sodh
07-23 03:39 PM
Do you have any document from CIS? Need some proof to fight.
Important missing documents,USCIS can reject an application on their discretion, no need for RFE.
Important missing documents,USCIS can reject an application on their discretion, no need for RFE.
wallpaper kim kardashian w magazine
tucker
03-14 07:14 PM
Id be up for a character modeling battle :) Then i can overcome my fear of battles :X
xlr8r
06-11 08:55 AM
Done.
2011 kim kardashian w magazine pics
go_gc_way
01-18 02:05 PM
Hi Go_Gc_Way
Can you please modify the AD content.
Immigration voice is a non-profit 501 (c) (4) (pending) organization. All of Immigration Voice�s financial transactions will be audited by a CPA, submitted to the IRS.(please remove pending,we are approved)
Members from 6000 to 8000.
Content, content updated. Please verify and let me know.
Can you please modify the AD content.
Immigration voice is a non-profit 501 (c) (4) (pending) organization. All of Immigration Voice�s financial transactions will be audited by a CPA, submitted to the IRS.(please remove pending,we are approved)
Members from 6000 to 8000.
Content, content updated. Please verify and let me know.
more...
hara_patta_for_rico
07-10 08:12 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
gcisadawg
12-14 11:20 PM
kumar1,
I agree to most of the points you wrote. I believe there is one thing that you missed.
H1B is a dual intent visa that allows a foreigner to work in US and also apply for permanent residency. It was originally intended for American companies to hire people from abroad. But how many American companies hire people directly from abroad? Even if there is some, it would be very very minimal.
Body shoppers are the one who take on the difficult task of interviewing/recruiting/sponsoring/air-lifting the foreigner to USA in addition to preparing the candidate to withstand the rigors of a visa interview.
They give initial accommodation (agreed, a 1BR aptmnt cramped with many ppl), pay on bench ( accepted, not all), place the candidate on a project and get the foreigner US work/cultural experience. After they go through the whole nine yards, these American companies jump in and poach these H1Bs.
Take the body shoppers and glorified body shoppers like TCS, wipro, infy etc out of the equation and you would have sheer wastage of H1B numbers since the American companies will not go abroad to recruit someone who is unfamiliar with US work culture.
That is why congress came up with 20K quota for master degree holders who can be recruited directly by US corporations. In my opinion, US corporations should not complain at all since they were never interested in upholding the true spirit of H1B by recruiting people from abroad directly.
-gcisadawg
I agree to most of the points you wrote. I believe there is one thing that you missed.
H1B is a dual intent visa that allows a foreigner to work in US and also apply for permanent residency. It was originally intended for American companies to hire people from abroad. But how many American companies hire people directly from abroad? Even if there is some, it would be very very minimal.
Body shoppers are the one who take on the difficult task of interviewing/recruiting/sponsoring/air-lifting the foreigner to USA in addition to preparing the candidate to withstand the rigors of a visa interview.
They give initial accommodation (agreed, a 1BR aptmnt cramped with many ppl), pay on bench ( accepted, not all), place the candidate on a project and get the foreigner US work/cultural experience. After they go through the whole nine yards, these American companies jump in and poach these H1Bs.
Take the body shoppers and glorified body shoppers like TCS, wipro, infy etc out of the equation and you would have sheer wastage of H1B numbers since the American companies will not go abroad to recruit someone who is unfamiliar with US work culture.
That is why congress came up with 20K quota for master degree holders who can be recruited directly by US corporations. In my opinion, US corporations should not complain at all since they were never interested in upholding the true spirit of H1B by recruiting people from abroad directly.
-gcisadawg
more...
snathan
08-21 08:20 PM
Thank you to those of you who were kind enough to respond with helpful information and some understanding for my situation. I do appreciate that much.
And for those of you who were sarcastic and rude and accusing me of being illegal, if that was the case, then why has USCIS not stated that one time in all the correspondence I have had from them and why are they willing to give me a chance to file the required forms at this time?
They know where I live, who I live with and anything else they need to know. Illegal immigrants don't make themselves known to anybody that could/would report them. If I had something to hide, I would do so, but I have no secrets from them whatsoever. I have done all I have been asked to do and have the paperwork to prove it. I have not gotten a job anywhere outside of the home I live in and they are well aware of what I do here, I have not committed any crimes, my biometrics have come back clear, therefore I have no criminal record in my home country, so therefore I am not a threat whatsoever to anyone in the US.
No one at USCIS has ever stated by phone or mail that I am here illegally and if that was the case, I would think they would have been quick to deport me since they knew everything they needed to know in order to find me and still do. I have nothing to hide.
