PMisYMMV
09-03 11:55 AM
I am in the same boat as you.. See SLUD on both bases on 09/01/09 with EAC08** pending at TSC. Waiting.
Thank you for sharing the boat. Although, it is better than being lonely, I don't want anyone in this dilemma.
I hope we both get ours soon, hopefully by EOD today as other poster was wishing.
Thank you for sharing the boat. Although, it is better than being lonely, I don't want anyone in this dilemma.
I hope we both get ours soon, hopefully by EOD today as other poster was wishing.
wallpaper emo love 23 puppet picture and
aksaharan
10-14 06:02 PM
I believe this has been going on for last year or so, with no outcome yet..
Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search Results (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/servlet/ForwardServlet?SearchTarget=Agenda&textfield=1615-AB82)
Lets hope they do it this time.
Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search Results (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/servlet/ForwardServlet?SearchTarget=Agenda&textfield=1615-AB82)
Lets hope they do it this time.
eb3retro
03-15 01:38 PM
eb3retro,
Your concerns are well placed. Please be rest assured that we're working on reinstating the AC21 clause on per country limits.
Due to the sensitive nature of lobbying, we're sorry that we will not be able to divulge any more detailed information.
Thanks for the response admin, I understand your concerns.
Your concerns are well placed. Please be rest assured that we're working on reinstating the AC21 clause on per country limits.
Due to the sensitive nature of lobbying, we're sorry that we will not be able to divulge any more detailed information.
Thanks for the response admin, I understand your concerns.
2011 emO LOve
go_guy123
04-19 12:08 AM
Hi Folks,
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
in 2007 fellow indian international students in Canada used to get loan from
https://www.isloan.org/faqs.htm
but in 2008 that was closed. However you can call and find out from them.
With the credit crisis I am not sure if they give anymore. ask if u cosign then can they give or not
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
in 2007 fellow indian international students in Canada used to get loan from
https://www.isloan.org/faqs.htm
but in 2008 that was closed. However you can call and find out from them.
With the credit crisis I am not sure if they give anymore. ask if u cosign then can they give or not
more...
krish2005
11-09 06:18 PM
That would be the view of Dr BalKrishna Matapurkar.
There is no accepted literary evidence to support his views. If so, please point me to that
Right. Its his view of stem cells research in ancient india. Some article I read in net which excerpted from mahabharatha.
"It appears that the ancient Indians also had the ability to clone humans(it's very ironic that contemporary India is taking the lead in stem-cell research) In the Mahabharata, the queen Ghandari, who had pregnancy problems and after 2 years bore a pinda(ball of flesh) which was then handed over to a sage. He divided this ball of flesh into 100 parts and treated them with a chemical process, then put each part into a sealed cooling container for 2 years, from which 100 male babies were created."
Maybe some support.. :)
There is no accepted literary evidence to support his views. If so, please point me to that
Right. Its his view of stem cells research in ancient india. Some article I read in net which excerpted from mahabharatha.
"It appears that the ancient Indians also had the ability to clone humans(it's very ironic that contemporary India is taking the lead in stem-cell research) In the Mahabharata, the queen Ghandari, who had pregnancy problems and after 2 years bore a pinda(ball of flesh) which was then handed over to a sage. He divided this ball of flesh into 100 parts and treated them with a chemical process, then put each part into a sealed cooling container for 2 years, from which 100 male babies were created."
Maybe some support.. :)
whatamidoinghere
03-26 10:04 PM
Hi,
Does anyone know if people on H4 are allowed to work unpaid? For example, can a person on an H4 visa file for an H1B visa with a start date of October 1st, 2007 but work on a volunteer basis (i.e., unpaid) at the same job while waiting for the H1B to come?
Thanks,
Andy
H4 can do volunteer work for non-profit organizations only.
Does anyone know if people on H4 are allowed to work unpaid? For example, can a person on an H4 visa file for an H1B visa with a start date of October 1st, 2007 but work on a volunteer basis (i.e., unpaid) at the same job while waiting for the H1B to come?
Thanks,
Andy
H4 can do volunteer work for non-profit organizations only.
more...
GCwaitforever
08-17 08:58 AM
I would not advise people to move to UK without a job offer either. I read in the documents that the VISA is granted for 2 years.
2010 2011 wallpaper emo love. free
jthomas
06-12 12:49 PM
Your next step would be to copy this and post it in anti-immigration site. Go ahead.... I have seen my suggestion being copied and posted in anti-immigration site.
Thanks for finding this out. Anyway, who in hell would file for a labor certification when companies are laying off. As per the rules companies cannot apply for labor certification for 6 months from last layoff.
Don't try again
J thomas
Thanks for finding this out. Anyway, who in hell would file for a labor certification when companies are laying off. As per the rules companies cannot apply for labor certification for 6 months from last layoff.
Don't try again
J thomas
more...
satishku_2000
02-23 02:05 PM
Dont worry you will get your RFE soon. I saw pretty much everyone is getting RFE for H1 extension ( beyond 6 yr) these days !
Is this a new rule by USCIS?
Is this a new rule by USCIS?
hair wallpaper love. background
seba
09-24 01:31 PM
Thanks for the clear answer thepaew. That is what I thought. I currently have the opportunity to start the green card process with my employer under EB3 ROW, but I am also planning to go for an MBA in the US within the next few years. I am just into my 5th year of H1. It seems that I should not start the green card process if I am sure about going for an MBA in the US within the next few years. That would be terrible if you get into a school you like but cannot attend since you cannot switch from H1 to F1.
more...
anurakt
01-08 09:23 AM
Are you 100% sure that it's the stamped visa date which will be given on the arrival and not the extension date ?? I was under the impression other way round ?
