nixstor
07-05 01:35 PM
I think IV should allow only paid members to create a new thread. Any non-paid member wants to create a new thread, then make them pay before creating one.
Very decent idea. But Its very difficult to implement as we might have to some code tweaks. I myself am not a programmer. I remember Pappu or some one asking for PHP/My SQL help which I believe went unanswered.
Very decent idea. But Its very difficult to implement as we might have to some code tweaks. I myself am not a programmer. I remember Pappu or some one asking for PHP/My SQL help which I believe went unanswered.
wallpaper jackets that Nicole Richie
v7461558
07-17 11:23 AM
See? It works. Nothing like instant gratification!
Go after the lies one by one. We have the power to disassemble lies, because knowledge is power.
Anyone want to take on #3?
After a while, they'll get tired and take the whole thing down. Whatever other methods of propagating lies they try, we have the power to expose them. And, the laws are on our side.
Go after the lies one by one. We have the power to disassemble lies, because knowledge is power.
Anyone want to take on #3?
After a while, they'll get tired and take the whole thing down. Whatever other methods of propagating lies they try, we have the power to expose them. And, the laws are on our side.
immig4me
03-01 08:57 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/
2011 Nicole Richie is a busy
mirage
02-03 03:54 PM
Guys we need to see the staff of 4 people. Congresswoman Zoe Logfen, Senator John Cornyn , Senator Arlen Specter and Senator Gillibrand. I have spoken to the offices of 2 of these Lawmakers, and they have always shown the understanding of this issue. as you may know recently elected NY Senator Gillibrand mentioned about 'some country people waiting for 8 years', this tells her understanding of the situation.
I have 4 people sent me emails, It would be good if we can make a group of about 20 people...It'll also help if people of these 4 states come forward...
also please suggest on conferencing facilitie..
Thanks
I have 4 people sent me emails, It would be good if we can make a group of about 20 people...It'll also help if people of these 4 states come forward...
also please suggest on conferencing facilitie..
Thanks
more...
lazycis
12-21 10:03 PM
lazycis,
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
thakkarbhav
08-10 02:29 PM
I am in. I am EB2 but I support this because this makes sense.
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:33 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
2010 nicole richie casual fashion.
ItIsNotFunny
10-15 02:28 PM
I have a doubt about what can be accomplished by the flower campaign. I am totally for it if it would help but just think - it is not in USCIS hands to assign more visas to EB3 or EB2. The number of visas is limited and the number of people waiting for the visas is huge. That is the whole cause of retrogression . If there were as many visas as the people everything would be current.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
Think how the supply is controlled?
Just as a hypothetical example, if USCIS makes a spill over policy that ROW can not lead any other country by more than 3 years.
If we try we can achieve something, atleast we can see some avenues. If we sit silent - Nope, then we are loosers not fighters.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
Think how the supply is controlled?
Just as a hypothetical example, if USCIS makes a spill over policy that ROW can not lead any other country by more than 3 years.
If we try we can achieve something, atleast we can see some avenues. If we sit silent - Nope, then we are loosers not fighters.
more...
thirdworldman
02-15 09:17 PM
I don't usually like to post until I'm done, but here's what I've got so far; I'm going the "light study" route.
http://www.tweakmedia.com/casey/3dsubway.jpg
http://www.tweakmedia.com/casey/3dsubway.jpg
hair nicole richie blonde
kumar1
12-10 03:24 PM
Do some population control in India and China, that would automatically fix the issue of retrogression. We are simply too many and we have clogged the system real bad. every 6th person on the face of this earth is Indian.
more...
gulute
06-11 02:11 PM
done
hot nicole richie hair.
Hope_GC
07-16 08:05 PM
Guys Looking at this false propagandas my blood boils after paying whole lot of taxes... we get to see these claims. :mad:
more...
house nicole richie photo shoot 2010
meridiani.planum
03-04 01:24 PM
I am expectin WSJ to pay a visit. So I changed the first message.
perhaps you want to make it even simpler?
