pyrosleepy
07-31 11:35 AM
Thanks, Sanbaj! Your response does help.
wallpaper Anaconda: World Longest Snake
guy03062
07-02 04:21 PM
Medical (for me and my spouse) - $700
EAD / AP attorney's fees + filing fees (for my spouse) - $1140
Photographs - $55
Affidavit - $40
Upgraded I-140 to PP - $1500
==============
TOTAL = $3435
==============
EAD / AP attorney's fees + filing fees (for my spouse) - $1140
Photographs - $55
Affidavit - $40
Upgraded I-140 to PP - $1500
==============
TOTAL = $3435
==============
singhsa3
01-06 07:18 AM
The post did not mean to offend people of any particular community. I apologize, if it appeared that way. So please take this thread light heartedly only.
If it is of any further consolation then here is my brief backgroud:
I am a Hindu by birth.
Did my schooling from a catholic school and know Bible's stories by heart and also had led choirs.
Did my B.S. Mechanical engineering from a prominent miniority university, Aligarh Muslim University.
So you see, I would be the last person to use this story to stereotype folks from any particular religon.
I will conclude by saying that polygamy in India is almost non existent. The story cited here is unique, irrespective of what religion the person belongs to, even though the laws may be permitting in certain cases.
If it is of any further consolation then here is my brief backgroud:
I am a Hindu by birth.
Did my schooling from a catholic school and know Bible's stories by heart and also had led choirs.
Did my B.S. Mechanical engineering from a prominent miniority university, Aligarh Muslim University.
So you see, I would be the last person to use this story to stereotype folks from any particular religon.
I will conclude by saying that polygamy in India is almost non existent. The story cited here is unique, irrespective of what religion the person belongs to, even though the laws may be permitting in certain cases.
2011 Picture 4, -, Anaconda (film)
chantu
09-19 06:29 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7002296.stm
more...
h1techSlave
04-14 08:34 AM
See how Mr. Blog feed has omitted the fact that this law is against "unauthorized alien". To a casual observer it would appear that IV supports such endeavors (promoting illegal immigration).
And there's plenty of competition. Essentially, the bill makes the entire state a 287(g) state without the supervision of Department of Homeland Security. The bill's constitutionality seems extremely dubious, but we'll have to wait on the courts and I feel certain that a suit will be filed within days of the governor signing. Here is a summary of the bill's provisions. As an aside, I was struck by the "Profiles in Courage" passage from the LA Times coverage of the bill: [Governor] Brewer, a Republican, has not taken a public stance on the bill. She replaced Janet Napolitano, a Democrat...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/arizona-passes-nations-toughest-antiimmigration-law.html)
And there's plenty of competition. Essentially, the bill makes the entire state a 287(g) state without the supervision of Department of Homeland Security. The bill's constitutionality seems extremely dubious, but we'll have to wait on the courts and I feel certain that a suit will be filed within days of the governor signing. Here is a summary of the bill's provisions. As an aside, I was struck by the "Profiles in Courage" passage from the LA Times coverage of the bill: [Governor] Brewer, a Republican, has not taken a public stance on the bill. She replaced Janet Napolitano, a Democrat...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/arizona-passes-nations-toughest-antiimmigration-law.html)
Drifter
04-01 07:10 PM
Contact attoreny ASAP why/how it has happened. As he represnts you, USCIS acts upon his request to withdraw. However, he has to make such requsest only upon your written communication to withdraw the application. Therefore, find out whose mistake it is (law firm or USCIS).
Ramba and others
Thanks for all your responses, It is clearly the attorneys fault.
- I have a letter I wrote to the attorney asking them to withdraw the representation. and the letter clearly states that.
- I have a copy of the letter the attorney sent to USCIS and this letter is clearly asking USCIS to withdraw the case.
The error is with the Attorney and it is one of the big immigration firms.
What really bothers me is that the error is not on USCIS's part but the error is of the Attorney so I am afraid that USCIS may not be too inclined to reinstate the case.
