mbartosik
09-11 09:54 PM
He means July 2008, i.e. the last quarter of the year when USCIS feels the need to use up the 140,000 visas.
If that happens again it will be sick. But it is an easy way for USCIS to avoid processing applications in priority date order. Just have DoS (dept of state) make the bulletin move forward or make current for a brief time, then they can approve applications in any order convenient for them. Then move it back again so no one can send them new applications.
Think I'm kidding, that's what the 2007 July mess was caused by!
If that happens again it will be sick. But it is an easy way for USCIS to avoid processing applications in priority date order. Just have DoS (dept of state) make the bulletin move forward or make current for a brief time, then they can approve applications in any order convenient for them. Then move it back again so no one can send them new applications.
Think I'm kidding, that's what the 2007 July mess was caused by!
wallpaper Nenu Naa Rakshasi Wallpaper
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
03-13 06:32 PM
Guys, c'mon stop criticizing. Let this thread die, why digging and putting it back on the top and beat the crap out of me. Do you guys have any reason??
Do you have any reason for just starting this thread? Anything you can do about the numbers moving by trying predict?
Instead please focus on the efforts by IV core and support it in anyway you can so that we send out an united message.
- cheers
kris
Do you have any reason for just starting this thread? Anything you can do about the numbers moving by trying predict?
Instead please focus on the efforts by IV core and support it in anyway you can so that we send out an united message.
- cheers
kris
roseball
02-06 03:50 PM
Vinod,
This is the thread that was created by administrator.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/1059335-announcement-iv-would-like-to-help-with-ac21-cases.html#post1409417
You can try posting there or you can contact administrator.
Do keep us in the loop on what happens.
I would also check if your original GC sponsoring employer (Company A) is not involved in any fraud investigations by USCIS. In which case, USCIS can revoke an approved I-140 without any notice on the basis of fraud, which would automatically lead to your I-485 denial. I-140 online status may or may not change in such cases. Your case being in extended review is raising some flags. Do you know anything about the kind of extended review that was going on. Your lawyer on file, as well as you should get a copy of the notice. Make sure no communication was sent to the lawyer from Company A. Sometimes USCIS does not update the lawyer information even though a new G-28 is submitted. You will have to just wait for the denial notice. Send an email to info at immigrationvoice dot com so IV can get in touch with you to help.
This is the thread that was created by administrator.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/1059335-announcement-iv-would-like-to-help-with-ac21-cases.html#post1409417
You can try posting there or you can contact administrator.
Do keep us in the loop on what happens.
I would also check if your original GC sponsoring employer (Company A) is not involved in any fraud investigations by USCIS. In which case, USCIS can revoke an approved I-140 without any notice on the basis of fraud, which would automatically lead to your I-485 denial. I-140 online status may or may not change in such cases. Your case being in extended review is raising some flags. Do you know anything about the kind of extended review that was going on. Your lawyer on file, as well as you should get a copy of the notice. Make sure no communication was sent to the lawyer from Company A. Sometimes USCIS does not update the lawyer information even though a new G-28 is submitted. You will have to just wait for the denial notice. Send an email to info at immigrationvoice dot com so IV can get in touch with you to help.
2011 3.17 Wallpapers amp; Themes
485Question
10-24 12:04 PM
Keep us posted.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
anilsal
11-08 09:29 AM
My personal opinion is that at the national level, the immigration issue was not key. At certain local levels, maybe it was. I think it is time for us at IV to look to the new ocean with new hope.
But the work remains the same. Awareness, drive and confidence until we succeed.
But the work remains the same. Awareness, drive and confidence until we succeed.
thomachan72
05-24 12:02 PM
in the long run, it is going to be extremely BAD/HARD for skilled immigrants..
I couldn't confirm it but from what I understand, the dual intent will no longer be valid on H1 ie A H1-B holder cannot have an immigrant intent. Does that mean, they cannot file for a GC, while on H1? Also, as consulting would be severely restricted, how many of the H1s will be able to find Full-Time Jobs?
As we read more into the Bill, the 'hidden' intent is becoming clear..
Restrictions & more Restrictions..
