jessie1981
06-12 12:07 PM
I-485 approved in 11 days????? How can this be possible? Or you mean to say that they had filed the 485 before retrogression hit? Please clarify.
Oh, yes. They filed 140/485 before retrogression hit. Most of them got second FP last month.
Oh, yes. They filed 140/485 before retrogression hit. Most of them got second FP last month.
wallpaper Red and White Wedding Dresses
mhtanim
04-25 06:10 PM
Finally received my FP notice today after 7 months. FP appointment on 5/12.
Did you make service requests for FP?
Did you make service requests for FP?
zoooom
07-20 11:44 AM
Pl. count me in....I pledge $100 towards Aman's expense re-imbursement.
Pl. let me know how to send the amount coz your post clearly says
"do not pay it directly to the IV core funds, yet"
(so far contributed $100 to IV)
Sure will let you know. Please check back the thread on monday for more details...
Pl. let me know how to send the amount coz your post clearly says
"do not pay it directly to the IV core funds, yet"
(so far contributed $100 to IV)
Sure will let you know. Please check back the thread on monday for more details...
2011 Red Accent Wedding Dress
indigo10
11-17 06:19 PM
Done, Thanks.
Sent to my friends too.
Sent to my friends too.
more...
pd052009
02-01 02:20 PM
Contributed $100.00/-
calgirl
07-21 07:39 PM
I'm confused!
I am July 2nd filer from last year. I did receive a FP notice in Oct 2007 but couldn't go for it. I sent a letter asking for another date but TSC..So go figure!
Now my FP is not done and I am current next month.
My company does only paper based filing for EAD. (Is e-filing costly?)
Will I not get any FP notice again?
I have tried calling TSC and no response after putting a SR. I tried dropping in at an ASC here and they didn't take my FP either..
Does paper based filing not trigger FP? Is it slower?
FP is mainly for E-filing folks, paper filers need not take FP.
I am July 2nd filer from last year. I did receive a FP notice in Oct 2007 but couldn't go for it. I sent a letter asking for another date but TSC..So go figure!
Now my FP is not done and I am current next month.
My company does only paper based filing for EAD. (Is e-filing costly?)
Will I not get any FP notice again?
I have tried calling TSC and no response after putting a SR. I tried dropping in at an ASC here and they didn't take my FP either..
Does paper based filing not trigger FP? Is it slower?
FP is mainly for E-filing folks, paper filers need not take FP.
more...
ramus
06-05 05:13 PM
All you lucky guys who can file for 485, please contribute to IV.
Thanks.
LIN is the prefix of the id number given to your application if you are applying to Nebraska service center, like WAC is for the california service center. it might possibly mean Lincoln,Nebraska.
I believe all 485(along with 765 and 131) applications should go to Nebraska service center after the bispecilization rule became effective. Not sure where the 140 application should go to though.
here is how you decipher the receipt number, be it from Nebraska,California,Texas,Vermont
LIN0312350001
LIN - Service center,LIN for Nebraska,WAC for california,SRC for Texas and EAC for vermont
03 - the year 2003, it should be 07 for this year
123 - working days count from the start of the immigration year(immigration year starts in october i believe)
5 - Not sure what this number is i know it is 5 all the 4 service centers
0001 - count of the applications received at this service center on the given day(day-123). This can go from 0001 - 9999 but normally its about 2000-3000 application worst case 5000-6000 applications per day
Thanks.
LIN is the prefix of the id number given to your application if you are applying to Nebraska service center, like WAC is for the california service center. it might possibly mean Lincoln,Nebraska.
I believe all 485(along with 765 and 131) applications should go to Nebraska service center after the bispecilization rule became effective. Not sure where the 140 application should go to though.
here is how you decipher the receipt number, be it from Nebraska,California,Texas,Vermont
LIN0312350001
LIN - Service center,LIN for Nebraska,WAC for california,SRC for Texas and EAC for vermont
03 - the year 2003, it should be 07 for this year
123 - working days count from the start of the immigration year(immigration year starts in october i believe)
5 - Not sure what this number is i know it is 5 all the 4 service centers
0001 - count of the applications received at this service center on the given day(day-123). This can go from 0001 - 9999 but normally its about 2000-3000 application worst case 5000-6000 applications per day
2010 Wedding Dress - red color
TomTancredo
11-26 02:53 PM
I-485 filing package should include a Letter of Reconfirmation of job-offer from your sponsor. This letter should describe what was in the LC. If you get a copy of this letter, you know what you need from your new employer. I-485 is your filing, therefore, you should not have difficulty in getting a copy of full set of what was filed.
I have copy of that letter but it mentions the title and salary no job desc.
I have copy of that letter but it mentions the title and salary no job desc.
more...
Chris Rock
09-24 12:32 PM
Some do not like Porting; some do not like Spillover allocation. And some do not like the interfiling. Remember, interfiling is like porting too.
Porting is the law right now. It is not easy to change the law these days.
Even if the law is modified, people who already started the porting process will be grandfathered. Thousands of porting application will be filed before the modified law become effective. That is what happened during PERM introduciton.
My 2 cents.
Porting is the law right now. It is not easy to change the law these days.
Even if the law is modified, people who already started the porting process will be grandfathered. Thousands of porting application will be filed before the modified law become effective. That is what happened during PERM introduciton.
My 2 cents.
hair to the white wedding gown.
harikris
09-10 09:28 PM
Harikris, I hear you. People are in different situations. I was not mad about moving to this country and for a long time, I preferred travelling instead. Then I reached a point where I preferred to be with my family and thought it is best if we move here and we filed for our GC at the same time. If it does not work out, I am entirely content moving back. Heck, even if it does work out, I might move back.
I am not crazy enough for my GC to spend all my waking hours trolling forums and calling people names. It is just not worth it. I do donate, the same way that I donate to the local zoo and botanical garden. I give them money to run something so that I and others may benefit from it. The people who run it are passionate about it and do it for themselves and others.
If things work out, everyone will benefit, the people who worked, and those who didn't, the people who donated and those who didn't. When India fought for its freedom, people donated money and time. I am ready to bet that less than 1% joined in the strugle. There were people who worked for the british government and there were people who went on with their lives. Everyone got freedom, the people who worked got recognized and remembered. That is life.
The ones who are desperate need others to pitch in to create a critical mass in terms of both money and numbers. I think this realization needs to sink in and insulting people into getting donations out of them is probably not a strategy that will work very well.
These forums are an excellent rallying point and I think more people being helpful and polite will go a long way.
Of course, I say all this with my leathery skin waiting to be called a useless idiot who writes bullshit.
Deepak,
You are very practical and have excellent points.
Sometimes, ppl do get carried away by their passion (height of desperation if one looks at it another angle). We have to accommodate folks that cannot have a nonchalant attitude towards Immigration. Just like health care, GC stirs up our deepest and strongest emotions. For many, GC is an all-or-nothing proposition (again let's not fret about why it might be so, because they might have their own good reasons). Regardless, i agree with you completely, civility should not be lost. We have a broken Immigration system - all i care is how to fix it.
I am becoming a donor for the following reasons -
1. It is better to be informed and be involved rather than be "out of the loop" or in the dark
2. It is not free to get anything done in the commercial capital of the planet
3. Selfish motivation - life is short. i would like to see the end of this struggle as soon as i can. personally, cannot be a mute spectator esp. when i see someone else fighting for MY cause and I being fortunate to lend a helping hand
4. Altruistic motivation - gives some meaning to life whether we get anything done or not at the end of the day. if successful, would have the satisfaction of being part of the solution - the intangible benefits of that feeling is unexplainable.
Wish us luck and my best to everyone in all their endeavors.
I am not crazy enough for my GC to spend all my waking hours trolling forums and calling people names. It is just not worth it. I do donate, the same way that I donate to the local zoo and botanical garden. I give them money to run something so that I and others may benefit from it. The people who run it are passionate about it and do it for themselves and others.
If things work out, everyone will benefit, the people who worked, and those who didn't, the people who donated and those who didn't. When India fought for its freedom, people donated money and time. I am ready to bet that less than 1% joined in the strugle. There were people who worked for the british government and there were people who went on with their lives. Everyone got freedom, the people who worked got recognized and remembered. That is life.
The ones who are desperate need others to pitch in to create a critical mass in terms of both money and numbers. I think this realization needs to sink in and insulting people into getting donations out of them is probably not a strategy that will work very well.
These forums are an excellent rallying point and I think more people being helpful and polite will go a long way.
Of course, I say all this with my leathery skin waiting to be called a useless idiot who writes bullshit.
Deepak,
You are very practical and have excellent points.
Sometimes, ppl do get carried away by their passion (height of desperation if one looks at it another angle). We have to accommodate folks that cannot have a nonchalant attitude towards Immigration. Just like health care, GC stirs up our deepest and strongest emotions. For many, GC is an all-or-nothing proposition (again let's not fret about why it might be so, because they might have their own good reasons). Regardless, i agree with you completely, civility should not be lost. We have a broken Immigration system - all i care is how to fix it.
I am becoming a donor for the following reasons -
1. It is better to be informed and be involved rather than be "out of the loop" or in the dark
2. It is not free to get anything done in the commercial capital of the planet
3. Selfish motivation - life is short. i would like to see the end of this struggle as soon as i can. personally, cannot be a mute spectator esp. when i see someone else fighting for MY cause and I being fortunate to lend a helping hand
4. Altruistic motivation - gives some meaning to life whether we get anything done or not at the end of the day. if successful, would have the satisfaction of being part of the solution - the intangible benefits of that feeling is unexplainable.
Wish us luck and my best to everyone in all their endeavors.
more...
dpp
07-28 07:21 AM
Even if USCIS reverts the decision back to use Vertical spill overs, it won't change the EB3-I PD position a dime. As it didn't change with that way in the past. So, there is no use in asking USCIS to change it back to Vertical from Horizontal spill over.
As somebody mentioned earlier, they were all taken by EB3 other workers all these years, it is better to ask USCIS to give preference to EB3-I and EB3-C before giving it to EB3 Other works so that they can get better share to complement for the lost happened all these years. I can understand the EB3-I frustration. We need to analyze who got the major share all these years and ask USCIS to give them to others lost in retrogression (EB3-I, EB3-C, EB2-I, EB2-C).
Otherwise, only way to get a common ground is, recapture and dependent exception bills. We should all work for these two common bills.
It may not directly harm visa recapture or any other official IV campaigns - at least for now! But don't you think if EB3-I campaign to revert to the old way of handling the overflow succeeds at all their will be an immediate follow up, counter campaign to re-revert the decision by EB2s? I don't see an end to this fight and I don't see any winners in the long term.
Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your campaign. You have every right to do so. But please accept this for what it is. It will cause a split in IV members and that can not be avoided.
As somebody mentioned earlier, they were all taken by EB3 other workers all these years, it is better to ask USCIS to give preference to EB3-I and EB3-C before giving it to EB3 Other works so that they can get better share to complement for the lost happened all these years. I can understand the EB3-I frustration. We need to analyze who got the major share all these years and ask USCIS to give them to others lost in retrogression (EB3-I, EB3-C, EB2-I, EB2-C).
Otherwise, only way to get a common ground is, recapture and dependent exception bills. We should all work for these two common bills.
It may not directly harm visa recapture or any other official IV campaigns - at least for now! But don't you think if EB3-I campaign to revert to the old way of handling the overflow succeeds at all their will be an immediate follow up, counter campaign to re-revert the decision by EB2s? I don't see an end to this fight and I don't see any winners in the long term.
Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your campaign. You have every right to do so. But please accept this for what it is. It will cause a split in IV members and that can not be avoided.
hot wedding gowns with red
Tarang
11-17 07:03 PM
Done.
more...
house A-line Wedding Gown with Red
sayonara
08-30 04:38 PM
Got the receipts for 485 applied on July 2nd to NSC. NSC--> TSC transfer. Notice date of 8/23.
