tapukakababa
07-03 03:54 PM
I have contributed $100 yesterday. We can do it.
wallpaper I hate you, Natalie Portman.
Mr.Z
12-09 01:43 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...
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...
Macaca
07-17 09:42 AM
Immigration bill ignites grass-roots fire (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=89612&postcount=461) The conservative group NumbersUSA has seen its numbers skyrocket. Activists pressure wavering senators. By Nicole Gaouette (nicole.gaouette@latimes.com), Times Staff Writer, June 24, 2007
Grass Roots Roared and Immigration Plan Collapsed By JULIA PRESTON New York Times, June 10, 2007: part 1 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80626&postcount=203), part 2 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80627&postcount=204)
Grass Roots Roared and Immigration Plan Collapsed By JULIA PRESTON New York Times, June 10, 2007: part 1 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80626&postcount=203), part 2 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=80627&postcount=204)
2011 Natalie Portman playing
vgayalu
11-02 02:45 PM
any one got approval after submitting recent RFE?
In my kids case after one week we got approval notice. In general it takes two / three days.
In my kids case after one week we got approval notice. In general it takes two / three days.
more...
sledge_hammer
02-13 05:01 PM
You honestly believe that our problems are comprable to the suffering that the real victims of ethnic cleansing go through?
Why do you want to delete this thread? This is true. The witch hunt has started. Why be scared to say the truth?
.
Why do you want to delete this thread? This is true. The witch hunt has started. Why be scared to say the truth?
.
485Mbe4001
02-21 11:38 AM
i am in the same boat, i was begging the damn lawyer to port me to EB2, she said, we will have to start the process all over again (as i had filed 485 in dec 04 )and it is not worth it. My company refuses to change lawyers so i am stuck in EB3 with pd apr 2002. :mad:
Your friends lawyer is stupid. I know many who are GC holder by converting. File new EB2 LCA and Port the EB3 date in I140 filing. Nothing wrong with it. My company (F 500) don't do it by some crap policy. I am still waiting since PD 2001 to see light. Why? Because EB2 India is always current but EB3 India PD is May 2001 or before from last 3 years. So if possible take advantage or I am living example. Waiting from 8+ years. Sorry for venting.. :)
Your friends lawyer is stupid. I know many who are GC holder by converting. File new EB2 LCA and Port the EB3 date in I140 filing. Nothing wrong with it. My company (F 500) don't do it by some crap policy. I am still waiting since PD 2001 to see light. Why? Because EB2 India is always current but EB3 India PD is May 2001 or before from last 3 years. So if possible take advantage or I am living example. Waiting from 8+ years. Sorry for venting.. :)
more...
Goodintentions
02-09 11:47 AM
I am planning to drive down from Detroit area. It should take about 10 1/2 hours to DC. It will be good if we could car pool, more for driving comfort and company. If anyone is interested, please let me know.
Best wishes...
Best wishes...
2010 I think of Natalie Portman as
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
more...
BharatPremi
07-10 12:28 AM
Whether they are smart people or not, a future department of justice investigation will find out.
http://s202395528.onlinehome.us/category/general/
However I see a way out for DOS/USCIS. They can avoid class action by claiming that they had warned the public in advance via the July 2 update to the July visa bulletin, and had modified the July visa bulletin only on July 6, after warning the public in advance. This way they can accept all applications received till July 5, and will be covered against any class action law suits.
No, it will be very difficult for them to follow this as non filers or filers after 5th would come with the arguments like we were still respecting USCIS's published notice and so we did not file (non filers) and others would come up with the argument that we decided to file with having clear understanding of its rejection as filers on 5th or before did so you (USCIS) cannot discriminate merely based upon filing date.
http://s202395528.onlinehome.us/category/general/
However I see a way out for DOS/USCIS. They can avoid class action by claiming that they had warned the public in advance via the July 2 update to the July visa bulletin, and had modified the July visa bulletin only on July 6, after warning the public in advance. This way they can accept all applications received till July 5, and will be covered against any class action law suits.