Does any one know if the client has any legal protection from errors and mistakes made by the attorneys
Does any one know if the client has any legal protection from errors and mistakes made by the attorneys
Please help.
Ramba and others
Thanks for all your responses, It is clearly the attorneys fault.
- I have a letter I wrote to the attorney asking them to withdraw the representation. and the letter clearly states that.
- I have a copy of the letter the attorney sent to USCIS and this letter is clearly asking USCIS to withdraw the case.
The error is with the Attorney and it is one of the big immigration firms.
What really bothers me is that the error is not on USCIS's part but the error is of the Attorney so I am afraid that USCIS may not be too inclined to reinstate the case.
Does any one know if the client has any legal protection from errors and mistakes made by the attorneys
Does any one know if the client has any legal protection from errors and mistakes made by the attorneys
Please help.
more...
delax
08-05 09:30 PM
But consider this: I just posted this in the approval thread:
Looking at the overall approval trend in IV, , Murthy forum etc it is clear to me that FIFO is out of the door and in most likelihood low hanging fruit is being plucked from the tree. At the next Ombudsman call I am going to raise the issue of USCIS's declared commitment to FIFO but actions that seem completely contrary to it.
Obviously anonymous postings in open forums cannot be presented as evidence but one can certainly request the Ombudsman's office to ask for monthly 485 approval statistics and the cat will be out of the bag. By the time the wheels of Goverment bureaucracy move it might be a month or two before this data is made available to the Ombudsman's Office; forget the applicants - that will be like asking for the moon.
Regardless of whether I get approved or not in the next month or two; from a process perspective a monthly approval report going from the USCIS to the Ombudsman's Office each month should hopefully force them to stop this stonewalling and walk the talk.
This will not only help EB2s down the line but spare a thought for next year when EB2 is current, EB3 has a cut off of June 1, 2006 and we start seeing May 2006 EB3 approvals when 2001/02 EB3s are still pending. Again I welcome suggestions but the focus of my effort is going to be the approval process rather than a personal case or two.
Looking at the overall approval trend in IV, , Murthy forum etc it is clear to me that FIFO is out of the door and in most likelihood low hanging fruit is being plucked from the tree. At the next Ombudsman call I am going to raise the issue of USCIS's declared commitment to FIFO but actions that seem completely contrary to it.
Obviously anonymous postings in open forums cannot be presented as evidence but one can certainly request the Ombudsman's office to ask for monthly 485 approval statistics and the cat will be out of the bag. By the time the wheels of Goverment bureaucracy move it might be a month or two before this data is made available to the Ombudsman's Office; forget the applicants - that will be like asking for the moon.
Regardless of whether I get approved or not in the next month or two; from a process perspective a monthly approval report going from the USCIS to the Ombudsman's Office each month should hopefully force them to stop this stonewalling and walk the talk.
This will not only help EB2s down the line but spare a thought for next year when EB2 is current, EB3 has a cut off of June 1, 2006 and we start seeing May 2006 EB3 approvals when 2001/02 EB3s are still pending. Again I welcome suggestions but the focus of my effort is going to be the approval process rather than a personal case or two.
2010 Largest Anaconda. Comments
pnjbindia
01-06 01:05 AM
Venky..
That was funny...no offense, but i think you meant "dessert"....
After reading all this, my story is even funnirer. I went to India to get engaged (arranged) when the dates became current...and not they rolled back to 1000BC.... Now I am engaged, and hearing all these wife stores feel quite screwed...lol..
reminds me of a popular hindi maxim:
"Shadi aisa laddoo hai jo khaye wo pacchataaye, jo na khaye wo bhi pacchataaye"
loosely translated in english it means
Marriage is a desert which if somebody eats it, he will repent and if somebody does not eat it, will repent too...
(thank god my 5th grade english teacher is no more in this world to see this day...he must be rolling in his grave seeing my poor english translation skills:D)
That was funny...no offense, but i think you meant "dessert"....