My dear friend this statement that you made is BS. Pls read the bill draft carefully, actually they have added dual intent to even F1 in some catagories. They have not taken dual intent off H1b visas. Our major killer is however the restrictions imposed for extension beyond 6 years. We need the employer's recomendation + >365 days pending 140. I dont know whether one of these would suffice or whether both would be needed??? Otherwise it looks not VERY bad, but bad.
I couldn't confirm it but from what I understand, the dual intent will no longer be valid on H1 ie A H1-B holder cannot have an immigrant intent. Does that mean, they cannot file for a GC, while on H1? Also, as consulting would be severely restricted, how many of the H1s will be able to find Full-Time Jobs?
As we read more into the Bill, the 'hidden' intent is becoming clear..
Restrictions & more Restrictions..
My dear friend this statement that you made is BS. Pls read the bill draft carefully, actually they have added dual intent to even F1 in some catagories. They have not taken dual intent off H1b visas. Our major killer is however the restrictions imposed for extension beyond 6 years. We need the employer's recomendation + >365 days pending 140. I dont know whether one of these would suffice or whether both would be needed??? Otherwise it looks not VERY bad, but bad.
more...
makemygc
07-06 10:20 AM
Hey guys,
I have a question to all of you...
AILA prepares the lawsuit and some (probably most) of the lawyers are supporting that.
For several days I keep hearing that WHEN you file (in July) is not important and I am wondering how that could be true...
I understand that the people who filed on July 2nd are beneficiaries of this but in my mind, everybody who files after falls under a different category because technically they would file after the revised bulletin was announced therefore have no argument. I understand that everybody else prepared (legal fees, medical exam and so on) and they are affected even if they didn't file but I am wondering how that can be justification enough after the dates (retrogression) were announced.
I am trying to understand why they say that it does not matter when you file. They need more people to back this up or is just so they can justify billing you for their work...
Is just scary, how many people play with our hopes and I need to understand if this is just to serve somebody's interests or it is what it is .
Please post your 2 cents ...
Thanks !
AILA has expanded the definition of the plaintiff to cover all the july filings but it does not mean that you will be beneficiary if you have just filed in July. You either have to be a plaintiff or member of the class action (if judge allows). That also does not guarantee that you will get the benefit if lawsuit is won. As per AILF, only limited number of visa will be made available upon winning the lawsuit and that will cover only people who filed early in July. All depends upon number of visa made available, number of applications filed and out of those how many are part of class action lawsuit.
See this excerpts from immigration-law:-
The AILF is currently developing a lawsuit against the USCIS and the DOS. As reported earlier, apparently the AILF has been successful in finding the potential plaintiffs for the lawsuit. The plaintiffs will automatically become members of the class in the class action who will get the relief if they win in the lawsuit. The details of the relief this lawsuit is pursuing are articulated in the AILF's Visa Bulletin Lawsuit FAQ. For the summary, please click here.
The lawsuit team lawyers are still developing the strategies and details of the members of the class this lawsuit will cover who are not members of the plaintiffs. As they move along, the details can be changed, but according to the FAQ, membership of the class would require filing of EB I-485 applications in July 2007. Accordingly, those who fail to file EB I-485 applications are likely not included in the membership and will not be able to receive the fruits of the litigation, once the class wins in the litigation. Relevant to the issue of when the EB I-485 should be filed to receive the benefit as a class member is the number of July visa numbers which will be made available to the members of the winning class of the lawsuit. Obviously, the visa numbers will be limited in numbers. The members of the class will have to compete each other for the numbers. According to the FAQ, the number will be taken under the principle First In First Out bases. Accordingly, the earlier his/her EB I-485 is filed, the better the chance of getting the number before they are exhausted. It appears that those who fail to get the numbers are likely to be left out of any benefits of the litigation.
It thus appears that some people may want to file the EB I-485 applications with the full knowledge that the applications will be rejected and returned by the USCIS, just to become a member of the class of this lawsuit. Consdering the fact that some visa numbers may become available in October 2007 for certain people, they may be less desperate and eager in seeking membership of the class of the lawsuite. While, the nationals of ovesubscribed countries such as India, China, Mexico, and Philippines will need the fruits of this litigation much more desperately than the people from other countries. Additionally, EB-3 people may have such need more than EB-1 or EB-2 since when new visa numbers become available in October, the EB-3 numbers are likely more oversubscribed than EB-1 and EB-2. Lastly, the lower the priority date is, the more they will need the fruit of the litigation as the higher priority date applicants will have a better chance to get their priority date becoming current in October or soon thereafter. These variants should give a guide to the people to determine whether or not they should file EB I-485 applications to become a member of the class.
However, these factors alone should not be considered absolute determinants in deciding whether they should file the EB I-485 applications in July. The FAQ indicates that the downside of becoming a member of the class by filing EB I-485 applications in July is potential extensive and in-depth scrutiny of the cases by the USCIS to weed out the applicants on the ground of ineligibility of I-485 applications. Accordingly, people with some potential issues of whatever nature may be considered poor candidates for the membership of the class. The straight forward case should be considerred a better candidate for filing EB I-485 applications in July, while those with some potential wrinkes in the case may stay away from filing the application in July.
For the foregoing reasons, people should seek assessment of one's case by legal counsel for appropriateness of filing EB I-485 now and becoming a potential member of the class of the lawsuit. It is absolutely no and no to jump into filing the applications without the appropriate legal counsel.
I have a question to all of you...
AILA prepares the lawsuit and some (probably most) of the lawyers are supporting that.
For several days I keep hearing that WHEN you file (in July) is not important and I am wondering how that could be true...
I understand that the people who filed on July 2nd are beneficiaries of this but in my mind, everybody who files after falls under a different category because technically they would file after the revised bulletin was announced therefore have no argument. I understand that everybody else prepared (legal fees, medical exam and so on) and they are affected even if they didn't file but I am wondering how that can be justification enough after the dates (retrogression) were announced.
I am trying to understand why they say that it does not matter when you file. They need more people to back this up or is just so they can justify billing you for their work...
Is just scary, how many people play with our hopes and I need to understand if this is just to serve somebody's interests or it is what it is .
Please post your 2 cents ...
Thanks !
AILA has expanded the definition of the plaintiff to cover all the july filings but it does not mean that you will be beneficiary if you have just filed in July. You either have to be a plaintiff or member of the class action (if judge allows). That also does not guarantee that you will get the benefit if lawsuit is won. As per AILF, only limited number of visa will be made available upon winning the lawsuit and that will cover only people who filed early in July. All depends upon number of visa made available, number of applications filed and out of those how many are part of class action lawsuit.
See this excerpts from immigration-law:-
The AILF is currently developing a lawsuit against the USCIS and the DOS. As reported earlier, apparently the AILF has been successful in finding the potential plaintiffs for the lawsuit. The plaintiffs will automatically become members of the class in the class action who will get the relief if they win in the lawsuit. The details of the relief this lawsuit is pursuing are articulated in the AILF's Visa Bulletin Lawsuit FAQ. For the summary, please click here.
The lawsuit team lawyers are still developing the strategies and details of the members of the class this lawsuit will cover who are not members of the plaintiffs. As they move along, the details can be changed, but according to the FAQ, membership of the class would require filing of EB I-485 applications in July 2007. Accordingly, those who fail to file EB I-485 applications are likely not included in the membership and will not be able to receive the fruits of the litigation, once the class wins in the litigation. Relevant to the issue of when the EB I-485 should be filed to receive the benefit as a class member is the number of July visa numbers which will be made available to the members of the winning class of the lawsuit. Obviously, the visa numbers will be limited in numbers. The members of the class will have to compete each other for the numbers. According to the FAQ, the number will be taken under the principle First In First Out bases. Accordingly, the earlier his/her EB I-485 is filed, the better the chance of getting the number before they are exhausted. It appears that those who fail to get the numbers are likely to be left out of any benefits of the litigation.
