies.
Yes,but it has no effect on your GC.
thanks for your replies.
Yes,but it has no effect on your GC.
fromnaija
10-09 11:52 AM
I initially volunteered to steer the Arizona chapter but my job schedule has changed so much and now involves a lot of in-country and overseas traveling. Would someone please lead this chapter? I will attend any of the chapter activities whenever I am in the country.
CADude
09-26 05:18 PM
You will get couple of July 2nd tracker under "Receipt tracker of 485, EAD and AP applications" category. USCIS forgot about few July 2nd filer or abandoned.
Hi, My application for I485 was received by Texas service centre. I have not received my RN and neither is my check has been cashed yet. I am confused looking at the online dates at www.USCIS.gov. Is there anyone who filled on 2nd of july and have not heard back from USCIS.
Thanks!
Hi, My application for I485 was received by Texas service centre. I have not received my RN and neither is my check has been cashed yet. I am confused looking at the online dates at www.USCIS.gov. Is there anyone who filled on 2nd of july and have not heard back from USCIS.
Thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment