sledge_hammer
06-29 12:43 PM
^^^^
wallpaper funny quotes about life and
hoosier07
07-18 02:59 PM
Hello guys,
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
amitjoey
04-13 06:16 PM
We have some talented hardworking young men & women who are always on top of things. This group of wo/men are IV-Core. They know all the bills that are being introduced, and definately IV will support whichever one (beneficial to us) if/when it comes out (Either House/Senate). But the thing to remember is that there is a long procedure. Just because of introduction, dosent mean they would be on calendar.
Some of these bills are place-holders, some of these are just like pressure building tactics, and some are to please some big lobby (High-tech employers lobby) that "look I got the bill introduced", I care. Dosent mean that it will be on calendar. Lots of these so called bills, never make it to the calendar. It might be that one or two may get bundled into CIR.
NOW. The most important thing for us is to not get excited that this bill, or that bill has gotten introduced. We need to build on it and raise awareness. Not on the forum but by meeting our lawmakers. When lawmakers in all 50 states get some feedback one-to-one meeting with IV members, that will get them thinking. Some of them do not know that these bills are being introduced and mayget introduced.
It is our goal to highlight that this will help us, so when they go back they pay attention to our issues.
So if you havent scheduled a meeting with your congressmen, do it. Leave all the rest to the core team. They are already doing the needfull.
We should definitely support this bill. It will help reduce the EB backlog for us considerably. There are two provisions in this bill which if passed would help reduce the backlog a lot.
a) Exempt spouses and minor children of the principal applicant from employment-based immigrant visa quotas. At least half the backlog is due to dependents of the applicant using GC visas and this should reduce the backlog considerably.
b)� Exempt STEM advanced degree graduates who have 3 years of U.S. work experience as a non-immigrant from the numerical limit on employment-based immigrant visas, in addition to those who are deemed to have extraordinary ability, are outstanding professors and researchers, and whose presence is determined to be in the national interest of the United States. Another 20% of the applicants specially with indian passports would fit this category and hence thought would reduce the backlog significantly as well.
c) The most important thing about this Bill is that it offers some relief entirely for the skilled employees without associating them with the fate of illegals. There is very little controversial elements in this Bill. Remember the main bone of contention between Democrats & Republicans in CIR is about the fate of illegal immigrants and how tough an approach they should have on them. This might easily scuttle CIR this year and we might have to wait till 2009 before anything else comes up again. There is not much that the parties disagree on with regards to Hightech skilled workers and a bill such as this which offers interim relief has much better chance of being passed. Agreed some groups such as IEEE-US might oppose it (specially the provisions related H1B increase) but even IEEE-US does support sorting out the EB GC issues and backlogs and might support those provisions on this Bill.
In conclusion IV should definitely support this Bill.
$20 per month.
EB2 - PD Jan 05
Some of these bills are place-holders, some of these are just like pressure building tactics, and some are to please some big lobby (High-tech employers lobby) that "look I got the bill introduced", I care. Dosent mean that it will be on calendar. Lots of these so called bills, never make it to the calendar. It might be that one or two may get bundled into CIR.
NOW. The most important thing for us is to not get excited that this bill, or that bill has gotten introduced. We need to build on it and raise awareness. Not on the forum but by meeting our lawmakers. When lawmakers in all 50 states get some feedback one-to-one meeting with IV members, that will get them thinking. Some of them do not know that these bills are being introduced and mayget introduced.
It is our goal to highlight that this will help us, so when they go back they pay attention to our issues.
So if you havent scheduled a meeting with your congressmen, do it. Leave all the rest to the core team. They are already doing the needfull.
We should definitely support this bill. It will help reduce the EB backlog for us considerably. There are two provisions in this bill which if passed would help reduce the backlog a lot.
a) Exempt spouses and minor children of the principal applicant from employment-based immigrant visa quotas. At least half the backlog is due to dependents of the applicant using GC visas and this should reduce the backlog considerably.
b)� Exempt STEM advanced degree graduates who have 3 years of U.S. work experience as a non-immigrant from the numerical limit on employment-based immigrant visas, in addition to those who are deemed to have extraordinary ability, are outstanding professors and researchers, and whose presence is determined to be in the national interest of the United States. Another 20% of the applicants specially with indian passports would fit this category and hence thought would reduce the backlog significantly as well.
c) The most important thing about this Bill is that it offers some relief entirely for the skilled employees without associating them with the fate of illegals. There is very little controversial elements in this Bill. Remember the main bone of contention between Democrats & Republicans in CIR is about the fate of illegal immigrants and how tough an approach they should have on them. This might easily scuttle CIR this year and we might have to wait till 2009 before anything else comes up again. There is not much that the parties disagree on with regards to Hightech skilled workers and a bill such as this which offers interim relief has much better chance of being passed. Agreed some groups such as IEEE-US might oppose it (specially the provisions related H1B increase) but even IEEE-US does support sorting out the EB GC issues and backlogs and might support those provisions on this Bill.
