Jerrome
11-08 12:51 PM
It includes all the AOS i.e Family Based, EB etc... Right
wallpaper mens hairstyles for thin hair. Mens Hairstyles For Thin Hair.
prem_goel
01-13 06:59 PM
Can you please let me know which website to book H1B visa interview appointment in Mexico and Canada?
And please guide me on things to keep in mind while going for stamping.
Thanks.
Servicio de Informaci�n de Visas de Estados Unidos en M�xico (http://www.usvisa-mexico.com/mex/index.jsp?locale=es_MX)
i didn't remember but it took me 4 seconds after i googled it. Most of the info is available online. Please do try once there too before you post.
And please guide me on things to keep in mind while going for stamping.
Thanks.
Servicio de Informaci�n de Visas de Estados Unidos en M�xico (http://www.usvisa-mexico.com/mex/index.jsp?locale=es_MX)
i didn't remember but it took me 4 seconds after i googled it. Most of the info is available online. Please do try once there too before you post.
thepaew
09-24 10:45 AM
It is not possible to switch to F-1 if one has filed I-140. If you wish to pursue an MBA you basically have 3 choices:
1. US-based part-time program
2. If you are married, you can attend on H-4, with risks of being out of status if your spouse loses employment and the difficulty in obtaining US-based placements.
3. Look outside the US - INSEAD, IMD, MBA-HSG, LBS, ISB, etc. etc. There are very good options outside the US too.
Good Luck!
-N
1. US-based part-time program
2. If you are married, you can attend on H-4, with risks of being out of status if your spouse loses employment and the difficulty in obtaining US-based placements.
3. Look outside the US - INSEAD, IMD, MBA-HSG, LBS, ISB, etc. etc. There are very good options outside the US too.
Good Luck!
-N
2011 mens hairstyles for thin hair.
avi101
05-19 04:30 PM
A few more questions:
1. While the I-140 is pending, can I get a different lawyer to file the I-485?
2. If I wait until the I-140 is approved and then get a different lawyer to process my I-485 (or do it myself), will this be a problem?
3. Can my employer withdraw the I-140 AFTER it's been approved?
Please advise me.
1. Yes you can.. but how is it going to help? you still need your employer's support letter and I140 receipt notice. Read all the posts carefully.
2. No problem. But why? Your employer is your 1st problem, lawyer 2nd. Lawyer is going to listen to your employer for labor and I140. They have to legally. you need to get the employment letter and I140 notice. Law firms and employer are not legally obligated to provide you I140 related information as its employer who is petitioning for you.
3. Yes.
1. While the I-140 is pending, can I get a different lawyer to file the I-485?
2. If I wait until the I-140 is approved and then get a different lawyer to process my I-485 (or do it myself), will this be a problem?
3. Can my employer withdraw the I-140 AFTER it's been approved?
Please advise me.
1. Yes you can.. but how is it going to help? you still need your employer's support letter and I140 receipt notice. Read all the posts carefully.
2. No problem. But why? Your employer is your 1st problem, lawyer 2nd. Lawyer is going to listen to your employer for labor and I140. They have to legally. you need to get the employment letter and I140 notice. Law firms and employer are not legally obligated to provide you I140 related information as its employer who is petitioning for you.
3. Yes.
more...
Higcoptimist
05-15 09:05 PM
Hi,
Well, Bush has delivered his address on the immigration subject. Unless I am missing something, not a word was said about the Legal Immigration or the H1Bs. All the focus was on the illegal immigrants and the border enforcement.
Does that mean that the Legal ones like us are in the backburner? Would the Senate and the house focus only on the illegals and give them the path to citizenship, leaving those who played by the rules, in the lurch? What kind of justice is this in the "Land of Justice"?
I hope the senators and the representatives are sensible and leave the provisions for the EBs in the proposed bill, alone.
Hoping for the best.
Higcoptimist
Well, Bush has delivered his address on the immigration subject. Unless I am missing something, not a word was said about the Legal Immigration or the H1Bs. All the focus was on the illegal immigrants and the border enforcement.
Does that mean that the Legal ones like us are in the backburner? Would the Senate and the house focus only on the illegals and give them the path to citizenship, leaving those who played by the rules, in the lurch? What kind of justice is this in the "Land of Justice"?
I hope the senators and the representatives are sensible and leave the provisions for the EBs in the proposed bill, alone.