No, it will be very difficult for them to follow this as non filers or filers after 5th would come with the arguments like we were still respecting USCIS's published notice and so we did not file (non filers) and others would come up with the argument that we decided to file with having clear understanding of its rejection as filers on 5th or before did so you (USCIS) cannot discriminate merely based upon filing date.
hair Natalie Portman (with her real
unitednations
12-22 02:34 PM
this is our history...
1.was working with employer B in June 07(when PD was current for EB2/Oct 2003-India)...went to attorney to file 485 with approved 140 thru ex employer A. filled in all the paperwork for 485,but the attorney was asking for a current employment letter from B with exact skills mentioned on labor and the employer B was not ready to give such a letter and hence we planned to find a new employer and file for 485 in July.
2. In June end found this new current employer C and planned to file 485 in July and all the fiasco scene happened...anyway...in August we filed the 485 with a current employer letter from C with all the skills matching the labor..till here fine.
NOW...we got a copy of the bunch of 48 documents sent to INS from the atnys office...I had given the latest 325a form
current employer C : July 07 - current
employer B : Jan 2006 - June 2007
employer A : June 2003 - Dec 2005 (who filed for labor/i140)
the shitty paralegal now submitted the 325a from submitted in June 07 where the current employer B was the latest.... + the current employment letter of C + 485 employment offer letter from A
She had whitened out the date on the 325a form signed on June 07 and changed it to Aug 07 to my utter shock....
when I call back..she says we will handle any RFE's...
quite worried as the 325a form already says something like 'all info disclosed is truthful'... etc and the fine print..
pls post your thoughts and comments..
hope I dint confuse
Pretty confusing situation. Don't know why you even put in an experience letter from a company which doesn't have anything to do with the petition.
I am aware of a couple of cases where uscis did deny on such issues (g-325a not matching up with h-1b approvals, etc.). However, affidavits and such to say it was an honest mistake took care of the issue.
You might be able to appreciate this story:
I worked on an ability to pay case for a company in ohio. Person got approved and was then waiting for 485 approval.
He contacts me many months later and tells me that he got this rfe. The jest of the rfe was:
You claim to have never filed a 485 adjustment of status application. However; our search of records show that you filed a 485 on xxx date in xx office as a marriage base applicant. It appears that you are not eligible for a waiver of the interview requirement for adjustment of status.
Now; i truly believe that his current wife (from india) never knew about this marriage (his family and friends didn't know either). he tried to blame it on his lawyer that they never asked him and they just defaulted that he never filed for a 485. Pretty weak excuse. However; they responded to the 485 that everything was in such a rush to file the 485 that he didn't have a chance to look it all over and it was an honest mistake. He didn't get called for an interview and they approved his case.
Now; if the record of his marriage base application had shown that he was caught in fraudulent marriage; he never got divorced and re-married or there was something that went wrong with his earlier case then it may have been a different story. However; since nothing was wrong with that application; the officer let him off the hook because it was an honest mistake.
1.was working with employer B in June 07(when PD was current for EB2/Oct 2003-India)...went to attorney to file 485 with approved 140 thru ex employer A. filled in all the paperwork for 485,but the attorney was asking for a current employment letter from B with exact skills mentioned on labor and the employer B was not ready to give such a letter and hence we planned to find a new employer and file for 485 in July.
2. In June end found this new current employer C and planned to file 485 in July and all the fiasco scene happened...anyway...in August we filed the 485 with a current employer letter from C with all the skills matching the labor..till here fine.
NOW...we got a copy of the bunch of 48 documents sent to INS from the atnys office...I had given the latest 325a form
current employer C : July 07 - current
employer B : Jan 2006 - June 2007
employer A : June 2003 - Dec 2005 (who filed for labor/i140)
the shitty paralegal now submitted the 325a from submitted in June 07 where the current employer B was the latest.... + the current employment letter of C + 485 employment offer letter from A
She had whitened out the date on the 325a form signed on June 07 and changed it to Aug 07 to my utter shock....
when I call back..she says we will handle any RFE's...
quite worried as the 325a form already says something like 'all info disclosed is truthful'... etc and the fine print..
pls post your thoughts and comments..
hope I dint confuse
Pretty confusing situation. Don't know why you even put in an experience letter from a company which doesn't have anything to do with the petition.
I am aware of a couple of cases where uscis did deny on such issues (g-325a not matching up with h-1b approvals, etc.). However, affidavits and such to say it was an honest mistake took care of the issue.
You might be able to appreciate this story:
I worked on an ability to pay case for a company in ohio. Person got approved and was then waiting for 485 approval.
He contacts me many months later and tells me that he got this rfe. The jest of the rfe was:
You claim to have never filed a 485 adjustment of status application. However; our search of records show that you filed a 485 on xxx date in xx office as a marriage base applicant. It appears that you are not eligible for a waiver of the interview requirement for adjustment of status.
Now; i truly believe that his current wife (from india) never knew about this marriage (his family and friends didn't know either). he tried to blame it on his lawyer that they never asked him and they just defaulted that he never filed for a 485. Pretty weak excuse. However; they responded to the 485 that everything was in such a rush to file the 485 that he didn't have a chance to look it all over and it was an honest mistake. He didn't get called for an interview and they approved his case.
Now; if the record of his marriage base application had shown that he was caught in fraudulent marriage; he never got divorced and re-married or there was something that went wrong with his earlier case then it may have been a different story. However; since nothing was wrong with that application; the officer let him off the hook because it was an honest mistake.
more...
retrohatao
02-03 09:40 AM
I have not heard from any of the moderators/forum organizers on this. Does that mean immigrationvoice is NOT FOR "name check" affected immigrants?
hot Natalie Portman: Bad Hair
satishku_2000
12-27 01:50 AM
I travelled in last november thru hongkong. You dont need a transit visa but I felt humiliated with the treatment. Hope you know what I mean.
And on another note My sis and her husband have been Bank Of America customers for a long time and they have decent amount of funds in their account .Their mortgage application was rejected by BOA because they dont have a GC only to be accepted by other lender and better APR on their loan :)
I like this country and capitalism ...God bless America.
And on another note My sis and her husband have been Bank Of America customers for a long time and they have decent amount of funds in their account .Their mortgage application was rejected by BOA because they dont have a GC only to be accepted by other lender and better APR on their loan :)
I like this country and capitalism ...God bless America.
more...
house Natalie Portman sees the light
ivdude
01-16 05:04 PM
I faced this pain before christmas
tattoo natalie-portman-oscars
Jerrome
07-13 12:38 PM
If your guess true, it is good for me.. My PD is 2006 April with RD of July 31st 2007 in TSC with 140 approved. :-)
more...
pictures Natalie Portman
yabadaba
09-10 12:10 PM
So are you coming then?
Thanks.
yes
Thanks.
yes
dresses Natalie Portman was Deep
frostrated
09-09 03:09 PM
For those of you thinking that EB3I will move forward once EB2 becomes current in the next year or so, please think again.
There are many EB2 I & C waiting to file their AOS applications. Anyone that missed the 2007 and 2008 windows, are eagerly waiting to file. It is estimated that there are a few thousand primary applicants in EB2 alone, each year from 2007 to 2010.
As a result, it is very unlikely that EB3 I will advance apart from its annual allocation of approximately 2800 visas. At the current rate, it will be three years before EB3 I 2002 is cleared, and many more years for the other years. In the meantime, there will be more applicants in EB2 category, thereby preventing your applications from being approved.
The options that lie before you are the passage of CIR, removal of country limits (which again is invariably tied to CIR), porting to EB2. The only option that is within your control is porting.
I would highly suggest that you use that option rather than rely on a change in law - a law that we have seen being dangled before us like a carrot for the past four years.
If you have been given a promotion or even offered one, take that. Contrary to what someone says about not being able to use experience in your current company, that is wrong to a certain extent. Experience in your current company in your current position cannot be used. But, experience in a different position in the same company can be used as experience to your EB2 status.
Take your promotion, and have the employer file a new labor petition. During the I-140 stage, port your EB3 priority date to your EB2 petition, and pretty much your 485 will be approved along with your 140, if not a few weeks after that (provided your PD is current).
Good luck in your porting. If you decide to wait until EB3I becomes current without porting, you are going to wait for a long time. I would suggest that anyone with a PD of Jan 2003+ to start your porting process. For the others, I'd suggest you wait it out as in the time it takes to do the porting, your 485 in EB3 will be approved.
There are many EB2 I & C waiting to file their AOS applications. Anyone that missed the 2007 and 2008 windows, are eagerly waiting to file. It is estimated that there are a few thousand primary applicants in EB2 alone, each year from 2007 to 2010.
As a result, it is very unlikely that EB3 I will advance apart from its annual allocation of approximately 2800 visas. At the current rate, it will be three years before EB3 I 2002 is cleared, and many more years for the other years. In the meantime, there will be more applicants in EB2 category, thereby preventing your applications from being approved.
The options that lie before you are the passage of CIR, removal of country limits (which again is invariably tied to CIR), porting to EB2. The only option that is within your control is porting.
I would highly suggest that you use that option rather than rely on a change in law - a law that we have seen being dangled before us like a carrot for the past four years.
If you have been given a promotion or even offered one, take that. Contrary to what someone says about not being able to use experience in your current company, that is wrong to a certain extent. Experience in your current company in your current position cannot be used. But, experience in a different position in the same company can be used as experience to your EB2 status.
Take your promotion, and have the employer file a new labor petition. During the I-140 stage, port your EB3 priority date to your EB2 petition, and pretty much your 485 will be approved along with your 140, if not a few weeks after that (provided your PD is current).
Good luck in your porting. If you decide to wait until EB3I becomes current without porting, you are going to wait for a long time. I would suggest that anyone with a PD of Jan 2003+ to start your porting process. For the others, I'd suggest you wait it out as in the time it takes to do the porting, your 485 in EB3 will be approved.
more...
makeup Natalie Portman 3
rockstart
03-10 03:16 PM
Thank you Saravanaraj that was exactly what I was thinking too but wanted to double check since there were some specific tools mentioned in Column H which I might not use in future. Common sense dictates that it should be similar to the job code and not to those specific tools. I think this will help other in similar boat as well
girlfriend natalie-portman-dot-cc-snl
Jaime
09-10 03:53 PM
By the way, here's a funny (and sad but true) anecdote. I had already been on H1-B status with my current employer for over a year when I engaged HR to start my green card/adjustment of status process. The answer I got from the HR person was "Oh, sorry, but we don't sponsor"...I was frozen! Did not know whether to laugh or cry out loud! "But dear, you already have sponsored me!" I told the poor lady.....
Funny? Pathetic? WE NEED TO FIX THIS! AND THIS STARTS AT OUR RALLY IN WASHINGTON! LET'S ALL GO!!!!!
Funny? Pathetic? WE NEED TO FIX THIS! AND THIS STARTS AT OUR RALLY IN WASHINGTON! LET'S ALL GO!!!!!
hairstyles Real Heroes: Natalie Portman.
cshen
12-27 07:34 AM
Here is the link where I posted in Chinese
http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Immigration&gid=14675155&ftype=0&dingflag=1e link where I posted in Chinese
http://www.mitbbs.com/mitbbs_article_t.php?board=Immigration&gid=14675155&ftype=0&dingflag=1e link where I posted in Chinese
rayoflight
06-11 03:17 PM
Pappu,
Is there a way to know the list of the states the mail was sent to. As you know it is very important for these mails going to all the 50 states in huge numbers.
Thanks,
Rayoflight
Is there a way to know the list of the states the mail was sent to. As you know it is very important for these mails going to all the 50 states in huge numbers.
Thanks,
Rayoflight
Desertfox
10-29 08:14 PM
EB3 India
PD July 06
I-140 Approved
485 Pending:D
PD July 06
I-140 Approved
485 Pending:D
0 comments:
Post a Comment