In conclusion IV should definitely support this Bill.
$20 per month.
EB2 - PD Jan 05
2011 funny quotes on life and love.
Geni
05-30 09:43 PM
Democrats have majority in the house and that is what Nacy will look for. She will see what is the out come of the HOUSE before really making some thing in the SENATE
They'll probably start with what Senate passes. and make some minor amendments.
If it passes the house, conference will be piece of cake.
Our best hope is:
1. When senators return to the constituencies for the memorial day recess, they receive a LOT of negative feedback about CIR and enough number of senators change their minds and vote in -ve and bill fails to make out of the Senate. Likelihood: 10-20%.
2. House of reps votes on this CIR and defeats it. Likelihood: 40-60%.
I hope one way or another, this piece of crap fails and I happily get my GC in another 5-10 years. If it passes, I'll have to pack my bags. Amen.
They'll probably start with what Senate passes. and make some minor amendments.
If it passes the house, conference will be piece of cake.
Our best hope is:
1. When senators return to the constituencies for the memorial day recess, they receive a LOT of negative feedback about CIR and enough number of senators change their minds and vote in -ve and bill fails to make out of the Senate. Likelihood: 10-20%.
2. House of reps votes on this CIR and defeats it. Likelihood: 40-60%.
I hope one way or another, this piece of crap fails and I happily get my GC in another 5-10 years. If it passes, I'll have to pack my bags. Amen.
more...
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
GCJinx
03-21 10:35 AM
I'm on H4. I have got an offer from a company and they will do my H1
I have few questions
1)How easy it is to transfer H1's to another company? What documents I need?
2)Is it possible to convert back to h4? I have 2 kids so I might have to convert back to H4 from h1 if I cannot take the stress.
what documents do I need?Do I need to go out of US for this?
3)Once back on H4, and in future If I want to get back on h1, Am I subject to cap?
I have few questions
1)How easy it is to transfer H1's to another company? What documents I need?
2)Is it possible to convert back to h4? I have 2 kids so I might have to convert back to H4 from h1 if I cannot take the stress.
what documents do I need?Do I need to go out of US for this?
3)Once back on H4, and in future If I want to get back on h1, Am I subject to cap?
more...
manand24
08-14 03:43 PM
I am also a July 2nd 7:55 filer at NSC, signed for by R Williams. No receipts yet!
PD 04/2006 EB2 INDIA
I-140 NSC AP 10/2006
SELF:
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
WIFE
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
PD 04/2006 EB2 INDIA
I-140 NSC AP 10/2006
SELF:
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
WIFE
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
2010 good quotes about life and
gcpain
07-24 04:42 PM
Thanks for clarification.
more...
fromnaija
02-18 10:11 AM
The reasons for retrogression are limit on the number of visas available (140,000) per year, country cap and the number of applications with USCIS for adjustment of status and with DOS for CP. Nobody knows how many applications are outstanding and so we cannot estimate PD movement accurately.
hair good quotes about life and
MeraNaamJoker
08-13 03:04 PM
This seems to be a unique situation.
If the company does not object to your approval then you should be fine.
Please try to contact them or thier lawyer. (hopefully the lawyer is still in business :-) )
If the company does not object to your approval then you should be fine.
Please try to contact them or thier lawyer. (hopefully the lawyer is still in business :-) )
more...
ivar
04-10 09:40 AM
All the best pal....welcome to the club !:rolleyes:
Now that i am a part of this immigration struggle once again, i will make a small donation to IV.
Now that i am a part of this immigration struggle once again, i will make a small donation to IV.
hot life and love quotes.
vivache
11-08 07:29 PM
1. I would like to believe that all visa numbers include the dependents etc .. since USCIS has the numbers.
2. At the same time .. maybe 245i is kicking in .. else the priority dates would be different
The only thing I'm not clear about is this:
Is 245i only affecting eb3 and not eb2?
And also from the answers it looks like, inspite of uscis making the numbers public .. it doesn't help us make a prediction
2. At the same time .. maybe 245i is kicking in .. else the priority dates would be different
The only thing I'm not clear about is this:
Is 245i only affecting eb3 and not eb2?
And also from the answers it looks like, inspite of uscis making the numbers public .. it doesn't help us make a prediction
more...
house funny quotes on life and love.
mbartosik
08-03 03:55 PM
see \/\/\/
tattoo good quotes about life and
extra_mint
05-16 01:31 PM
PD June 12, 2006 NSC
Waiting for my spouse's GC (dependent)
I got mine (primary) over the weekend. Any one else in same boat ?
