aj_jadeja
02-17 01:10 PM
So basically he is saying that count your blessings and thank god that you are stuck in Backlog centers or in retrogression because in Europe, its even worse. Its a nice way of saying : "It is what it is, take it or go to Europe or go back to India".
Right?
exactly :)
Right?
exactly :)
wallpaper Bethenny Frankel is prepared
jayleno
10-28 08:03 PM
I just dropped the letters in the mailbox. Thanks to all the people behind this effort.
legalservice
10-09 04:45 PM
I am a july 2nd filer and filed my second application on Aug 15th.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
Hi, I'm in the same situation. I was afraid that my July 2nd application may be rejected or misplaced or ... so I filed a second application in August. Do you think that it's safe to put a stop payment on the check for the second application? I consulted an immigration attorney on that and he thought that it may negatively affect the first application if the second one is rejected. The attorney's suggestion was to withdraw the second application once the receipt notice is generated. Is there an option to combine both I-485s? Please, let me know what you think. Thanks, Leo
Disclaimer: The opinion expressed above is the result of my immigration experience and the consultations with immigration attorneys as provided through legalserviceplans.info; in no way it constitutes legal advice
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
Hi, I'm in the same situation. I was afraid that my July 2nd application may be rejected or misplaced or ... so I filed a second application in August. Do you think that it's safe to put a stop payment on the check for the second application? I consulted an immigration attorney on that and he thought that it may negatively affect the first application if the second one is rejected. The attorney's suggestion was to withdraw the second application once the receipt notice is generated. Is there an option to combine both I-485s? Please, let me know what you think. Thanks, Leo
Disclaimer: The opinion expressed above is the result of my immigration experience and the consultations with immigration attorneys as provided through legalserviceplans.info; in no way it constitutes legal advice
2011 2011 Bethenny Frankel
BharatPremi
03-24 03:34 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15304
more...
SunnySurya
08-07 10:40 AM
Zindagi hai to khwab hai
Khwab hai to manzile hain
Manzile hai to hosla hai
Hosla hai to vishwas hai
(If there is life there is a dream
If there is a dream there are milestones
If there are mileston there is enthusasm
If there is enthusasm there is a confidence )
May be you will fall from your bed!
Wake up dude, enough of day dreaming.
Khwab hai to manzile hain
Manzile hai to hosla hai
Hosla hai to vishwas hai
(If there is life there is a dream
If there is a dream there are milestones
If there are mileston there is enthusasm
If there is enthusasm there is a confidence )
May be you will fall from your bed!
Wake up dude, enough of day dreaming.
desi3933
08-07 01:31 PM
Yes, I agree that not filing GC earlier is not an excuse for MBA. The point is he still would have been in the same situation (EB3, 2003 is not too different from EB2, 2005) in terms of how fast he will get his GC..
It is really better. He can recapture his old eb3 PD after getting approval for eb2 based I-140 for the manager job.
Law provides equal opportunity to everyone for PD recapture. This is my point.
And, for those who are going to argue that no one is going to file GC for him in 2003, this is not a valid legal arguement. Granted, it may be a emotional one.
On a related note, how many people REALLY agree that GC is for the future job? But they never dispute that in court of law because it does not hurt their case. Anything that hurts their GC cause makes them victim and root cause for gaming the system.
Have a good day!
It is really better. He can recapture his old eb3 PD after getting approval for eb2 based I-140 for the manager job.
Law provides equal opportunity to everyone for PD recapture. This is my point.
And, for those who are going to argue that no one is going to file GC for him in 2003, this is not a valid legal arguement. Granted, it may be a emotional one.
On a related note, how many people REALLY agree that GC is for the future job? But they never dispute that in court of law because it does not hurt their case. Anything that hurts their GC cause makes them victim and root cause for gaming the system.
Have a good day!
more...
nrk
08-17 09:34 AM
Congrats.
All,
Received CPO mail today for self, wife and son.
EB2 - India PD Oct 24 2005. NSC
I-485 receipt date: Sept 14 2007.
Opened SR on 08/09/2010
All,
Received CPO mail today for self, wife and son.
EB2 - India PD Oct 24 2005. NSC
I-485 receipt date: Sept 14 2007.