After reading all this, my story is even funnirer. I went to India to get engaged (arranged) when the dates became current...and not they rolled back to 1000BC.... Now I am engaged, and hearing all these wife stores feel quite screwed...lol..
reminds me of a popular hindi maxim:
"Shadi aisa laddoo hai jo khaye wo pacchataaye, jo na khaye wo bhi pacchataaye"
loosely translated in english it means
Marriage is a desert which if somebody eats it, he will repent and if somebody does not eat it, will repent too...
(thank god my 5th grade english teacher is no more in this world to see this day...he must be rolling in his grave seeing my poor english translation skills:D)
more...
WeShallOvercome
08-22 02:29 PM
Abhidos,
I have a feeling the re-file might not work in this case. Just be prepared for the worst.
BTW, are you EB2 or EB3? and which country?
EB2 might have a good chance of begin current in near future.
I have a feeling the re-file might not work in this case. Just be prepared for the worst.
BTW, are you EB2 or EB3? and which country?
EB2 might have a good chance of begin current in near future.
hair World#39;s biggest snake
cheg
08-22 06:44 PM
Hi JunRN. After reading your post I googled if labor certification does have an expiration. According to: http://www.hooyou.com/lc/faq.html , it doesn't. Did you have to re-apply for yours? Thanks!
Make thing worse....your labor expires after six months, so you have to re-apply again..and again...and again...and again...and again....
Make thing worse....your labor expires after six months, so you have to re-apply again..and again...and again...and again...and again....
more...
sundarpn
04-20 10:12 AM
Hello Neelu,
Can you share the draft of your modified letter?
thx.
Can you share the draft of your modified letter?
thx.
hot Strange World: First Anaconda
rolrblade
03-17 08:41 AM
Engrr:
What has happened here is extremely unfortunate. What I would recommend is that you file a new PERM application. You could appeal the decision, but considering the complications of your course work and degree, it would be an uphill fight. In your appeal, I dont believe that the case would have much merit if it fought purely on the basis of your attorney saying that "he marked the incorrect box".
Good luck!
What has happened here is extremely unfortunate. What I would recommend is that you file a new PERM application. You could appeal the decision, but considering the complications of your course work and degree, it would be an uphill fight. In your appeal, I dont believe that the case would have much merit if it fought purely on the basis of your attorney saying that "he marked the incorrect box".
Good luck!
more...
house A small example of the world#39;s
smuggymba
05-12 10:09 AM
We as a community have not even done 5 % of the hard work that DREAM act advocates have done. So such provisions are well deserved by them for the hard work they have done. If we had done enough work for our provisions, there is no doubt our provisions would have seen the day. You need to do some search on all the DREAM act advocates have done in the last few years to reach where they are now. And then compare it our community effort and you will get the answers.
We recently had an advocacy day. How many of you contributed to it. We failed to even reach a modest budget goal for such a big event. So there is no point blaming undocumented. We need to first blame ourselves for doing nothing.
Only 200 ppl contributed and now 20 new memebers from July 2007 show up everyday in the prediction thread wanting to be current.
I believe there is a mini-advocacy in July - do we need to contribute for that. Any other details?
We recently had an advocacy day. How many of you contributed to it. We failed to even reach a modest budget goal for such a big event. So there is no point blaming undocumented. We need to first blame ourselves for doing nothing.
Only 200 ppl contributed and now 20 new memebers from July 2007 show up everyday in the prediction thread wanting to be current.
I believe there is a mini-advocacy in July - do we need to contribute for that. Any other details?
tattoo one of the world#39;s largest
mpadapa
06-12 02:16 PM
The text of the testimonials on the sub committee hearing is uploaded. Do find the pdf of the testimonials at http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=452
All the witness except Mark Krikorian felt the 3 bills from Rep. Lofgren and one bill from Rep. Wexler (HR 5924 - addressing Nursing shortage) are the need of the hour.
Let us keep working on the phone campaigns.
All the witness except Mark Krikorian felt the 3 bills from Rep. Lofgren and one bill from Rep. Wexler (HR 5924 - addressing Nursing shortage) are the need of the hour.
Let us keep working on the phone campaigns.
more...
pictures to modern-day anacondas.
ashshef
11-02 03:54 PM
Hydboy, you make a good point. Does anyone know if this is how USCIS would do a Qtrly Spillover if they do it ? And do they have to make the EB2-I and EB2-C dates the same before they do a spill over like they do it for the yearly?
The quarterly spillover is still a myth untill we see it happen one time. I don't recall a big movement in any quarter in the last few years.....except the last quarter of the year when they have done the annual spillover.
That said....I would obviously love to see a quarterly spillover as I think it might make my date current a few months earlier.
The quarterly spillover is still a myth untill we see it happen one time. I don't recall a big movement in any quarter in the last few years.....except the last quarter of the year when they have done the annual spillover.
That said....I would obviously love to see a quarterly spillover as I think it might make my date current a few months earlier.
dresses large logging operations.
Slave_2k
11-30 11:33 PM
Hi Pappu!
First of all... a big thank you for all the time you have spent to come up with such an excellent analysis of the data available in the public domain. Your effort and the effort of the senior members is like leading a freedom struggle. If you guys were born in India before 1947, I am sure you would have been one of the well known freedom fighters.
Anyway.... I have a small clarification. It'll be great if you could take that issue up with the USCIS contacts you guys have.
If you see from that inventory document, there are entries in the year 2008 and 2009 for I-485 backlog. The Visa Bullettin fiasco happend in July 2007. After that for EB-3 India the date was never current. It has retrogressed consistently since then. How was it possible even for one EB-3 India application to be filed in the years 2008 and 2009? or for that matter anytime after Aug-2007?
Can you please try to get the answer for that?
GO IV!!
- Modern SLAVE
First of all... a big thank you for all the time you have spent to come up with such an excellent analysis of the data available in the public domain. Your effort and the effort of the senior members is like leading a freedom struggle. If you guys were born in India before 1947, I am sure you would have been one of the well known freedom fighters.
Anyway.... I have a small clarification. It'll be great if you could take that issue up with the USCIS contacts you guys have.
If you see from that inventory document, there are entries in the year 2008 and 2009 for I-485 backlog. The Visa Bullettin fiasco happend in July 2007. After that for EB-3 India the date was never current. It has retrogressed consistently since then. How was it possible even for one EB-3 India application to be filed in the years 2008 and 2009? or for that matter anytime after Aug-2007?
Can you please try to get the answer for that?
GO IV!!
- Modern SLAVE
more...
makeup Anaconda in Bolivian jungle
gdhiren
08-28 05:24 PM
Gdhiren:Can you please send me your email id mine is zoozee4@hotmail.com
I am flying from San Jose to Dc for the rally.Can you please post me the threads for the hosts for accomodation in DC.
Here is the thread where you can request accomodation.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12565
I'll shoot you an email.
I am flying from San Jose to Dc for the rally.Can you please post me the threads for the hosts for accomodation in DC.
Here is the thread where you can request accomodation.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12565
I'll shoot you an email.
girlfriend Anaconda Stalks World#39;s
LegallyGC
08-09 10:46 AM
Guys,
There was a question and answer section on this site and i found this which might help us..
---------------------------------
12. Question(08/03/10): It has taken several years for me to receive the I-485 approval yesterday based on the employment-based petition filed by my employer. I have never changed employer. Neither have I invoked AC 21 change of employment. Since the 485 is approved, I am seeking new employment and started sending out employment applications to various employers. Is there any law that forces me to work for the green card sponsoring employer even after the green card is approved?
