anju
09-05 11:40 AM
Do you know about new category when booking visa stamping appointment?
It reads Renewing same category visa expired within last 12 months. If you say yes, there is no appointment available as of today. At least not in Chennai consulate? Anyone knows about this?
Anju
It reads Renewing same category visa expired within last 12 months. If you say yes, there is no appointment available as of today. At least not in Chennai consulate? Anyone knows about this?
Anju
wallpaper megan fox hair color dye. blue
perm2gc
01-17 01:34 PM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationforum/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigration-usa/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigration-usa/
Abhinaym
07-03 12:01 PM
I admit, it seems discriminatory to say you can't get your GC now because you're from this country or that country but these "high volume" countries have created the current back log through their sheer numbers and sometimes multiple applications, not the system. The system is fair to ALL and for some group to say that it isn't fair because all of that group isn't getting what they want is unjust to the rest of us. I knew I would be pounced upon when I submitted my original post and it only proves my point of personal agendas; sometimes I wonder what the "I" in "IV" really stands for? Don't be so arrogant as to believe that your higher education should give you more rights than others - that doesn't fly with me! I am frustrated with this forum because of this arrogance and I may not visit too much longer!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Ridiculous, nobody ever mentioned education here. Did any one here mention higher education at all?
You want to get ahead of me in the line just because where I was born even if we're equally qualified, and you're calling me arrogant???
Yes, our countries are 'high volume', how does it matter? Who are you blaming for what? Now what, you want to be commended and applauded for your countries' low population? :D LOL!
Why is it so unjust to wait your turn?
BS! IV has done so much for all immigrants and not just Indians. You should get your facts straight here. Besides this is a thread created for this purpose, there are plenty of threads which help you, if you ignore all of those and make your opinions on this you're being obnoxious. Also, the number of people in support of this petition is a tiny proportion of IV'ers. So stop stereotyping man, it is showing.
You say that we applicants are to blame for our countries' populations? I.e. we're responsible for circumstances that happened before our birth? Could you get any more ridiculous please?
I hope you begin to understand who is sounding arrogant here.
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Ridiculous, nobody ever mentioned education here. Did any one here mention higher education at all?
You want to get ahead of me in the line just because where I was born even if we're equally qualified, and you're calling me arrogant???
Yes, our countries are 'high volume', how does it matter? Who are you blaming for what? Now what, you want to be commended and applauded for your countries' low population? :D LOL!
Why is it so unjust to wait your turn?
BS! IV has done so much for all immigrants and not just Indians. You should get your facts straight here. Besides this is a thread created for this purpose, there are plenty of threads which help you, if you ignore all of those and make your opinions on this you're being obnoxious. Also, the number of people in support of this petition is a tiny proportion of IV'ers. So stop stereotyping man, it is showing.
You say that we applicants are to blame for our countries' populations? I.e. we're responsible for circumstances that happened before our birth? Could you get any more ridiculous please?
I hope you begin to understand who is sounding arrogant here.
2011 megan fox hair color dye.
pappu
01-18 01:18 PM
we need some more members to keep this effort stay ignited. This effort has helped us get several hundred members in the past few weeks. Pls continue to help. It will only take 15 min of your time.
more...
desi3933
03-11 11:49 AM
Don't put words in my mouth.
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way. About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
>> Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand.
[COLOR=Black]
Thanks for using such "polite" language.
------------------------------------------------------
I think it is in our interest to punish the first insult; because an insult unpunished is the parent of many others. -- Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, 1785
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way. About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
>> Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand.
[COLOR=Black]
Thanks for using such "polite" language.
------------------------------------------------------
I think it is in our interest to punish the first insult; because an insult unpunished is the parent of many others. -- Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, 1785
newbee7
07-05 12:58 AM
"Although USCIS stated in its 2006 Annual Report Response (at p. 8) that it provides detailed data to DOS, the tri-agency group identified gaps in USCIS’ data. Through these discussions, the Ombudsman learned that accounting and processing methods differ at the Nebraska and Texas Service Centers (where USCIS processes employment-based petitions)."
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf
more...
goel_ar
08-08 09:47 AM
I work at one of these companies & they applied for my GC.