It thus appears that some people may want to file the EB I-485 applications with the full knowledge that the applications will be rejected and returned by the USCIS, just to become a member of the class of this lawsuit. Consdering the fact that some visa numbers may become available in October 2007 for certain people, they may be less desperate and eager in seeking membership of the class of the lawsuite. While, the nationals of ovesubscribed countries such as India, China, Mexico, and Philippines will need the fruits of this litigation much more desperately than the people from other countries. Additionally, EB-3 people may have such need more than EB-1 or EB-2 since when new visa numbers become available in October, the EB-3 numbers are likely more oversubscribed than EB-1 and EB-2. Lastly, the lower the priority date is, the more they will need the fruit of the litigation as the higher priority date applicants will have a better chance to get their priority date becoming current in October or soon thereafter. These variants should give a guide to the people to determine whether or not they should file EB I-485 applications to become a member of the class.
However, these factors alone should not be considered absolute determinants in deciding whether they should file the EB I-485 applications in July. The FAQ indicates that the downside of becoming a member of the class by filing EB I-485 applications in July is potential extensive and in-depth scrutiny of the cases by the USCIS to weed out the applicants on the ground of ineligibility of I-485 applications. Accordingly, people with some potential issues of whatever nature may be considered poor candidates for the membership of the class. The straight forward case should be considerred a better candidate for filing EB I-485 applications in July, while those with some potential wrinkes in the case may stay away from filing the application in July.
For the foregoing reasons, people should seek assessment of one's case by legal counsel for appropriateness of filing EB I-485 now and becoming a potential member of the class of the lawsuit. It is absolutely no and no to jump into filing the applications without the appropriate legal counsel.
2010 Live Wallpapers Themes and
logiclife
02-01 02:06 PM
Can we get License renewed using EAD and not having H1?.
Driver's licenses are issued by state and governed by state laws and regulations. Check your state DMV and find out.
In about 12 states, even illegals can obtain driver's licenses. However, most states are tightening rules and need to see your I-94 to prove your legal presence.
EAD is for work authorization and doesnt prove legal presence. Legal presence is proved by I-94. Regardless of how you enter into USA, with H1 stamp or with AP, you will have an I-94.
In any case, check your DMV.
Driver's licenses are issued by state and governed by state laws and regulations. Check your state DMV and find out.
In about 12 states, even illegals can obtain driver's licenses. However, most states are tightening rules and need to see your I-94 to prove your legal presence.
EAD is for work authorization and doesnt prove legal presence. Legal presence is proved by I-94. Regardless of how you enter into USA, with H1 stamp or with AP, you will have an I-94.
In any case, check your DMV.
more...
Omm
11-14 08:50 PM
I read in murthy.com that asking money for H1 b is illigal. below is the link for more info
http://murthy.com/news/n_hfraud.html
Fraud vs. Technical Violations
For purposes of the BFCA, fraud is defined as a willful misrepresentation, falsification, or omission of a material fact. Technical violations, essentially, are errors, omissions, and failures to comply that are not within the fraud definition.
�MurthyDotCom
Examples of items that were categorized as technical violations include instances of employers requiring H1B workers to pay filing fees that are designated by regulation to be the obligation of the employer, as well as the deduction of other H1B-related fees from employees' wages, and, thereby, reducing the wages of these H1B workers to levels below the LCA wage requirement. Other technical violations included general failure by employers to pay beneficiaries at least the prevailing wage for the occupations within their particular geographic locations as listed on the LCAs, employment of H1B workers in geographic locations not covered by valid LCAs, and the benching of H1B employees. The fact that these were characterized as technical violations does not mean that, if found to be intentional, they could not fall under the definition of fraud.
http://murthy.com/news/n_hfraud.html
Fraud vs. Technical Violations
For purposes of the BFCA, fraud is defined as a willful misrepresentation, falsification, or omission of a material fact. Technical violations, essentially, are errors, omissions, and failures to comply that are not within the fraud definition.
�MurthyDotCom
Examples of items that were categorized as technical violations include instances of employers requiring H1B workers to pay filing fees that are designated by regulation to be the obligation of the employer, as well as the deduction of other H1B-related fees from employees' wages, and, thereby, reducing the wages of these H1B workers to levels below the LCA wage requirement. Other technical violations included general failure by employers to pay beneficiaries at least the prevailing wage for the occupations within their particular geographic locations as listed on the LCAs, employment of H1B workers in geographic locations not covered by valid LCAs, and the benching of H1B employees. The fact that these were characterized as technical violations does not mean that, if found to be intentional, they could not fall under the definition of fraud.
hair The themes change the icons on
vedicman
03-09 12:00 PM
Pappu,
184 members and guests viewing this thread.