Hoping for the best.
Higcoptimist
piyu7444
05-11 01:56 PM
Job Title has to be same. Detail description does not matter. So if you are say "Computer System Analyst", new job should have same title. Duties do not matter. Higher salary is OK. No problems there. I-140 if revoked by previous company does not harm.
Good Luck. I am also using AC21.
Please ask your lawyer once again as what I have read on IV or any other website about AC21 is that job title does not matter but job descriptionduties is what matters..........This is the first time I am reading that Job title has to match.........and if thats true ( I dont think its true) then a lot of people will be screwed coz 99% of time even if its the same job no 2 companies will have the same job title..........
Good Luck. I am also using AC21.
Please ask your lawyer once again as what I have read on IV or any other website about AC21 is that job title does not matter but job descriptionduties is what matters..........This is the first time I am reading that Job title has to match.........and if thats true ( I dont think its true) then a lot of people will be screwed coz 99% of time even if its the same job no 2 companies will have the same job title..........
more...
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.
2010 Why Is My Hair Thinning?
dval_dpal
12-27 02:21 PM
hello guys...
i'm about to spend 180k to open a business in month or so....am i eligible for this?
thank you for your inputs..
i'm about to spend 180k to open a business in month or so....am i eligible for this?
thank you for your inputs..
more...
Dhundhun
09-21 12:26 AM
Wow it almost sounds like attaining Nirvana (moksha). May be USCIS/DOS/DHS/Us Govt should name it as Nirvana Card.
Sometimes question might be very simple, but there could be deep meaning associated with that. I think every one in this forum understands what is the meaning of GC. So the question seemed to me of more philosophical in nature.
One of the best example of this type of question about an elephant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_an_Elephant). Almost every one knows what is an elephant, how a blind man perceives is explained in that URL.
This is like a question what is project success?
- For investor/owner, it is money
- For management, it is successful completion perhaps in time and in budget
- For engineer, it is promotion, recognition and sometimes rewards
Similarly GC stands simply for Green Card (in our context), but for different people, it can have different meaning:
- Worst case a guy gets GC just one day before marriage - forcing seperations for years
- Best case - perhaps freedom from slavery
Sometimes question might be very simple, but there could be deep meaning associated with that. I think every one in this forum understands what is the meaning of GC. So the question seemed to me of more philosophical in nature.
One of the best example of this type of question about an elephant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_an_Elephant). Almost every one knows what is an elephant, how a blind man perceives is explained in that URL.
This is like a question what is project success?
- For investor/owner, it is money
- For management, it is successful completion perhaps in time and in budget
- For engineer, it is promotion, recognition and sometimes rewards
Similarly GC stands simply for Green Card (in our context), but for different people, it can have different meaning:
- Worst case a guy gets GC just one day before marriage - forcing seperations for years
- Best case - perhaps freedom from slavery
hair professional mens hairstyles
letstalklc
10-07 10:37 AM
Is there anything specific that can be done after 15 months? I was justing waiting for someone to look at my case at DOL. Can you please shed some more light on this?
I tried to find information on the web, but I could not find anything anything particular to a case pending for 15 months or more.
Please share your understanding with us all. I'm sure there are a lot of people who are in the similar situation.
Thanks.
If your case is not filed by Fragomen and if it's passed 15 months period you can ask your lawyer to enquire about your case status, the DOL informed in the stake holders meeting to AILA no's that they are welcomed enquires to the cases that has been passed 15 months time period...for more information you can see in this web site under labor audit's endless delay thread (this is in the section of labor processing)
Final conclusion - if your case is pending for more than 15 months and not filed by fragomen you can ask your employer to enquire about it.
I tried to find information on the web, but I could not find anything anything particular to a case pending for 15 months or more.
Please share your understanding with us all. I'm sure there are a lot of people who are in the similar situation.
Thanks.
If your case is not filed by Fragomen and if it's passed 15 months period you can ask your lawyer to enquire about your case status, the DOL informed in the stake holders meeting to AILA no's that they are welcomed enquires to the cases that has been passed 15 months time period...for more information you can see in this web site under labor audit's endless delay thread (this is in the section of labor processing)
Final conclusion - if your case is pending for more than 15 months and not filed by fragomen you can ask your employer to enquire about it.
more...
ganguteli
06-12 09:52 AM
Hi,
While in the process of filing for labor certification my company has found 2 suitable citizens who are eligible for the job.