Answer: The green card employment is "permanent" employment. "Permanent" means the employment term is not temporary and must be for a period of "indefinite" duration. Inasmuch as there is no ending date, it can be considered a permanent terms of employment. The employer sponsed employment based immigration requires both the employer and employee to retain "intent" to offer such permanent employment and accept such permanent employment on or before the I-485 is approved. If the employer does not maintain such "intent" and file a labor certification and I-140 petition, It can be construed a fraud. If the employee does not have such "intent" and sign the labor certification application and and file I-485 application based on the employer-sponsored I-140 petition, it can also be considered a fraud. The issue is "intent" which is a mental state as judged from the actions of the employer or employee. AC-21 portability of approved I-140 petition changed the picture and both the employer and employee are freed from such obligation if two conditions are met. One is that until AC-21 is invoked, the employer and employee retain such intent. Practically, in the context of AC-21, such oblication is limited until the alien invokes the AC-21 change of employment after 180 days of filing of I-485 application in similar or same occupational classification. There is a grey area where the alien does not invoke AC-21 and change of employment. In such context, it may be assumed that both the employer and the employee retain such intent at the time I-485 is approved. In old days, the legacy INS was active in initiating a revocation of green card proceeding before the immigration courts to stip off the approved green card and launch a deportation proceeding based either on the ground that there was a fraud on the parties or the INS approved the I-485 application without the knowledge of such fact of ill-conceived intent of the parties. The theory of the law is that "had the agency known the true facts." the agency would not have approved the employment-based I-485 because the I-485 could have been ineligible without such intent. Intent is proven in most cases by the circumstantial evidence since no one can go into the state of mind of other person. The evidence they used to use was the evidence of search of another employment immediately before or after I-485 was approved. For the reasons, even though there is no fixed period of time for a new green card holder to work for the sponsoring employer, legal counsels advised the employees not to send out employment application in writing to other employers immediately prior to the approval of I-485 application or at least for certain period of time like two months not to change employment, because such behavior can be construed as relection of the true state of mind and intent of the employee not to work for the sponsoring employer before or on the date of approval of I-485 application owing to short period of time that lapsed when they changed employment. This problem used to pop up during the naturalization proceeding when the agency learned that the alien changed employment immediately before or after the green card is granted. The foregoing inent issue can be overridden when the alien left the job because of employer's decision to terminate the employment or because of change of circumstances which are beyond the control of the parties such as slow-down of business and layoffs. Again AC-21 affected this issue, and it appears that the agency may no longer actively look for this issue. But theoretically, the issue still exists and a law is a law. Accordingly, there is always a potential risk of this issue popping up after green card is approved, especially when there is a grudged sponsoring employer who obtained and possessed such adverse evidence and contact the agency to revoke the green card. Just beware.
------------------------
Hope this helps.
Pappu, there is nothing wrong in seeking exact clarification though from USCIS because things are not really clear on this regard and its better to get clear cut answer to the immigrant community..
There was a question and answer section on this site and i found this which might help us..
---------------------------------
12. Question(08/03/10): It has taken several years for me to receive the I-485 approval yesterday based on the employment-based petition filed by my employer. I have never changed employer. Neither have I invoked AC 21 change of employment. Since the 485 is approved, I am seeking new employment and started sending out employment applications to various employers. Is there any law that forces me to work for the green card sponsoring employer even after the green card is approved?