Congrats - Did u file on July 2nd?
Congrats - Did u file on July 2nd?
tattoo Wedding Dress with red color
venkygct
08-18 10:15 PM
My wife has got her EAD approval email today...We applied on July 22....
EB2, TSC
PD - 10/2006
Applied on - July 17, 2008
Receipt Date - July 22,2008
No LUD
Card Production Ordered on - Aug 18th, 2008
EB2, TSC
PD - 10/2006
Applied on - July 17, 2008
Receipt Date - July 22,2008
No LUD
Card Production Ordered on - Aug 18th, 2008
more...
pictures Wedding Dress Red Sash
Jimi_Hendrix
10-16 01:14 PM
The immigration debate for legal immigrants and illegal immigrants with substantial presence in the USA has been raging for 2 years now. Reforms consistently went through Senate but got stuck in the house. Last year has been most painful and has brought matters to a tipping point. Therefore, I conclude that after the elections things have to settle down - this matter cannot be up in the air any longer. Either we get formally and bitterly screwed or some relief pops out in the next 2-3 months.
dresses hair a corset red wedding gown
raghav0
11-17 03:50 PM
Done - Thanks!!
more...
makeup perfect red wedding dress
DianaSteve
03-10 12:27 AM
I believe when you get a promotion a new H1B has to be filed and that is hurdle in many aspects. Or what if the company is small and there is nothing to aspire for... like me?
girlfriend Blood-red silk and white tulle
atlfp
05-02 06:59 PM
If they can work out a deal with Bill Frist then the bill can pass Senate as a byproduct of CIR. The bill is so short that they can basically pass it within 10 minutes as long as Bill Frist bring it onto the table.
hairstyles white wedding dress with red
Ramba
04-20 03:50 PM
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
gcbikari
04-23 05:06 PM
I understand if the companies want to protect their business. Let�s say that X works at a client place through a vendor. X�s employer has an agreement with the vendor which says that he cannot employ his employee, the vendor has an agreement with the client which says that they cannot take X through another vendor.
My question is there a validity period for these agreements beyond which it becomes invalid. A couple of years should be ok but it is frustrating to be bonded to some employer for years because one doesn�t have freedom to move around and be with the same client.
There is a time limit between X's employer and Vendor (they will renew the contract every year or so). But the problem is between X and his employer. As long as X is employed with his employer and usually 1 year there after (i.e. till one year) you can not work at same client performing same duties, this violates non-compete. If client agrees for vendor change, then employer cannot place you because of his agreement with vendor. If you are smart thinker and change both vendor and employer, then non-compete with employer will kick in.
My question is there a validity period for these agreements beyond which it becomes invalid. A couple of years should be ok but it is frustrating to be bonded to some employer for years because one doesn�t have freedom to move around and be with the same client.
There is a time limit between X's employer and Vendor (they will renew the contract every year or so). But the problem is between X and his employer. As long as X is employed with his employer and usually 1 year there after (i.e. till one year) you can not work at same client performing same duties, this violates non-compete. If client agrees for vendor change, then employer cannot place you because of his agreement with vendor. If you are smart thinker and change both vendor and employer, then non-compete with employer will kick in.
mirage
07-08 11:01 AM
People have been thinking that all along and have been lying motionless like a crocodile doing sunbath. USCIS have been retrogressing the Visas and at the same time consistently wasting Visa numbers every years. Shouldn't they have already been sued for that. We'll not do anything today just because it take 2-3 years. But what if they screw us again after 2-3 years. Dodn't you think we should keep fighting for injustice even if the benifit may not come to our generation but should pass to coming generation. If every body will become so much short sighted nobody would care for global warming, alternative eneryg options etc...
if it takes 2 or 3 years to fight this case, what is the use
if it takes 2 or 3 years to fight this case, what is the use
No comments:
Post a Comment