amitps
09-26 11:27 AM
Eilene Zimmerman
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
IV Leaders and Core are working on it...but feel free to call her / email her.
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
IV Leaders and Core are working on it...but feel free to call her / email her.
wallpaper The FIAT 600 Multipla:
singhsa3
02-22 09:18 AM
In ancient times there used be gods for every potentially powerful / Harmful things that people were afraid of . For example:
God of Fire : Hephasistos for greeks, Agnidev for Hindus, Vulcan for Romans
Godess of Wisdom : Athena for greeks, Sarswati for Hindus, Minerva for Romans
King of gods : Zeus for greeks , Indra for Hindus, Jupiter for Romans
etc etc...
So in the modern times we have the following gods, and we are afraid making them unhappy
God of Visa Bulletien : DOS
God of Visa issuance : INS
King of gods : The Lawmakers.
Then there are priests , who claim to have direct connections with these Gods. :D
I agree with you.
This guy googler just wants 5 minutes of fame and attention. By talking about such sensitive information on the forum, he is risking anything good that can happen for us in future. DOS can get unhappy with this official for discussing such information. I can understand the motives of lawyers for announcing on their website. They want publicity and business for themselves by showing off their connections.
God of Fire : Hephasistos for greeks, Agnidev for Hindus, Vulcan for Romans
Godess of Wisdom : Athena for greeks, Sarswati for Hindus, Minerva for Romans
King of gods : Zeus for greeks , Indra for Hindus, Jupiter for Romans
etc etc...
So in the modern times we have the following gods, and we are afraid making them unhappy
God of Visa Bulletien : DOS
God of Visa issuance : INS
King of gods : The Lawmakers.
Then there are priests , who claim to have direct connections with these Gods. :D
I agree with you.
This guy googler just wants 5 minutes of fame and attention. By talking about such sensitive information on the forum, he is risking anything good that can happen for us in future. DOS can get unhappy with this official for discussing such information. I can understand the motives of lawyers for announcing on their website. They want publicity and business for themselves by showing off their connections.
indio0617
11-20 09:20 AM
Probably, at this moment it might still be true but the reality is that it is soon going to be demoted from this position......so there is nothing like missing the opportunity....!!!!
VERY TRUE...
VERY TRUE...
2011 Fiat 600 Multipla 1956
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
more...
glus
09-10 03:27 PM
so....recess until 5pm... :-(
yabadaba
12-27 08:22 AM
this was back in 2004...was on opt till then...wellsfargo just needed my h1b approval notice to approve my mortgage
plus for tax purposes u r considered a permanent resident. that means u have lived in ur state for x number of days in a calendar year...never had issues with getting credit cards, car loan, etc.
of course i had 4 yrs of credit history before that..dont know if that helped.
plus for tax purposes u r considered a permanent resident. that means u have lived in ur state for x number of days in a calendar year...never had issues with getting credit cards, car loan, etc.
of course i had 4 yrs of credit history before that..dont know if that helped.
more...
sriramkalyan
06-10 12:48 PM
May be we should do some thing dramatic. Like sending letter to Canadian Government, here we are 1000 skilled people with extensive experience and International degrees. Collectively we going to bring in $1 million or more. Can you expedite our Permanent residency!!
All US senators know that EB immigrants are going through Hell hole of USCIS. They are unable to do anything about it.
All US senators know that EB immigrants are going through Hell hole of USCIS. They are unable to do anything about it.
2010 Photo for FIAT 600 Multipla
raysaikat
07-28 09:01 AM
Hi all,
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
Would you be offended if the image of Ganesh is used on a sack of rice or sugar or a bottle of cooking oil? If not, then what's the problem in using it on an alcoholic beverage bottle?
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
Would you be offended if the image of Ganesh is used on a sack of rice or sugar or a bottle of cooking oil? If not, then what's the problem in using it on an alcoholic beverage bottle?
more...
TomPlate
10-22 11:22 AM
So by your theory don't tax the rich at all. That way we will get all the money as wage from the rich. :D LOL. Do you really believe this? How is the trickle down economy working so far? BTW Clinton taxed the rich and the economy grew.
I mean tax everyone equally. During this tough economy time, consider everyone and not the middle class or upper class or lower class.