Now what are my options going forward and how does this affect my chances of a successful PERM filing ??
I'm filing in EB3 category right now. Also I need to file for labor before oct since my H1 will expire its original 6 year length next Oct (Oct 2010).
Ask your company to fire you asap. The HR should anyways fire you and hire the US citizen.
You should find another job asap.
If you cannot, then leave the country. If you overstay you will be illegal.
And if you are an anti-immigrant posting on this site to expect people to tell you how to break the law. Then sorry bad luck. I have seen your websites with such posts. Stop comming to this site and try to malign law abiding people. Got it.
Read this
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08060/861421-85.stm
1 in every 100 Americans in jail
While in the process of filing for labor certification my company has found 2 suitable citizens who are eligible for the job.
Now what are my options going forward and how does this affect my chances of a successful PERM filing ??
I'm filing in EB3 category right now. Also I need to file for labor before oct since my H1 will expire its original 6 year length next Oct (Oct 2010).
Ask your company to fire you asap. The HR should anyways fire you and hire the US citizen.
You should find another job asap.
If you cannot, then leave the country. If you overstay you will be illegal.
And if you are an anti-immigrant posting on this site to expect people to tell you how to break the law. Then sorry bad luck. I have seen your websites with such posts. Stop comming to this site and try to malign law abiding people. Got it.
Read this
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08060/861421-85.stm
1 in every 100 Americans in jail
hot Men Image
wandmaker
02-18 07:01 PM
Child born abroad to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) may be boarded if child was born during the temporary visit abroad of a mother who is a lawful permanent resident alien, or a national, of the United States, provided that the child's application for admission to the United States is made within 2 years of birth and the child is accompanied by the parent who is applying for readmission as a permanent resident upon the first return of the parent.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Kudos to desi3933!
rajesh1972 - You should ask your wife to consider giving birth child in US land, who knows your baby may be a next president.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Kudos to desi3933!
rajesh1972 - You should ask your wife to consider giving birth child in US land, who knows your baby may be a next president.
more...
house hairstyles for men with thick
nissan_1
11-30 12:59 PM
Thanks for your reply guys..I have 71 points (with 16 language point). Hence I have to get at least 12 points in language skill. I think i will have to sit for IELTS..no other choice man :( But I have found in one canadian immigration forum that one guy with similiar situation replied back to canadian consulate that he studied English from school and also his work experiance is in english and he really thinks he should get 16 points. And then the embassy called him for an interview in NY and finally he got his PR. But this is just one example, everyone else ultimately took IELTS...
For me I have to fly to a different city as there is no IELTS center here...The IELTS gonna cost me some $$$ :((((
I had sent my application 3 months ago w/o IELTS and had given myself 16 points. I did write a paragraph explaining that throughout my schooling in India the medium of instruction was english and i have an American bachelors degree and have been working here.
Last month I got a letter from Buffalo asking me to submit results of IELTS exam that substantiates my assesment of 16 points. It also said that if i did not submit IELTS results they will evaluate and assess points on their own.
I am planning to take the exam, since i am border line with 70 points and can not afford to loose points. But if you have say 80-85 points, you may not take it and let them assess you whatever they want, may be 8 or even less points and you could still qualify.
For me I have to fly to a different city as there is no IELTS center here...The IELTS gonna cost me some $$$ :((((
I had sent my application 3 months ago w/o IELTS and had given myself 16 points. I did write a paragraph explaining that throughout my schooling in India the medium of instruction was english and i have an American bachelors degree and have been working here.
Last month I got a letter from Buffalo asking me to submit results of IELTS exam that substantiates my assesment of 16 points. It also said that if i did not submit IELTS results they will evaluate and assess points on their own.
I am planning to take the exam, since i am border line with 70 points and can not afford to loose points. But if you have say 80-85 points, you may not take it and let them assess you whatever they want, may be 8 or even less points and you could still qualify.
tattoo Hairstyles for men
fingerscrossed
11-14 03:20 PM
Letstalklc,
Thanks! Good luck with yours too.
No, my application is not filed by Fragoman.
Apparently, there are some fellow in my law firms, who got audited before September 2007 (mine is November 2007), and they havent been approved. So apparently, it is more random than FIFO.
It really sucks.
it would be very helpful if you entered your info on the t-r-a-c-k-i-t-t website.