2010 megan fox hair color dye.
bfadlia
02-16 01:57 PM
I am sorry if I offended anyone. I don't recall how.
and by the way, my friend, you really really need a life :-) That's the last thing you'll hear from me on this subject.
peace out
don't worry my friend.. it's not u.. that dummy has been using this fascist style of discussion on all threads
just ignore him.. it infuriates him like hell.. u'll be amused with his later responses :)
and by the way, my friend, you really really need a life :-) That's the last thing you'll hear from me on this subject.
peace out
don't worry my friend.. it's not u.. that dummy has been using this fascist style of discussion on all threads
just ignore him.. it infuriates him like hell.. u'll be amused with his later responses :)
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:25 PM
nixstor,
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Well, Thats what I have said before as well. Its like setting the order card flag to "yes" on 60K cases with older PD's. I do not know from where Jay Solomon got the tip off about lapse of name checks, unless they are trying to make this a big issue through all possible means. There have been stories flying around that they by passed on security checks, which I thought your original post conveyed. Most of the 485's they approved have been the one's with PD's from 2003 and 2004 initially. If there are a few from the pile that were of later PD's, I don't think its a big issue. The lack of communication and implementation/interpretation at their whims and fancies has resulted in the situation at hand for every one involved in the chain. I am very very positive that the OB's office has nothing do with this and USCIS is not worried about the postmortem conducted by OB.
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Well, Thats what I have said before as well. Its like setting the order card flag to "yes" on 60K cases with older PD's. I do not know from where Jay Solomon got the tip off about lapse of name checks, unless they are trying to make this a big issue through all possible means. There have been stories flying around that they by passed on security checks, which I thought your original post conveyed. Most of the 485's they approved have been the one's with PD's from 2003 and 2004 initially. If there are a few from the pile that were of later PD's, I don't think its a big issue. The lack of communication and implementation/interpretation at their whims and fancies has resulted in the situation at hand for every one involved in the chain. I am very very positive that the OB's office has nothing do with this and USCIS is not worried about the postmortem conducted by OB.
hair megan fox hair color dye.
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
more...
kaisersose
08-17 10:06 AM
hi everyone,
I want to get feedback about the possibility of pursuing PERM for EB2 and still capture my PD for EB3. Here is my situation.
I am a South Korean with PD in Dec. 04 on EB3. I filed I-485 along with EAD & AP on 7/25/07.
I recently got a master's degree in another field, and my current job can hire me in a different position.
Q1. If I ask my employer to file PERM on EB2 for the new position requiring the master's degree, I should be able to capture the PD (12/04) for my EB3, right?
Q2. Based on the september visa bulletin, should I wait on the EB-3 AOD application to be processed or would it be faster to switch to EB-2 and refile I-485? Please explain why.
Thanks.
A1: If you have an approved I-140 for the earlier PD, the answer is yes.
A2: You do not have to refile 485. Apply for PERM and get a new 140 for this PERM substituting your earlier PD. Now you will have an EB2 I-140 with the 2004 PD. There is an option to replace the 140 for an already filed 485. Just do that and you are all set.
I want to get feedback about the possibility of pursuing PERM for EB2 and still capture my PD for EB3. Here is my situation.
I am a South Korean with PD in Dec. 04 on EB3. I filed I-485 along with EAD & AP on 7/25/07.
I recently got a master's degree in another field, and my current job can hire me in a different position.
Q1. If I ask my employer to file PERM on EB2 for the new position requiring the master's degree, I should be able to capture the PD (12/04) for my EB3, right?
Q2. Based on the september visa bulletin, should I wait on the EB-3 AOD application to be processed or would it be faster to switch to EB-2 and refile I-485? Please explain why.
Thanks.
A1: If you have an approved I-140 for the earlier PD, the answer is yes.
A2: You do not have to refile 485. Apply for PERM and get a new 140 for this PERM substituting your earlier PD. Now you will have an EB2 I-140 with the 2004 PD. There is an option to replace the 140 for an already filed 485. Just do that and you are all set.
hot megan fox hair color dye.
Legal
12-27 09:58 AM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
NOT TRUE.
You are considered a permanent resident for tax purposes. :mad:
If you noticed carefully most mutual fund application forms ask "are you a
resident of US? " i.e they are asking you "are you a resident for tax purpsoses". You are not visiting US of r6 months or you are not trying to open an account while living in India. Just say YES;)
NOT TRUE.
You are considered a permanent resident for tax purposes. :mad:
If you noticed carefully most mutual fund application forms ask "are you a
resident of US? " i.e they are asking you "are you a resident for tax purpsoses". You are not visiting US of r6 months or you are not trying to open an account while living in India. Just say YES;)
more...
house crazy hair color dye. megan
nomi
12-13 12:21 PM
I am sure that the IV core has already explored this option. We need some kind of feedback from them.