Do we have at least 150 people registered for the advocacy days in DC?
184 members and guests viewing this thread.
Do we have at least 150 people registered for the advocacy days in DC?
more...
Macaca
06-15 05:57 PM
This loss of visas is due to:
gaps in USCIS� accounting of cases;
USCIS not processing enough pending applications in a timely manner; and
the imprecise art of predicting workflows and demand surges at three federal agencies:
Department of Labor (DOL) (approves labor certifications);
USCIS (processes immigration petitions after completion of labor certifications and processes green card applications for applicants in the United States); and
DOS (establishes priority dates and processes immigrant visas from applicants outside the United States).
gaps in USCIS� accounting of cases;
USCIS not processing enough pending applications in a timely manner; and
the imprecise art of predicting workflows and demand surges at three federal agencies:
Department of Labor (DOL) (approves labor certifications);
USCIS (processes immigration petitions after completion of labor certifications and processes green card applications for applicants in the United States); and
DOS (establishes priority dates and processes immigrant visas from applicants outside the United States).
hot Worldcup Wallpapers Themes 2
inthehole
08-22 02:40 PM
I am working on EAD and current one is expiring on Sep 26. I got an RFE for photos and it was received on Aug 7th.
I called last week Aug 15th and requested to expedite the process. I got an email two days back saying that my request was accepted and will get the decision within 14 days.
I been trying to get the infopass appoinment since past 2 weeks but so far I havn't been able to get any appointments.
I am keeping my fingers crossed and waiting.
Can I go to a different city to get an infopass appoinment ?.
I called last week Aug 15th and requested to expedite the process. I got an email two days back saying that my request was accepted and will get the decision within 14 days.
I been trying to get the infopass appoinment since past 2 weeks but so far I havn't been able to get any appointments.
I am keeping my fingers crossed and waiting.
Can I go to a different city to get an infopass appoinment ?.
more...
house Windows 8 wallpapers in
perm2gc
08-23 09:21 AM
unless I am egregiously mistaken, I 140 is totally employers and not employee's. How can you invoke FOIA on that? I mean freedom of info doesnt mean a breach of privacy or disclose "compny/personal" documentation. Nixstor..i have only same view but i dont understand how USCIS is proceeding...As per gc_in_30_years it seems possible..but never trust Customer Support at USCIS..Many Dont know the rules..
gc_in_30_years..let us know when you got the copy.
gc_in_30_years..let us know when you got the copy.
tattoo Free Smartphone Wallpapers
casinoroyale
03-18 11:53 AM
So lets do the numbers. If 10,000 of us buy houses worth $300K.
Lets say, each make 20% downpayment.
10,000 * $ 60,000 = $ 600 Million (right away gets pumped into the market)
each pays mortgate of $2000 per month which makes by next year this time
10, 000 * $2000 * 12 = $240 Million.
So which this plan, for 1 year, we are helping the economy by $ 840 Million. :confused:
Hmm, Is that number sufficient enough for Berneke to even think about our plan?
Lets say, each make 20% downpayment.
10,000 * $ 60,000 = $ 600 Million (right away gets pumped into the market)
each pays mortgate of $2000 per month which makes by next year this time
10, 000 * $2000 * 12 = $240 Million.
So which this plan, for 1 year, we are helping the economy by $ 840 Million. :confused:
Hmm, Is that number sufficient enough for Berneke to even think about our plan?
more...
pictures 35 Wallpapers Themes for
chanduv23
11-08 02:27 PM
You get 3 greens from me :)
excellent post
"Happy Diwali" to anybody on this forum who accepts the Hindu faith.
I don't think wishing Happy Diwali to fellows of a common faith qualifies as hate mongering; same as a Muslim wishing a fellow Muslim "Eid Mubarak" or a Christian wishing a fellow Chrisitian "Merry Christmas" does not qualify as hate mongering.
All said and done this is an open forum where potential immigrants to this country (where there is a long history of separation of state and religion) are free to express their opinion.