Opened SR on 08/09/2010
2010 ethenny frankel peta.
jasmin45
07-15 09:10 PM
There's an interesting blog about Lou Dobbs' "inaccuracies" here:
www.dobbswatch.com
Lets track him down.. after the July fieasco is over we will deal with this guy
www.dobbswatch.com
Lets track him down.. after the July fieasco is over we will deal with this guy
more...
pcs
06-18 07:41 PM
I used www.epassportphoto.com for great & cheap photos ( costs only 40 cent for 10 photos towards printing at any riteaid kind of store)
This service is free & real easy
I DO NOT OWN THIS SITE ...
This service is free & real easy
I DO NOT OWN THIS SITE ...
hair images ethenny frankel peta
NKR
01-06 09:37 AM
I would like this idea to materialize but I am just wondering how it is practical.
Except for waiting for a visa number to be available all other delays are due to the time that it takes to process a case (and also due to the country quota). In labor stage, DOL determines if there is any citizen who fit in the labor description and who is looking for a job. In 140 stage, USCIS determines if the company is in good standing and has the ability to pay. In final stage, the candidate�s biometrics is taken and his background checked. All these are essential process in adjudicating a GC case in the employment category. I just do not how all these can be surpassed and candidates handed over a GC, let alone citizenship.
Allocating recaptured visa numbers and following a sensible order is more practical in eliminating some of the delays�
Except for waiting for a visa number to be available all other delays are due to the time that it takes to process a case (and also due to the country quota). In labor stage, DOL determines if there is any citizen who fit in the labor description and who is looking for a job. In 140 stage, USCIS determines if the company is in good standing and has the ability to pay. In final stage, the candidate�s biometrics is taken and his background checked. All these are essential process in adjudicating a GC case in the employment category. I just do not how all these can be surpassed and candidates handed over a GC, let alone citizenship.
Allocating recaptured visa numbers and following a sensible order is more practical in eliminating some of the delays�
more...
indio0617
05-15 11:15 PM
Hi,
Can anyone share their expert views on this scenario.
Say, I have approved I-140 (current PD) from employer A (never worked with). Work with employer B in a different. Now if employer A applies for I-485 and after it is pending for 6 months, Can I invoke AC21 to continue the GC process while still with employer B ?
Also is it possible to have 2 separate I-485 filed from different employers.
I have heard the above is possible. But, I am curious as to how AC21 is interpreted. Isn't AC21 essentially an instrument to change jobs without hampering the GC process. In this case since one is not 'really switching jobs' how will this be treated or possible ?
Thank You.
/\/\ Bump /\/\ Anyone ?
Can anyone share their expert views on this scenario.
Say, I have approved I-140 (current PD) from employer A (never worked with). Work with employer B in a different. Now if employer A applies for I-485 and after it is pending for 6 months, Can I invoke AC21 to continue the GC process while still with employer B ?
Also is it possible to have 2 separate I-485 filed from different employers.
I have heard the above is possible. But, I am curious as to how AC21 is interpreted. Isn't AC21 essentially an instrument to change jobs without hampering the GC process. In this case since one is not 'really switching jobs' how will this be treated or possible ?
Thank You.
/\/\ Bump /\/\ Anyone ?
hot frankel peta untouched.
Winner
06-10 11:04 AM
Thanks guys .... for coming behind me .. Shane Warne or Purple Haze won't satisfy you guys .. Y dont we discuss how Kanimozhi's discontent couldn't play spoil sport for the new govt and how Azhagiri got cornered with chemicals and fertilizers (these 2 are not any interntaional fame for an american 'tunnel rat' to know abt them).
Above all I am here to get some information to bring a company which violates rules to authorities, nothing more nothing less and not here to do any name calling of mud slinging.
Good job. I see B1 visa violations in my client place where I work currently(will post it shortly in donor forum). Would you mind joining your state chapter so that we all know who you are?
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
Above all I am here to get some information to bring a company which violates rules to authorities, nothing more nothing less and not here to do any name calling of mud slinging.
Good job. I see B1 visa violations in my client place where I work currently(will post it shortly in donor forum). Would you mind joining your state chapter so that we all know who you are?
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
more...
house Bethenny+frankel+peta
nixstor
07-10 07:32 PM
Saimrathi, you are posting the same message on all threads. Anyway, I am sure some of the media will pick up the story and write about it. I think there are benefits from this campaign. The name Immigration Voice is out there. We may get more members of our community to join us and participate in future campaigns and we can learn from experience on how to carry out future campaigns, protests etc. We had to speak out in some way on what happened to us with the USCIS Visa Bulletin fiasco. I believe it was worth it for all these reasons.