Answer: The green card employment is "permanent" employment. "Permanent" means the employment term is not temporary and must be for a period of "indefinite" duration. Inasmuch as there is no ending date, it can be considered a permanent terms of employment. The employer sponsed employment based immigration requires both the employer and employee to retain "intent" to offer such permanent employment and accept such permanent employment on or before the I-485 is approved. If the employer does not maintain such "intent" and file a labor certification and I-140 petition, It can be construed a fraud. If the employee does not have such "intent" and sign the labor certification application and and file I-485 application based on the employer-sponsored I-140 petition, it can also be considered a fraud. The issue is "intent" which is a mental state as judged from the actions of the employer or employee. AC-21 portability of approved I-140 petition changed the picture and both the employer and employee are freed from such obligation if two conditions are met. One is that until AC-21 is invoked, the employer and employee retain such intent. Practically, in the context of AC-21, such oblication is limited until the alien invokes the AC-21 change of employment after 180 days of filing of I-485 application in similar or same occupational classification. There is a grey area where the alien does not invoke AC-21 and change of employment. In such context, it may be assumed that both the employer and the employee retain such intent at the time I-485 is approved. In old days, the legacy INS was active in initiating a revocation of green card proceeding before the immigration courts to stip off the approved green card and launch a deportation proceeding based either on the ground that there was a fraud on the parties or the INS approved the I-485 application without the knowledge of such fact of ill-conceived intent of the parties. The theory of the law is that "had the agency known the true facts." the agency would not have approved the employment-based I-485 because the I-485 could have been ineligible without such intent. Intent is proven in most cases by the circumstantial evidence since no one can go into the state of mind of other person. The evidence they used to use was the evidence of search of another employment immediately before or after I-485 was approved. For the reasons, even though there is no fixed period of time for a new green card holder to work for the sponsoring employer, legal counsels advised the employees not to send out employment application in writing to other employers immediately prior to the approval of I-485 application or at least for certain period of time like two months not to change employment, because such behavior can be construed as relection of the true state of mind and intent of the employee not to work for the sponsoring employer before or on the date of approval of I-485 application owing to short period of time that lapsed when they changed employment. This problem used to pop up during the naturalization proceeding when the agency learned that the alien changed employment immediately before or after the green card is granted. The foregoing inent issue can be overridden when the alien left the job because of employer's decision to terminate the employment or because of change of circumstances which are beyond the control of the parties such as slow-down of business and layoffs. Again AC-21 affected this issue, and it appears that the agency may no longer actively look for this issue. But theoretically, the issue still exists and a law is a law. Accordingly, there is always a potential risk of this issue popping up after green card is approved, especially when there is a grudged sponsoring employer who obtained and possessed such adverse evidence and contact the agency to revoke the green card. Just beware.
------------------------
Hope this helps.
Pappu, there is nothing wrong in seeking exact clarification though from USCIS because things are not really clear on this regard and its better to get clear cut answer to the immigrant community..
hairstyles Inside “Anaconda: The World#39;s
acecupid
06-27 05:36 PM
I guess rajkannan went underground after everyone got on this case... :D
MunnaBhai
07-02 03:39 PM
Medical : 400.00
Attorney Fees:2800.00
Pictures:150.00
Attorney Fees:2800.00
Pictures:150.00
gc_check
07-07 12:19 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/070610_AZlawsuit.pdf
Justice Department Files Suit Against Arizona Immigration Law
The Justice Department on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging Arizona's immigration law, claiming the law is "invalid" and "must be struck down." Read More (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/06/justice-department-file-suit-arizona-early-tuesday/)
Sometimes a rule/law might be an unpopular one, but the right one. All popular ones does not mean they are correct. People who have the guts to make unpopular / but the right decisions and enact them are the real leaders. This time, either this year or next year, we will know if CIR is driven by real Leader's or Politician who exploit any situation to increase their chances to stay longer in power.
Also do not see much media attention to anything related to CIR. May be it an election year politics that drive things now !!!
If this law suit translates into some action to address this broken immigration system, then it is a good one !!! Will have to wait and see ....
Justice Department Files Suit Against Arizona Immigration Law
The Justice Department on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging Arizona's immigration law, claiming the law is "invalid" and "must be struck down." Read More (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/06/justice-department-file-suit-arizona-early-tuesday/)
Sometimes a rule/law might be an unpopular one, but the right one. All popular ones does not mean they are correct. People who have the guts to make unpopular / but the right decisions and enact them are the real leaders. This time, either this year or next year, we will know if CIR is driven by real Leader's or Politician who exploit any situation to increase their chances to stay longer in power.
Also do not see much media attention to anything related to CIR. May be it an election year politics that drive things now !!!
If this law suit translates into some action to address this broken immigration system, then it is a good one !!! Will have to wait and see ....