===============
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
- Mohandas Gandhi
Slogan of the Linux community
Sure... we will wiat for IV Core Team and their approval. I am writing letter to USCIS and then I will paste it here so you guys can also see and we can fix it and add or remove stuff from it and once we make it final then we will give it to core team so they can look and approve it or change it if they want. I will paste it here once i am done. Let keep it moving untill we get some feedback from core team .
thx.
nomi
===============
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
- Mohandas Gandhi
Slogan of the Linux community
Sure... we will wiat for IV Core Team and their approval. I am writing letter to USCIS and then I will paste it here so you guys can also see and we can fix it and add or remove stuff from it and once we make it final then we will give it to core team so they can look and approve it or change it if they want. I will paste it here once i am done. Let keep it moving untill we get some feedback from core team .
thx.
nomi
tattoo megan fox hair color dye.
GCNaseeb
10-12 09:20 PM
See signature
more...
pictures Megan Fox Cool Haircut
guy03062
11-11 05:00 PM
Good one :p
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
dresses megan fox hair color dye.
ezee
10-16 04:37 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
more...
makeup megan fox hair color dye.
Mr.Z
12-10 05:32 PM
Hi friends,
I need your help!!!
I'm here at California with L-2 visa. I can stay legally in US but i can not get a SSN number, i can work too.But For a driver license they ask for SSN. Do i still get the Driver License or no?
Thank you very much...
Anyone:confused::confused:
I need your help!!!
I'm here at California with L-2 visa. I can stay legally in US but i can not get a SSN number, i can work too.But For a driver license they ask for SSN. Do i still get the Driver License or no?
Thank you very much...
Anyone:confused::confused:
girlfriend megan fox hair color dye.
Slumdog
01-22 04:17 PM
JSB, I agree partially with your analogy on US & Japan�s Quality of life but that is a generalized statement. The meaning of �Quality of Life� is lost the day people started looking at their house as an investment.
I also agree the quality of Life comes with a price. But not everything should be looked or compared monetarily. Back when I was kid, my Dad had a choice to send me to Govt School or Private school. Private school was expensive & he did pay price by sending me to private school, cutting most of his expenses because he wanted to give good quality of life for his kids. So for everything there is a Price to pay & what �price� means to you is again subjective. There is a lot of difference between Quality of Life & Enjoyment. If a person can only afford Honda Civic & he wishes to buy BMW X5 then he is doing that for his own enjoyment & NOT quality of life. I call it Stupidity. Buying a house (Affordable) with calculated risks is totally different matter & I will explain why on my next topic.
Your Comment �where a GC seeker gets up at 5am in a nicely furnished home, and gets to work, is entirely his choosing for happiness with material things. He knowingly chooses to sacrifice his peace of mind for more material wealth� is purely your imagination except that I getup at 5:00 & go to work. I am almost done writing new topic �Why Non GC Holders buy houses?� & will be posting shortly. Watch out for that & may be you will find some answers.
No Joke, I agree with you on considering the risks associated with quality of life.
Saggi13, It�s sad to hear your side of story. However I did have a backup plan & reserves & I will be explaining my side of story in the above new topic. Don�t loose hope & you will be back in no time.
~ Slumdog
I also agree the quality of Life comes with a price. But not everything should be looked or compared monetarily. Back when I was kid, my Dad had a choice to send me to Govt School or Private school. Private school was expensive & he did pay price by sending me to private school, cutting most of his expenses because he wanted to give good quality of life for his kids. So for everything there is a Price to pay & what �price� means to you is again subjective. There is a lot of difference between Quality of Life & Enjoyment. If a person can only afford Honda Civic & he wishes to buy BMW X5 then he is doing that for his own enjoyment & NOT quality of life. I call it Stupidity. Buying a house (Affordable) with calculated risks is totally different matter & I will explain why on my next topic.
Your Comment �where a GC seeker gets up at 5am in a nicely furnished home, and gets to work, is entirely his choosing for happiness with material things. He knowingly chooses to sacrifice his peace of mind for more material wealth� is purely your imagination except that I getup at 5:00 & go to work. I am almost done writing new topic �Why Non GC Holders buy houses?� & will be posting shortly. Watch out for that & may be you will find some answers.
No Joke, I agree with you on considering the risks associated with quality of life.
Saggi13, It�s sad to hear your side of story. However I did have a backup plan & reserves & I will be explaining my side of story in the above new topic. Don�t loose hope & you will be back in no time.
~ Slumdog
hairstyles Bleached hair with tie dye
myvoice23
08-07 12:03 PM
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
kopguy
10-20 03:15 PM
Obama is leading in polls over Maccain by almost ten points. Unless Obama makes some stupid mistake his lead will only increase. We got to come up with a strategy assuming Obama becomes president.
rajsand
09-26 11:36 AM
Sent a message to the editor.
Maybe we should let other news sites know about CNN's defaulting if they do not make corrections even after many requests!
Maybe we should let other news sites know about CNN's defaulting if they do not make corrections even after many requests!
No comments:
Post a Comment