Sorry to jump again and pose another Q here. I have seen this happening more than once from saim*. He/She posts the same thing across three threads and whats the point of the boxes being opened by Mr Gonzalez or being received by him intact. You must be trying to play spoil sport here or just acting childish. Can you send me a PM with your number and I would like to talk with you and help you understand what we were trying to accomplish here?
Sorry to jump again and pose another Q here. I have seen this happening more than once from saim*. He/She posts the same thing across three threads and whats the point of the boxes being opened by Mr Gonzalez or being received by him intact. You must be trying to play spoil sport here or just acting childish. Can you send me a PM with your number and I would like to talk with you and help you understand what we were trying to accomplish here?
tattoo makeup ethenny frankel peta
like_watching_paint_dry
06-18 09:46 AM
bloody cognizant. I was winking at their L1A EB1 misuse for sometime but now they denied me the job (I have ead) ;) god knows why. Since then I am against that company. lets screw them :p
Maybe you did not get a reference.
Maybe you did not get a reference.
more...
pictures images ethenny frankel peta
GCwaitforever
03-26 11:05 AM
Always complain, even if there is no hard proof. The companies may not tell you on your face that they do not hire EADs. But the hiring manager or recruiter must be acting on a policy made elsewhere in the company, directed by some higher-up officials. It will be written somewhere. In that case, OSC can ask for archived e-mails, and phone conversations for a record of discrimination. If discrimination is proved, company is liable for fines, and the higher-up official is sacked. If there is no official communication, the company can claim that the hiring manager or recruiter is acting on his/her own and it is not the company policy. Then the hiring manager or recruiter is fired and the company pledges to enforce the rules strictly. Always a positive outcome for us.
Complain to EEOC also in addition to OSC. Double the pressure on the erring company and you would see quick results.
Complain to EEOC also in addition to OSC. Double the pressure on the erring company and you would see quick results.
dresses Its soul real housewife time is ethenny frankel Up a big fan of new jerseys
diptam
10-03 03:40 PM
Like 140 premium that program will be first suspended and then dumped eventually because there are resource and Process problems internally.
Unless you fix root causes - these Premium things ain't going to work.
IV should propose a Premium Processing for FBI Namecheck/ Other Background checks. For certain extra fee UCIS/ FBI can do this on premium bases.
what you all think ?
Unless you fix root causes - these Premium things ain't going to work.
IV should propose a Premium Processing for FBI Namecheck/ Other Background checks. For certain extra fee UCIS/ FBI can do this on premium bases.
what you all think ?
more...
makeup ad,ethenny frankel peta
aristotle
06-29 06:55 PM
Could it be that the AILA is talking about the 4th category and AILF's Legal Action Center is seeking plaintiffs - mainly 4th category that got their applications rejected?
Then the title would say "June" visa availability. And it was for EB3 other category.
Then the title would say "June" visa availability. And it was for EB3 other category.
girlfriend 2011 ethenny frankel peta
logiclife
01-07 03:07 PM
House Majority leader Tom Delay has resigned and will not seek the Majority post until next year. See here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/07/AR2006010700488.html
The house republicans will move to start working on electing a new house majority leader. Tom Delay was considered to be anti-immigration that tightened immigration laws according to anti-immigration organizations like www.numbersusa.com. He voted in favor of HR 4437 that is a nightmare for illegal immigration but does not address the ones already here illegally. And no, there is no mention of legal immigration facing backlogs in this bill either. Just enforcement to crackdown on illegal immigration. Voting "Yes" by any congressman on HR 4437 should not be construed as either supporting or opposing the legal immigration and/or retrogression relief.
There are 3 house members likely to seek the position and replace Tom Delay:
1. Roy Blunt (Missouri's 7th District). http://www.blunt.house.gov/
Roy Blunt has gotten poor grades from Anti-immigration orgs. However he voted to support HR 4437 that deals will illegal immigration. His views on legal immigration are unpredictable at best.
2. John Boehner (Ohio's 8th District). http://johnboehner.house.gov/
John Boehner has scored poor grades like Roy Blunt on immigration issues from Anti-immigration sites. However he too has voted to support HR 4437. His views on legal kind of immigration are again unknown at best.
3. Jeff Flake (Arizona's 6th District). http://www.house.gov/flake/
This is interesting. Jeff Flake is considered against immigration by Anti-immigration orgs. He got 100% marks by their grading system (God only knows how that grading system works on numbersusa.com, but whatever). He also voted to support HR 4437.