USA has certainly benefited from having different cultures live together side by side (within the realm of a common civil and criminal law). Suppression of cultures is more in tune with the ertswhile Soviet policy of suppression of various cultures (Georgian, Ukrainian, the list goes on); and we all know what happpened to Soviet Russia.
There is no reason potential legal immigrants of different faith should not open a new thread to wish people of fellow faith on commonly celebrated festivals. There is no great reason to pursue political correct speak to the degree where you would have to create a common greeting message if we want to wish "Happy Diwali" to fellow Hindus.
People of different faiths certainly have the freedom to post a similar message. After all the pool of potential legal immigrants is far and wide.
And I would certainly be happy for fellow Chinese, Muslims, Chrisitians, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Native Americans, Mexicans, Portuegese, Spanish, Greeks, Albanians, Croats, Serbs, Basque, Irish, SriLankan, Bangladeshis, Eritreans, Ethiopians, Somalis, Germans, French, Bralizians, Colombian, Ecuadarean, Argentinians, Chilean, Haitians, West Indians (the list is incomplete mind you) when somebody from their community puts up a message wishing their fellows the arrival of a happy community event.
The voice of these communities is the "Voice" of "Immigration". It would be foolhardy to try to suppress this voice in favor of political correct speak.
We are all working toward the same goal (pursuit of happiness); denial of one's culture and simple traditions is not in tune with this pursuit.
Just my 2 cents.
Regards.
excellent post
"Happy Diwali" to anybody on this forum who accepts the Hindu faith.
I don't think wishing Happy Diwali to fellows of a common faith qualifies as hate mongering; same as a Muslim wishing a fellow Muslim "Eid Mubarak" or a Christian wishing a fellow Chrisitian "Merry Christmas" does not qualify as hate mongering.
All said and done this is an open forum where potential immigrants to this country (where there is a long history of separation of state and religion) are free to express their opinion.
USA has certainly benefited from having different cultures live together side by side (within the realm of a common civil and criminal law). Suppression of cultures is more in tune with the ertswhile Soviet policy of suppression of various cultures (Georgian, Ukrainian, the list goes on); and we all know what happpened to Soviet Russia.
There is no reason potential legal immigrants of different faith should not open a new thread to wish people of fellow faith on commonly celebrated festivals. There is no great reason to pursue political correct speak to the degree where you would have to create a common greeting message if we want to wish "Happy Diwali" to fellow Hindus.
People of different faiths certainly have the freedom to post a similar message. After all the pool of potential legal immigrants is far and wide.
And I would certainly be happy for fellow Chinese, Muslims, Chrisitians, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Native Americans, Mexicans, Portuegese, Spanish, Greeks, Albanians, Croats, Serbs, Basque, Irish, SriLankan, Bangladeshis, Eritreans, Ethiopians, Somalis, Germans, French, Bralizians, Colombian, Ecuadarean, Argentinians, Chilean, Haitians, West Indians (the list is incomplete mind you) when somebody from their community puts up a message wishing their fellows the arrival of a happy community event.
The voice of these communities is the "Voice" of "Immigration". It would be foolhardy to try to suppress this voice in favor of political correct speak.
We are all working toward the same goal (pursuit of happiness); denial of one's culture and simple traditions is not in tune with this pursuit.
Just my 2 cents.
Regards.
dresses Free Smartphone Wallpapers
bkarnik
06-13 03:18 PM
pg. 53:
"There will be severe consequences from rapid fluctuations in priority dates. If the priority date became current today, due to delayed USCIS processing and thus underutilization of visa numbers, some have predicted that within a few months as many as 500,000 to 750,000 individuals now residing in the United States under a temporary worker visa could apply for a green card. Additionally, DOL�s recent backlog elimination efforts, scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2007, are predicted to add 70,000 or more approved labor certifications yielding as many as 170,000 additional green card applications. As USCIS begins to complete these applications and request visa numbers from DOS, the 140,000 statutorily authorized visa numbers will be used. DOS then will be required to retrogress priority dates. Consequently, most applicants in this scenario will find themselves trapped where as they anticipated timely receipt of a green card, their wait exceeds seven or more years. In addition, all future employment-based green card applicants effectively would be barred from applying for many years."