I am not sure what you are trying to achive here by trying to prove your legality. Normally the USCIS wont come after you immidiately. But once you are not able to provide what they ask, they might deny your I-485 and ICE will be at your door step. So try to fix the problem before its too late rather than wasting your time here.
And for those of you who were sarcastic and rude and accusing me of being illegal, if that was the case, then why has USCIS not stated that one time in all the correspondence I have had from them and why are they willing to give me a chance to file the required forms at this time?
They know where I live, who I live with and anything else they need to know. Illegal immigrants don't make themselves known to anybody that could/would report them. If I had something to hide, I would do so, but I have no secrets from them whatsoever. I have done all I have been asked to do and have the paperwork to prove it. I have not gotten a job anywhere outside of the home I live in and they are well aware of what I do here, I have not committed any crimes, my biometrics have come back clear, therefore I have no criminal record in my home country, so therefore I am not a threat whatsoever to anyone in the US.
No one at USCIS has ever stated by phone or mail that I am here illegally and if that was the case, I would think they would have been quick to deport me since they knew everything they needed to know in order to find me and still do. I have nothing to hide.
I am not sure what you are trying to achive here by trying to prove your legality. Normally the USCIS wont come after you immidiately. But once you are not able to provide what they ask, they might deny your I-485 and ICE will be at your door step. So try to fix the problem before its too late rather than wasting your time here.
2010 kim kardashian w magazine
jonty_11
12-13 04:06 PM
ALso, if u worked for a Client get the Client to write u a letter on Client Letter head stating u workind through Consulting COmpany ABC
more...
ksiddaba
07-04 07:39 PM
Thanks for the information. It's helpful to understand the ombudsman role. However, it still remains a violation of the law to pull VISA numbers without name check being done, since it has not been approved by Congress, although as you point our, the ombudsman did report to Congress along those lines.
IT is also incompetence, on the part of DOS not to understand the implication of making all categories current.
The question of whether a lawsuit is the most effective method will have to be seen. It may bring enough media/ political attention to the issue at hand so that legislation may become possible.
IT is also incompetence, on the part of DOS not to understand the implication of making all categories current.
The question of whether a lawsuit is the most effective method will have to be seen. It may bring enough media/ political attention to the issue at hand so that legislation may become possible.
hair kim kardashian w magazine
cowboy
07-18 11:14 AM
My case was sent by my attorney June 29th (current July bulletin) USPS certified mail.
As per USPS online tracking record it was delivered July 2nd 12.45 PM.
No receipt yet. So far sounds okay.
But I got the copy of actual delivery receipt stamped by F.Heinauer (Director NSC USCIS) with the date 062907.
It is a stamp so some of their employee clearly has stamped it.
Now I am confused if that’s the receipt date they are going to go with and may reject the application.
And with this many application it may take more than AUG 17th to receive anything back.
I am very sure it was reached on July 2nd. It was only sent June 29th afternoon.
And USPS is telling there is no delivery can reach so fast. According to USPS the guy who might have stamped the delivery did not changed the stamp date from 0629 to 0702 since it was a weekend.
Anybody in the same situation? Any advice?
Thanks
As per USPS online tracking record it was delivered July 2nd 12.45 PM.
No receipt yet. So far sounds okay.
But I got the copy of actual delivery receipt stamped by F.Heinauer (Director NSC USCIS) with the date 062907.
It is a stamp so some of their employee clearly has stamped it.
Now I am confused if that’s the receipt date they are going to go with and may reject the application.
And with this many application it may take more than AUG 17th to receive anything back.
I am very sure it was reached on July 2nd. It was only sent June 29th afternoon.
And USPS is telling there is no delivery can reach so fast. According to USPS the guy who might have stamped the delivery did not changed the stamp date from 0629 to 0702 since it was a weekend.
Anybody in the same situation? Any advice?
Thanks
more...
diptam
07-24 11:14 AM
Guys,
I signed a bond of 10G for getting a hardcopy of this letter mailed out by June 29th from my company's NJ office. This is initial evidence that you have FUTURE job offer and without it the 485 will be rejected.
If someone is lucky let they be - Do NOT make this mistake of not sending this letter in ORIGINAL.
Thanks,
I will try to dig out the actual memo. But this is from the oh law firm page:
---
06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing
* As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
* One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."
---
I signed a bond of 10G for getting a hardcopy of this letter mailed out by June 29th from my company's NJ office. This is initial evidence that you have FUTURE job offer and without it the 485 will be rejected.
If someone is lucky let they be - Do NOT make this mistake of not sending this letter in ORIGINAL.
Thanks,
I will try to dig out the actual memo. But this is from the oh law firm page:
---
06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing
* As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
* One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."