However he has co-sponsored a bill along with Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback, Jim Kolbe etc that deals comprehensively with immigration problem in this country, both the legal and the illegal variety. See that here: http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005512A04.html
Title VI describes proposals for retrogression relief.:) :)
Jeff Flake is one of the saner and more pragmatic voices in immigration debate. While he wants to crackdown on the illegal variety, he also understands the other reform need in other areas of immigration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/07/AR2006010700488.html
The house republicans will move to start working on electing a new house majority leader. Tom Delay was considered to be anti-immigration that tightened immigration laws according to anti-immigration organizations like www.numbersusa.com. He voted in favor of HR 4437 that is a nightmare for illegal immigration but does not address the ones already here illegally. And no, there is no mention of legal immigration facing backlogs in this bill either. Just enforcement to crackdown on illegal immigration. Voting "Yes" by any congressman on HR 4437 should not be construed as either supporting or opposing the legal immigration and/or retrogression relief.
There are 3 house members likely to seek the position and replace Tom Delay:
1. Roy Blunt (Missouri's 7th District). http://www.blunt.house.gov/
Roy Blunt has gotten poor grades from Anti-immigration orgs. However he voted to support HR 4437 that deals will illegal immigration. His views on legal immigration are unpredictable at best.
2. John Boehner (Ohio's 8th District). http://johnboehner.house.gov/
John Boehner has scored poor grades like Roy Blunt on immigration issues from Anti-immigration sites. However he too has voted to support HR 4437. His views on legal kind of immigration are again unknown at best.
3. Jeff Flake (Arizona's 6th District). http://www.house.gov/flake/
This is interesting. Jeff Flake is considered against immigration by Anti-immigration orgs. He got 100% marks by their grading system (God only knows how that grading system works on numbersusa.com, but whatever). He also voted to support HR 4437.
However he has co-sponsored a bill along with Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback, Jim Kolbe etc that deals comprehensively with immigration problem in this country, both the legal and the illegal variety. See that here: http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005512A04.html
Title VI describes proposals for retrogression relief.:) :)
Jeff Flake is one of the saner and more pragmatic voices in immigration debate. While he wants to crackdown on the illegal variety, he also understands the other reform need in other areas of immigration.
hairstyles ethenny frankel peta.
BharatPremi
09-27 12:47 AM
Its not that I think I am smarter or have any additional insight...but I take things at face value. Of course the total number of pending cases in the chart and in the PDF should match - they both are exactly what they say they are "PENDING EMPLOYMENT BASED I-485 cases" If that's what the report title says, that's exactly what it means. No point in over-analyzing if this is just for pre-adjudicated or only primary applications etc....
I say stupid questions because people still ask "Does the PDF report contain numbers for dependents or only for primary applicants" - so you are telling me that this is not clear from the PDF report??
I and many others do not see the definition of "Pending" what is in our minds matching the definition of "Pending" by USCIS. We believe that it is not yet concluded. Even USCIS itself is not clear. In trend chart under "All other pending" its total figure for national level is 279031 till July 2009. Where as in the Excel worksheet it is 233816 till July 2009( Worksheet is produced for the time period till the December 2009 but for July to Dec 2009 all visa categories have zero value thus data is till July 2009)
So I would request you to keep patience till we get "authentic" feedback from somebody. Many people are working on this in background. If you want to see the signs they are there in many other threads including recently declared FOIA and USCIS data comparison thread published by Pappu.
We can't be just "innocently simple minded" when USCIS itself publishes different data sets at different links and start believing the only data of a particular worksheet is correct just because USCIS declared it. If you try to compare both of these trend chart and excel worksheet with the April operating performance report declared by USCIS (needhelp! has posted it on this thread) then you get into more confusion and start seeing clear discrepency.
So choice is yours , patiently watching the input of others on this thread and start contributing in analysis OR keep on doing what you are doing unnecessarily.
I say stupid questions because people still ask "Does the PDF report contain numbers for dependents or only for primary applicants" - so you are telling me that this is not clear from the PDF report??