I mean tax everyone equally. During this tough economy time, consider everyone and not the middle class or upper class or lower class.
hair Fiat 600 Multipla
BharatPremi
09-26 10:08 AM
It is not about politics, it is about ignorance of the people (including reporters). It is explainable, though - what do you know about... I don't know, laws around transporting hazardous materials, something you have never been exposed or subject to? Next to nothing. That's what an average American knows about immigration - their closest brush with that law was when their co-worker adopted a child from abroad. Of course, they do not know the difference between worker visas, and employment based immigrant visas (don't they even sound alike?).
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
more...
tinamatthew
07-23 12:14 AM
I came to US through CompanyA on L1A Visa 4 months back. My L1A Visa is valid till Mar-09. I had applied for the H1B Visa when I was in India. I got the H1B Visa and now has a valid petition effective Oct-07.
I would like to know the following.
Can I join the Company B from Company A without going back to India after Oct-07?Shouldn't be a problem, but I need some clarifying
Do you have an i-94 for the H1B visa? Do you have 2 visas in your passport - L1 and H1? Or so you have an a receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B
Please clarify
I would like to know the following.
Can I join the Company B from Company A without going back to India after Oct-07?Shouldn't be a problem, but I need some clarifying
Do you have an i-94 for the H1B visa? Do you have 2 visas in your passport - L1 and H1? Or so you have an a receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B
Please clarify
hot Fiat 600 Multipla
suriajay12
04-04 08:59 AM
immigration-law.com says:.. Please read the second part which is more relavant to us.
04/04/2009: Congress Passed Concurrent Resolution, H. Con. Res. 93, to "Conditional" Recess Until April 20, 2009
* The 111th Congress has passed most of key and time-sensitive bills in the first three months. The last important bill which the Congress passed was the Obama Administration's FY 2010 budget proposal. Both the House and the Senate swiftly passed the budget in the last two days. It is historical in that the single most hot button legislative bill is a budget for the government and it tends to drag the legislative process for months. This week's Congressional action on the FY 2010 budget recorded a history.
* Having resolved most of hot botton legislations, yesterday the House and the Senate passed by unaimous consent a concurrent resolution to go into recess "conditionally" until April 20 for the Senate and April 21 for the House. "Conditionally" means when any hot issues develop, the leadership of the House and the Senate can always call back the Congress into the session during this period. Accordingly, unless such event develops, the Hill will remain quite for almost next three weeks in the legislative activities.
* The members of the House and the Senate are returning to their neighborhoods to recharge their energy in their political constituency. This presents a golden opportunity for the pro and con immigrant advocates to work with the legislators to support their immigration agenda when they return to the Hill after April 20th. These legislators never rest. Recess does not mean that they can take a time off to enjoy sleep for extended hours or enjoy a vacation. In fact, they tend to get busier in their community to harden and expand their political roots. It is time for the immigration advocators to roll up their sleeves to work with these legislators in their neighborhoods on person to person basis.
04/04/2009: Congress Passed Concurrent Resolution, H. Con. Res. 93, to "Conditional" Recess Until April 20, 2009
* The 111th Congress has passed most of key and time-sensitive bills in the first three months. The last important bill which the Congress passed was the Obama Administration's FY 2010 budget proposal. Both the House and the Senate swiftly passed the budget in the last two days. It is historical in that the single most hot button legislative bill is a budget for the government and it tends to drag the legislative process for months. This week's Congressional action on the FY 2010 budget recorded a history.
* Having resolved most of hot botton legislations, yesterday the House and the Senate passed by unaimous consent a concurrent resolution to go into recess "conditionally" until April 20 for the Senate and April 21 for the House. "Conditionally" means when any hot issues develop, the leadership of the House and the Senate can always call back the Congress into the session during this period. Accordingly, unless such event develops, the Hill will remain quite for almost next three weeks in the legislative activities.
* The members of the House and the Senate are returning to their neighborhoods to recharge their energy in their political constituency. This presents a golden opportunity for the pro and con immigrant advocates to work with the legislators to support their immigration agenda when they return to the Hill after April 20th. These legislators never rest. Recess does not mean that they can take a time off to enjoy sleep for extended hours or enjoy a vacation. In fact, they tend to get busier in their community to harden and expand their political roots. It is time for the immigration advocators to roll up their sleeves to work with these legislators in their neighborhoods on person to person basis.
more...
house FIAT Multipla 600 D
meimmi
03-09 04:45 PM
In my husband's case we dont have that much time.