Me and my spouse didn't applied together, I added her in 2008.
Waiting for my spouse's GC (dependent)
I got mine (primary) over the weekend. Any one else in same boat ?
Me and my spouse didn't applied together, I added her in 2008.
more...
pictures good quotes about life and
chanduv23
11-09 08:16 AM
Did someone say beer? If you guys will bring in chips and salsa, I will get beer. Let me know if you decide for 7ish on Friday. Will be there.
Cheers,
Cool - lets have a theme for the party and we can all wear clothes based on that theme. How about ramayana?
Obama - Rama
Michelle - Sita
Sasha and malia - lava and kusa
biden - lakshmana
one of us will be ravana, kumbakarna .....
with beer chips and salsa - I would also recommend shish kebabs with spicy chutney and offocurse onion and mirchi bhajjis
and some champagne - because they may make an announcement "Best costume winners will get a green card"
Cheers,
Cool - lets have a theme for the party and we can all wear clothes based on that theme. How about ramayana?
Obama - Rama
Michelle - Sita
Sasha and malia - lava and kusa
biden - lakshmana
one of us will be ravana, kumbakarna .....
with beer chips and salsa - I would also recommend shish kebabs with spicy chutney and offocurse onion and mirchi bhajjis
and some champagne - because they may make an announcement "Best costume winners will get a green card"
dresses good quotes about life and
RNGC
04-07 04:50 PM
Can we get an appointment with the President and explain the problems faced by EB immigrants....
1. Travel restrictions (no travel during H1 extension etc..)
2. Driver license issues
3. Wasted Visa numbers
4. Inefficiency of USCIS
5. Need to increase EB quota
I know that law makers should make these changes, but President has a strong voice and if he hears our pathetic position, he may do something, just a hope :rolleyes:
1. Travel restrictions (no travel during H1 extension etc..)
2. Driver license issues
3. Wasted Visa numbers
4. Inefficiency of USCIS
5. Need to increase EB quota
I know that law makers should make these changes, but President has a strong voice and if he hears our pathetic position, he may do something, just a hope :rolleyes:
more...
makeup good quotes about life
girishvar
08-15 12:14 PM
Non-compete is based on a state law. Consult a Virginia employment attorney. Generally non-compete doesn't have teeth, because every one has got a right to work and practice your profession/make living.
girlfriend good quotes about love. good
tinuverma
11-09 10:29 AM
There is a website called Google. Its amazing in that it is above nationality and responds to every "is which of the two"
Very innovative. It did not help as a lot of Junior Members were rather talking unwanted crap than discussing on the real point. I was and am hoping for something better here.
Anyone else who can actually give me the answer?
Very innovative. It did not help as a lot of Junior Members were rather talking unwanted crap than discussing on the real point. I was and am hoping for something better here.
Anyone else who can actually give me the answer?
hairstyles good quotes on life and love
ponvas
09-20 02:48 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/18/AR2007091801944.html
http://www.ocregister.com/news/green-highly-skilled-1847985-immigration-voice
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us/19immigration.html?ref=us
http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=53421
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070025734&ch=9/11/2007%205:05:00%20PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7002296.stm
http://www.mercurynews.com/lachung/ci_6935022
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/sep2007/db20070917_552357.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index _businessweek+exclusives
http://www.ocregister.com/news/green-highly-skilled-1847985-immigration-voice
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us/19immigration.html?ref=us
http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=53421
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070025734&ch=9/11/2007%205:05:00%20PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7002296.stm
http://www.mercurynews.com/lachung/ci_6935022
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/sep2007/db20070917_552357.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index _businessweek+exclusives
ubetman
08-07 08:40 PM
Hi guys,
How to determine to which service center we need to send our application packet? Is it based on the future job location described in the labor certificate or the present physical location of the applicant?
Applying concurrent: 140/485
present physical location(my present address) state comes under : TSC
Future job location state comes under : NSC
Confused...
Thanks in advance
How to determine to which service center we need to send our application packet? Is it based on the future job location described in the labor certificate or the present physical location of the applicant?
Applying concurrent: 140/485
present physical location(my present address) state comes under : TSC
Future job location state comes under : NSC
Confused...
Thanks in advance
dicarol18
07-26 02:10 PM
I got the Receipt Notice for the 140...I sent my 140-485-765 on June 30, reached Nebraska on July 2...my file was sent to Texas and July 12 they sent the Receipt Notice for the 140 ...I hope that after they changed the visa bulletin on July 17, I will receive the rest of the Receipts...
No comments:
Post a Comment