I and many others do not see the definition of "Pending" what is in our minds matching the definition of "Pending" by USCIS. We believe that it is not yet concluded. Even USCIS itself is not clear. In trend chart under "All other pending" its total figure for national level is 279031 till July 2009. Where as in the Excel worksheet it is 233816 till July 2009( Worksheet is produced for the time period till the December 2009 but for July to Dec 2009 all visa categories have zero value thus data is till July 2009)
So I would request you to keep patience till we get "authentic" feedback from somebody. Many people are working on this in background. If you want to see the signs they are there in many other threads including recently declared FOIA and USCIS data comparison thread published by Pappu.
We can't be just "innocently simple minded" when USCIS itself publishes different data sets at different links and start believing the only data of a particular worksheet is correct just because USCIS declared it. If you try to compare both of these trend chart and excel worksheet with the April operating performance report declared by USCIS (needhelp! has posted it on this thread) then you get into more confusion and start seeing clear discrepency.
So choice is yours , patiently watching the input of others on this thread and start contributing in analysis OR keep on doing what you are doing unnecessarily.
shirish
08-14 03:35 PM
Thankx fo rthe response.
Does this mean i will surly get a RFE, and if it is say 1 year later, will i have to go for the medical exam again?
You should be fine, one of the latest FAQs says you can file without medical report.
Does this mean i will surly get a RFE, and if it is say 1 year later, will i have to go for the medical exam again?
You should be fine, one of the latest FAQs says you can file without medical report.
FUNTIMES
06-22 11:13 AM
I am in the same situation. Details Below.
Me: EB2(10/2006) Pending I-140
Wife: EB3(04/2002 SUBSTITUTION) Pending I-140
Reply from My Lawyer.
"Many people are in your scenario.
There are many ways to do this. Each one being a little more expensive then others.
What can be done:
Your wife files as primary and you secondary on her 140.
You file as primary and her secondary on your 140.
Option #2
You file alone on your 140
She files alone on her 140.
Somehow if the dates should move backwards and her 140 on labor substitution should get denied (you never know with labor sub); then for her to file on your 140 the date has to be current or she canʼt file until it becomes current.
You and her just file on her 140. Problem is if the 140 gets denied then the window of opportunity to file the 485 again may not be for a couple of years.
You and her just file on your 140. Problem is that it may take a long time for you to eventually get the greencard approved.
If you want to be safe and want to spend more money then she would file as primary on her 140 and you as dependent. Then at same time we would file you as primary on your 140 and her as dependent on your 140.
Reply from Wife's Lawyer(Murthy):
"It is not possible for you to be her derivative as well as your own primary, and vice versa. It would require the filing of 2 I-485s and this causes nothing but confusion on the part of the USCIS. You have 2 choices. You could pick a case that you are going to proceed under, most likely the one with the earliest priority date, so long as there is confidence that the I-140 will be approved. Or, you can hedge your bets by each filing as your own primary because if one of the cases falls into a problem, the person can switch to be a derivative, but could run into a problem if there were not current priority dates at the time. But, so long as your both remain in H-1B status, and not use EAD/AP, that is minimized"
Me: EB2(10/2006) Pending I-140
Wife: EB3(04/2002 SUBSTITUTION) Pending I-140
Reply from My Lawyer.
"Many people are in your scenario.
There are many ways to do this. Each one being a little more expensive then others.
What can be done:
Your wife files as primary and you secondary on her 140.
You file as primary and her secondary on your 140.
Option #2
You file alone on your 140
She files alone on her 140.
Somehow if the dates should move backwards and her 140 on labor substitution should get denied (you never know with labor sub); then for her to file on your 140 the date has to be current or she canʼt file until it becomes current.
You and her just file on her 140. Problem is if the 140 gets denied then the window of opportunity to file the 485 again may not be for a couple of years.
You and her just file on your 140. Problem is that it may take a long time for you to eventually get the greencard approved.
If you want to be safe and want to spend more money then she would file as primary on her 140 and you as dependent. Then at same time we would file you as primary on your 140 and her as dependent on your 140.
Reply from Wife's Lawyer(Murthy):
"It is not possible for you to be her derivative as well as your own primary, and vice versa. It would require the filing of 2 I-485s and this causes nothing but confusion on the part of the USCIS. You have 2 choices. You could pick a case that you are going to proceed under, most likely the one with the earliest priority date, so long as there is confidence that the I-140 will be approved. Or, you can hedge your bets by each filing as your own primary because if one of the cases falls into a problem, the person can switch to be a derivative, but could run into a problem if there were not current priority dates at the time. But, so long as your both remain in H-1B status, and not use EAD/AP, that is minimized"
No comments:
Post a Comment