---
hot kim kardashian w cover photo.
sashidhar_gundimeda
07-02 08:14 PM
Confirmation Number: 34850160M9463882Y.
Thanks and keep up the good work - Sashi
Thanks and keep up the good work - Sashi
more...
house Kim Kardashian poses naked on
a_yaja
07-09 04:47 PM
I hope this lawsuit fails. Looking ahead this lawsuit, if it succeeds might do us more damage than good. Law of unintended consequences states that something can happen we haven't thought of.
Supposing, if lawsuit goes ahead and wins, one outcome might be - USCIS might start adhering to strict interpretation of 7% per country, or curtail spillovers drastically. Then we are in deep shit.
How can USCIS adher to 7% per country quota when AC21 explicitly says that if visas are still available after allotment to ROW, the remaining visas must spill over to the over subscribed countries?
As a result of failure of this lawsuite, if they start adhering to 7% cap, then they are in violation of AC21. That would be another lawsuite for sure.
Supposing, if lawsuit goes ahead and wins, one outcome might be - USCIS might start adhering to strict interpretation of 7% per country, or curtail spillovers drastically. Then we are in deep shit.
How can USCIS adher to 7% per country quota when AC21 explicitly says that if visas are still available after allotment to ROW, the remaining visas must spill over to the over subscribed countries?
As a result of failure of this lawsuite, if they start adhering to 7% cap, then they are in violation of AC21. That would be another lawsuite for sure.
tattoo Kim Kardashian regretted
alterego
03-16 12:44 AM
A few things.
Ignoring folks who are full of themselves is the best way to make them go away.
There are many reasons why people with priority dates before 2004 are stuck in queue. Some I can think of are:
1) Backlog labors that were completed as recently as late last year.
2) Background check stuck applications.
3) Labor Subs which were allowed as recently as last summer.
4) EB3-EB2 cases, where PDs are transferred.
5) Other applications that cannot be approved due to time specific requirements such as physician NIW cases.
6) Some cases that just slipped through the cracks of USCIS inefficiency.
Many of the above causes are being/have been addressed, however their impact will be with us for some time yet, unless there is a visa recapture legislation to make up for the unused visas.
Ignoring folks who are full of themselves is the best way to make them go away.
There are many reasons why people with priority dates before 2004 are stuck in queue. Some I can think of are:
1) Backlog labors that were completed as recently as late last year.
2) Background check stuck applications.
3) Labor Subs which were allowed as recently as last summer.
4) EB3-EB2 cases, where PDs are transferred.
5) Other applications that cannot be approved due to time specific requirements such as physician NIW cases.
6) Some cases that just slipped through the cracks of USCIS inefficiency.
Many of the above causes are being/have been addressed, however their impact will be with us for some time yet, unless there is a visa recapture legislation to make up for the unused visas.
more...
pictures Look at lil kim kardashian
swede
09-19 08:49 AM
All speeches and performances were great. I did not intend to leave anyone out. The song that was written for the occasion(!) was cool. Jay's speech was powerful. And everything else. It was all great. People who were not there really missed something. As someone said, "America is about fighting for your rights." and I was glad to see that so many decided to do that yesterday!
dresses According to W Magazine, quot;Kim
jcgc
02-21 02:13 PM
I can share some estimates for EB2 India through Dec03. I wish had the cases as a database, Then we could query for all dates.