Here what our plan is:-
1. Self file G-28.
2. Follow up with an infopass appt. with in a month.
Rest god willing. What ever is going to happen will happen. No one can stop it from happening.
Hi, Did you send the AC21 letter yourself? Can you please let us know the format of the letter and supporting documents you sent? Also, please share the format of G-28 explanation. How was your experience so far? Did you receive any confirmation back from USCIS? Thanks.
Here what our plan is:-
1. Self file G-28.
2. Follow up with an infopass appt. with in a month.
Rest god willing. What ever is going to happen will happen. No one can stop it from happening.
Hi, Did you send the AC21 letter yourself? Can you please let us know the format of the letter and supporting documents you sent? Also, please share the format of G-28 explanation. How was your experience so far? Did you receive any confirmation back from USCIS? Thanks.
tattoo model 600 middot; Virtual Tuning
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
more...
pictures Fiat 600 Multipla.
cshen
06-12 06:28 AM
We are not out of the CIR woods yet.
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
dresses Fiat 600 Multipla (1956-1965)
Ennada
12-10 01:36 PM
Easy boys and girls. We will need to stay united to win this. Cool it and enjoy the holiday season. :)
more...
makeup eenzame Fiat 600 Multipla.
pkak
07-09 08:10 PM
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
They cannot issue more than 37.800 visas for april-may-june quarter (0.27*140,000).
37800+13000 is less than 60,000.
my 2 cents...
They cannot issue more than 37.800 visas for april-may-june quarter (0.27*140,000).
37800+13000 is less than 60,000.
girlfriend Fiat Multipla 600D, 1964
sri1309
03-30 03:09 PM
Number USA is ready to kill our bill. If we introduce at time nothing is going to happen . Even it may kill CIR and that is what Anti wants.. This guy is encouraging people to push for recapture which will die soon. Why he didnot update profile. Even if he is good member he should pledge 25 $.
Did you read undocumented guys are trying to push their cause and by putting legals aside, which the goverment seems to be hearing. What makes you feel we must wait.. Just because you cannot contribute anything except for yourself. .People waiting for close to 10 years are usually in a position to create value and they are tied to this backlogs. We know EB2 is going at some pace.. How much time do you think is needed for EB2 to be in bin, into the same state as EB3 is in, right now.
Did you read undocumented guys are trying to push their cause and by putting legals aside, which the goverment seems to be hearing. What makes you feel we must wait.. Just because you cannot contribute anything except for yourself. .People waiting for close to 10 years are usually in a position to create value and they are tied to this backlogs. We know EB2 is going at some pace.. How much time do you think is needed for EB2 to be in bin, into the same state as EB3 is in, right now.
hairstyles De ludieke Fiat Multipla was
pcs
01-16 12:47 PM
Siva,
Thanks for listening to the request of lazy guys like me ( who cooled off after making intial contributions )
I will shoot some more on happy occasions like my Kid's birth day etc...
Thanks for listening to the request of lazy guys like me ( who cooled off after making intial contributions )
I will shoot some more on happy occasions like my Kid's birth day etc...
Jaime
09-10 09:55 PM
Microsoft using cricket to try to stop Reverse Brain Drain!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/...oft_cricket_dc
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/...oft_cricket_dc
bigboy007
06-11 12:36 PM
Don’t think you understand so let me give it a shot.
Let’s be smart, think for ourselves and act on our own behalf to send simple message requesting the Senate offices to oppose this amendment. What is so complicated about this? And if you don't want to participate, that's fine, but why would you discourage others from sending a simple message to the Senators from their state? Don't you have anything better to do?
Great explanation , Thank you for posting.
Let’s be smart, think for ourselves and act on our own behalf to send simple message requesting the Senate offices to oppose this amendment. What is so complicated about this? And if you don't want to participate, that's fine, but why would you discourage others from sending a simple message to the Senators from their state? Don't you have anything better to do?
Great explanation , Thank you for posting.
No comments:
Post a Comment