Congrats!
Thanks! Good luck with yours too.
No, my application is not filed by Fragoman.
Apparently, there are some fellow in my law firms, who got audited before September 2007 (mine is November 2007), and they havent been approved. So apparently, it is more random than FIFO.
It really sucks.
it would be very helpful if you entered your info on the t-r-a-c-k-i-t-t website.
Congrats!
more...
pictures short hair styles for men
pappu
04-25 11:23 AM
Could you please update your profile so that it helps people tracking cases on IV tracker.
Thanks
Thanks
dresses Hairstyles for Thin hair
usirit
01-28 12:16 PM
We got a denial around Dec-21'07 but after appealing they change back the status to 'In Process'; and according to the timeline we should be no more than 2 weeks away from getting 'CERTIFIED'... Then I-485 and I-140...
BTW, trs80 what a nice signature....
BTW, trs80 what a nice signature....
more...
makeup Thin and straight hair will
basav
08-04 02:30 PM
Awaiting for the response from experts, kindly help.
girlfriend that your hair style does
for_gc
09-26 11:00 AM
ohhhh wow !! .. Man ...It not so easy as it looks on paper ...U will find tons of ppl in the stage of limbo after doing all this ... (including me though :(
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
Hi pd_recapturing,
Can you please elaborate on your experience. This is an issue very close to my heart as well and possibly benefit lots of other folks on this forum.
I personally know a fried who in fact benefited from PD porting and got his GC sometime in 2007 beginning. He had a EB3 PD of 2001 which he used for his EB2 application with another employer.
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
Hi pd_recapturing,
Can you please elaborate on your experience. This is an issue very close to my heart as well and possibly benefit lots of other folks on this forum.
I personally know a fried who in fact benefited from PD porting and got his GC sometime in 2007 beginning. He had a EB3 PD of 2001 which he used for his EB2 application with another employer.
hairstyles Hairstyles for Thick Hair
keerthi
04-03 11:01 AM
I work as a software engineer in India and the US branch of my company has filed a L1-B petition by September 2008. The petition got denied by Nov 18, 2008 stating that I don't possess "specialized knowledge". Knowing that I am the only person who possesses knowledge of one of the company's product, we filed an appeal to re-consider by Dec 18, 2008.
The USCIS moved the case to AAO by Feb 9, 2009. After which there is no status change. The status of the case as reported by the USCIS web site is:
Application Type: I290B, NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER
Current Status: Appeal/Motion/Certification sent to Administrative Appeals Office for review.
Two months have passed by and I don't know how much more time it is going to take. Can someone please tell me how long this process is going to take?
Should we just withdraw this appeal and re-file again? In the meantime can I opt a B1 and work there a few months until the L1-B is approved?
The USCIS moved the case to AAO by Feb 9, 2009. After which there is no status change. The status of the case as reported by the USCIS web site is:
Application Type: I290B, NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER
Current Status: Appeal/Motion/Certification sent to Administrative Appeals Office for review.
Two months have passed by and I don't know how much more time it is going to take. Can someone please tell me how long this process is going to take?
Should we just withdraw this appeal and re-file again? In the meantime can I opt a B1 and work there a few months until the L1-B is approved?
ashkam
12-08 02:35 PM
Her H4 is not valid. She did travel to India without an approved AP.
Can we cancel her GC application and bring her back on H4?
Any other options?
According to my attorney, if you are in valid H1 status, your wife can get her H4 stamped, reenter on an H4 and still maintain her GC application. Once she comes back, she can go back to work on her EAD and transition into I-485 pending status.
Can we cancel her GC application and bring her back on H4?
Any other options?
According to my attorney, if you are in valid H1 status, your wife can get her H4 stamped, reenter on an H4 and still maintain her GC application. Once she comes back, she can go back to work on her EAD and transition into I-485 pending status.
sroyc
08-03 12:32 PM
There is no box for A#. The fields are - Receipt #, Case Type (I-140), Receipt Date, Priority Date, Petitioner, Notice Date, Page (1 of 1), Beneficiary, Law firm's name and address, Notice Type (Approval, Preference category).
This was around April 2006. Maybe they changed the format?
There should be a box for A number, is it blank?
This was around April 2006. Maybe they changed the format?
There should be a box for A number, is it blank?
No comments:
Post a Comment