Column 1: PD
Column 2: Nbr. Of EB2 India pending from
Column 3: Estimated Universe of EB2 India Pending ( to Universe ratio of 6.75%)
Column 4: Cumulative EB2 India pending
2000-01 0 - -
2000-03 0 - -
2000-04 1 15 15
2000-06 1 15 30
2000-08 0 - 30
2000-11 1 15 44
2000-12 0 - 44
2001-01 0 - 44
2001-03 1 15 59
2001-04 3 44 104
2001-05 2 30 133
2001-06 6 89 222
2001-07 3 44 267
2001-08 1 15 281
2001-09 1 15 296
2001-10 6 89 385
2001-11 2 30 415
2001-12 2 30 444
2002-01 5 74 519
2002-02 4 59 578
2002-03 1 15 593
2002-04 3 44 637
2002-05 11 163 800
2002-06 7 104 904
2002-07 5 74 978
2002-08 5 74 1,052
2002-09 5 74 1,126
2002-10 14 207 1,333
2002-11 16 237 1,570
2002-12 11 163 1,733
2003-01 13 193 1,926
2003-02 12 178 2,104
2003-03 20 296 2,400
2003-04 13 193 2,593
2003-05 16 237 2,830
2003-06 17 252 3,081
2003-07 22 326 3,407
2003-08 18 267 3,674
2003-09 18 267 3,941
2003-10 29 430 4,370
2003-11 17 252 4,622
2003-12 18 267 4,889
Total 330 4,889
Column 1: PD
Column 2: Nbr. Of EB2 India pending from
Column 3: Estimated Universe of EB2 India Pending ( to Universe ratio of 6.75%)
Column 4: Cumulative EB2 India pending
2000-01 0 - -
2000-03 0 - -
2000-04 1 15 15
2000-06 1 15 30
2000-08 0 - 30
2000-11 1 15 44
2000-12 0 - 44
2001-01 0 - 44
2001-03 1 15 59
2001-04 3 44 104
2001-05 2 30 133
2001-06 6 89 222
2001-07 3 44 267
2001-08 1 15 281
2001-09 1 15 296
2001-10 6 89 385
2001-11 2 30 415
2001-12 2 30 444
2002-01 5 74 519
2002-02 4 59 578
2002-03 1 15 593
2002-04 3 44 637
2002-05 11 163 800
2002-06 7 104 904
2002-07 5 74 978
2002-08 5 74 1,052
2002-09 5 74 1,126
2002-10 14 207 1,333
2002-11 16 237 1,570
2002-12 11 163 1,733
2003-01 13 193 1,926
2003-02 12 178 2,104
2003-03 20 296 2,400
2003-04 13 193 2,593
2003-05 16 237 2,830
2003-06 17 252 3,081
2003-07 22 326 3,407
2003-08 18 267 3,674
2003-09 18 267 3,941
2003-10 29 430 4,370
2003-11 17 252 4,622
2003-12 18 267 4,889
Total 330 4,889
more...
makeup Kim Kardashian Says W Magazine
pointlesswait
03-11 11:04 PM
kelaaaaaa....re kela..
girlfriend Kim Kardashian W Magazine
cableching
07-11 03:02 PM
I think movement in EB-3 for India nad Chine will be difficult, as most of the folks from ROW apply under EB3 and most of the applicants in EB2 are from India and Chine?
As a result EB-3 quota is used up easily and the per country limits apply for Indians and Chinese. Where as for EB-2, the per country limits do not apply as the ROW applicants are not that many.
As a result EB-3 quota is used up easily and the per country limits apply for Indians and Chinese. Where as for EB-2, the per country limits do not apply as the ROW applicants are not that many.
hairstyles Kim Kardashian regretted
chris
04-24 03:13 AM
Congrats Googler.
Did you see any LUD's before approval ?
__ visa numbers will be deducted from quota :D ( fill in the blank please )
All,
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Did you see any LUD's before approval ?
__ visa numbers will be deducted from quota :D ( fill in the blank please )
All,
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
go_guy123
09-09 03:05 PM
With republican House there is zero chance of anything happening on any kind of immigration bill. Nothing other than border security will be taken up. It will be best to kiss good bye to GC dreams if republicans win the House.
yes you will get border security (more national guards/agents at the border, mandatory SSN check )
in exchange for SKIL bill. GOP will thrown the illegals under the bus with backing of technology lobby (opposite of what the democratic party does: throw the skilled immigrants under under the bus at every oppotunity)
yes you will get border security (more national guards/agents at the border, mandatory SSN check )
in exchange for SKIL bill. GOP will thrown the illegals under the bus with backing of technology lobby (opposite of what the democratic party does: throw the skilled immigrants under under the bus at every oppotunity)
ronhira
04-10 10:40 AM
Time and again I am telling. EB 3 problem is due to 245(i) cases. Once 245(i) primaries are over, their dependent will come into the picture, who are waiting back home. All 245(i) cases have PD before April 2001. For time being, EB3 I or Mexico move beyond April 01 but again retrogress back to the April 01 when cases are accumulate at CP. This is the reason why EB3 I and Mexico is not moving since last many years.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
what r u...... y don't u file foia to prove your twisted racist theories.... y r u always attacking mexican immigrants or 245(i)...... 245(i) was a LEGAL provision in the law...... who made that law..... congress....... assuming any merit to u'r racist theory.... y r u faulting the people who filed 245(i)..... y not fault the congress for passing 245(i) & not passing immigration bill....
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
what r u...... y don't u file foia to prove your twisted racist theories.... y r u always attacking mexican immigrants or 245(i)...... 245(i) was a LEGAL provision in the law...... who made that law..... congress....... assuming any merit to u'r racist theory.... y r u faulting the people who filed 245(i)..... y not fault the congress for passing 245(i) & not passing immigration bill....
No comments:
Post a Comment