"There will be severe consequences from rapid fluctuations in priority dates. If the priority date became current today, due to delayed USCIS processing and thus underutilization of visa numbers, some have predicted that within a few months as many as 500,000 to 750,000 individuals now residing in the United States under a temporary worker visa could apply for a green card. Additionally, DOL�s recent backlog elimination efforts, scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2007, are predicted to add 70,000 or more approved labor certifications yielding as many as 170,000 additional green card applications. As USCIS begins to complete these applications and request visa numbers from DOS, the 140,000 statutorily authorized visa numbers will be used. DOS then will be required to retrogress priority dates. Consequently, most applicants in this scenario will find themselves trapped where as they anticipated timely receipt of a green card, their wait exceeds seven or more years. In addition, all future employment-based green card applicants effectively would be barred from applying for many years."
more...
makeup You can find themes and
geesee
07-16 11:18 AM
I never said whole life,term could cost around $100/m
You did, scroll above a little ;)
one of my family member have whole life for $81/month for $1m at the age of 28 in NJ, in this plan we will get back everything we paid after 30 years.
Thats an ROP plan... yes, that you can get it for $100/month.
I am questioning your statement of "getting 1 million insurance for $100/month till the last breath"
You did, scroll above a little ;)
one of my family member have whole life for $81/month for $1m at the age of 28 in NJ, in this plan we will get back everything we paid after 30 years.
Thats an ROP plan... yes, that you can get it for $100/month.
I am questioning your statement of "getting 1 million insurance for $100/month till the last breath"
girlfriend 5.11 Wallpapers amp; Themes
pcs
02-10 04:27 PM
Can you please do that ???
Thanks
Thanks
hairstyles Nenu Naa Rakshasi Wallpaper
logiclife
07-09 01:07 PM
Would you please elaborate if the flower campaign has hit any mainstream media like CNN, Fox etc?? Or just the TOI and other small covers? I just want to know how famous this has become.. Thanks.
I wouldnt make such a big request just for attention from TOI. Please trust me we will get attention if we manage to send a few hundred flowers. I am not exaggerating. And I am talking about bigger US media outlets. And I am also not speculating. I am 100% sure. Please send the flowers as per these directions from IV core. (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6191).
Thanks.
I wouldnt make such a big request just for attention from TOI. Please trust me we will get attention if we manage to send a few hundred flowers. I am not exaggerating. And I am talking about bigger US media outlets. And I am also not speculating. I am 100% sure. Please send the flowers as per these directions from IV core. (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6191).
Thanks.
ashishgour
05-28 06:02 PM
My humble disagreement here...
Even though the hearing has been scheduled for the bill S 424, the hearings are not tightly linked to a specific bill. Hearings are a means to collect the data related to the issue at hand. The hearing results can be used to a wide range of related bills. S 1085 is a very similar bill and the emphasis of this bill is also reuniting families. During markup of whichever bill they pickup, they can amend the new pieces of the other bill.
If it is a markup, then, it is tightly linked to the bill.
So, definitely the party remains in good standing :)
Thanks for the positive view dude..Cheers!!!:)
Even though the hearing has been scheduled for the bill S 424, the hearings are not tightly linked to a specific bill. Hearings are a means to collect the data related to the issue at hand. The hearing results can be used to a wide range of related bills. S 1085 is a very similar bill and the emphasis of this bill is also reuniting families. During markup of whichever bill they pickup, they can amend the new pieces of the other bill.
If it is a markup, then, it is tightly linked to the bill.
So, definitely the party remains in good standing :)
Thanks for the positive view dude..Cheers!!!:)
logiclife
02-01 02:27 PM
If I use my AP , what documents I need to carry? original 485 reciept? my original receipt is with lawer, he send me photocopy.
Its a good idea to have an original 485 receipt, but in my case, they did not ask for it and didnt see it. Not even photocopy.
Nonetheless ask your lawyer for 485 receipt and they should give you that. There is no reason for them to keep the original with themselves, they can keep the copy and give you original.
Its a good idea to have an original 485 receipt, but in my case, they did not ask for it and didnt see it. Not even photocopy.
Nonetheless ask your lawyer for 485 receipt and they should give you that. There is no reason for them to keep the original with themselves, they can keep the copy and give you original.