Look at this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2636&highlight=Atlanta
Look at this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2636&highlight=Atlanta
hot prevnext →emo LOVE wallpaper
raj2007
02-10 11:23 PM
Keeping H status for the Primary applicant (H1B) may sometime act as 'failover pair' ... But in these days of Highend Retrogression (specially if you are from India/China/Mexico) getting a GC would take 7-10 years - does it makes sense staying in H1 even for the Primary ???
I mean personally i've lived ( read 'did slavery') in US for sponsoring employees in H1 for 8 years and i wish to keep H1 as 'failover pair' but doing another 2nd term of slavery of 8 years till GC approval/denial comes - that has no sense at all. Its a 'No-Brainer' ....
Moreover the depends - peoples who are new in this country 2-3 years and got EAD due to July Fiasco they can still continue H1 game but folks who already lived 6-7 years on H1B they can easily go to market and play...
Advantage :- One advantage of EAD also is that if you lose your Job there is nothing called "revoke EAD" like "revoke H1B" so you can sit Jobless and sleep over for entire 8 years if you want and able to do :) :)
I agree with you..it depends how much time is left on H1.he can easily switch to H4
I mean personally i've lived ( read 'did slavery') in US for sponsoring employees in H1 for 8 years and i wish to keep H1 as 'failover pair' but doing another 2nd term of slavery of 8 years till GC approval/denial comes - that has no sense at all. Its a 'No-Brainer' ....
Moreover the depends - peoples who are new in this country 2-3 years and got EAD due to July Fiasco they can still continue H1 game but folks who already lived 6-7 years on H1B they can easily go to market and play...
Advantage :- One advantage of EAD also is that if you lose your Job there is nothing called "revoke EAD" like "revoke H1B" so you can sit Jobless and sleep over for entire 8 years if you want and able to do :) :)
I agree with you..it depends how much time is left on H1.he can easily switch to H4
more...
house emo love cartoons images.
pandu_hawaldar
06-04 11:09 AM
I don't think its necessary to have kind of a verification letter from bank. I only sent paper statements for past 6 months, that's it. I printed the same online and also did order in mail through 1-800 number of BOA free of charge. As a matter of fact, in my situation at that time, I was not worried about sending this verification letter, because we give enough docs for our genuineness and I thought monthly statements would suffice.
I guess you should close the account with that bank (or atleast make it non-active) and open one locally.
My $0.02 :).
I guess you should close the account with that bank (or atleast make it non-active) and open one locally.
My $0.02 :).
tattoo Emo love backgrounds 19
DudefromBombay
09-23 01:20 PM
I am eagerly waiting for the Nov Election results. Can't wait to see Democtas losing House and Senate and can't wait to see the Back of "BARRACK"
more...
pictures cute emo love backgrounds
sathish_gopalan
07-05 04:21 PM
If you leave US for 2 or 3 years and get back through a new employer, does your I140 priority date still holds good. A friend of mine got his I140 approved, left to canada and got his citizenship. He intends to move back and want to know if he can still use his priority date. Thanks.
dresses Emo love by ~NattyAngel on
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
makeup emo love couple. wallpaper emo
ImmigrationAnswerMan
07-24 12:58 PM
rsharma:
For many of the applications filed during the 2007 "visa-gate" visas are not available to allow USCIS to approve the applications. However, USCIS is in the process of doing what they can to get these applications ready to be approved once a visa becomes available.
So the idea is that for many of these applications USCIS has already decided that they are approvable but for the fact that a visa is not available, and once a visa becomes available, they will approve them. Hence the idea that they are "pre-adjudicated".
For many of the applications filed during the 2007 "visa-gate" visas are not available to allow USCIS to approve the applications. However, USCIS is in the process of doing what they can to get these applications ready to be approved once a visa becomes available.
So the idea is that for many of these applications USCIS has already decided that they are approvable but for the fact that a visa is not available, and once a visa becomes available, they will approve them. Hence the idea that they are "pre-adjudicated".
girlfriend emo love wallpaper. sad
motown
08-23 08:08 PM
Is this category seen as one or is it split into many countries and if so how do you find out about a particular country within ROW?
Thanks
Each county has a 7% cap limit.
Backlog Processing centers reported way back in early 2005 that they have
~180,000 cases.If most of the 2001 cases are cleared in the current fiscial year, we should see some movement in the October bulletin for ROW.
Motown
Thanks
Each county has a 7% cap limit.
Backlog Processing centers reported way back in early 2005 that they have
~180,000 cases.If most of the 2001 cases are cleared in the current fiscial year, we should see some movement in the October bulletin for ROW.
Motown
hairstyles emo love 45 hearts graphic
jeny
08-05 01:58 PM
please be more specific ,which interview??
Visa Interview(for green card)
Visa Interview(for green card)
nozerd
01-15 02:34 PM
The centers seem pretty spread out Geographically. Which part of the country do you live ?
LostInGCProcess
09-04 01:25 PM
This is yet another inefficiency on their part. When it comes to AC21 your file does not even get updated even though you may have attached I-485 receipt along with AC21 filing. But when the employer revokes I-140 they don't forget to send you NOID or even I-485 denial.
That is because of the computers at work as opposed to humans. When USCIS revoke I-140, it triggers NOID for the I-485 that is attached to the I-140, automatically.
That is because of the computers at work as opposed to humans. When USCIS revoke I-140, it triggers NOID for the I-485 that is attached to the I-140, automatically.
No comments:
Post a Comment