- Remove all the LC/I-140 details, just say that we are at the last stage of a long and arduous process, and are stuck waiting because of very small immigration quota's that were set decades ago which are completely out of line with real supply-demand for the size of todays high-tech workforce. In addition USCIS inefficiency has resulted in them not utilizing even this tiny quota fully, in the past few years.
- instead of EAD and validity just say getting a mortage is a lot easier if your immigration status is permanent. In this final stage of immigration most of us have work authorization that needs to be renewed every year, and mortgage companies dont accept that.
copy paste the suggested fixes there (or add a link to the administrative fixes campaign post)
perhaps you want to make it even simpler?
- Remove all the LC/I-140 details, just say that we are at the last stage of a long and arduous process, and are stuck waiting because of very small immigration quota's that were set decades ago which are completely out of line with real supply-demand for the size of todays high-tech workforce. In addition USCIS inefficiency has resulted in them not utilizing even this tiny quota fully, in the past few years.
- instead of EAD and validity just say getting a mortage is a lot easier if your immigration status is permanent. In this final stage of immigration most of us have work authorization that needs to be renewed every year, and mortgage companies dont accept that.
copy paste the suggested fixes there (or add a link to the administrative fixes campaign post)
tattoo nicole richie before and after
akkakarla
08-17 01:10 AM
Because you guys are not as clever as EB2s.
i pray to pray to pray rather than play like stephen hawking. marco polo. marco pray :D :D
i pray to pray to pray rather than play like stephen hawking. marco polo. marco pray :D :D
more...
pictures nicole richie nose job before
gcisadawg
03-09 06:52 PM
Quick question guys :- My PD is feb 2008 and I140 was approved in july 08.
I also want to call my congessman, can you please tell what are the things you talk to them?
A brief guidance will help many others like me to make a call.
~
I asked our area congressman to inquire about pending I-140.
Instead, they inquired about pending I-485 and came back with a message saying" Sorry, you have to wait it out since your PD is light years away as compared to current EB3/I processing date"
I also want to call my congessman, can you please tell what are the things you talk to them?
A brief guidance will help many others like me to make a call.
~
I asked our area congressman to inquire about pending I-140.
Instead, they inquired about pending I-485 and came back with a message saying" Sorry, you have to wait it out since your PD is light years away as compared to current EB3/I processing date"
dresses images nicole richie brown
ras
07-12 11:38 AM
am still unclear. Does it mean those who have PD prior to Jun 06 will get their GC? I cant believe it.
At the personal end, I have my GC filed with Dec 06 PD. However, I have a previous I140 approved with Sept 05. I was thinking about porting the priority date. If I port it now will I get my GC based on the previous priority date?
Ofcourse I dont intend to port it at this point of time because am planning to get married in another 3-4months. so can you guys let me know what would be the best approach. Is it porting the previous priority date now or wait till getting married and then port it? In such case will the spouse be eligible to file for 485 when it is current. am confused.
At the personal end, I have my GC filed with Dec 06 PD. However, I have a previous I140 approved with Sept 05. I was thinking about porting the priority date. If I port it now will I get my GC based on the previous priority date?
Ofcourse I dont intend to port it at this point of time because am planning to get married in another 3-4months. so can you guys let me know what would be the best approach. Is it porting the previous priority date now or wait till getting married and then port it? In such case will the spouse be eligible to file for 485 when it is current. am confused.
more...
makeup Nicole Richie Addresses
like_watching_paint_dry
11-18 11:38 AM
How long can we keep our career on hold..
I have decided to switch with a better job and restart with PERM. Anyway, EB3/2003 PD is no GOLD.
Even if some law gets passed in 2007. With new EB2, I will get GC may be max 1/2 years later.
What do you think?
You guys won't believe how glad I am to read a few posts here where some people are standing up for themselves and refusing to take bullshit from certain lousy employers. This will send a message to those kinds of employers that they can't use the immigration system and treat employees like shit while continuing to profit from these hard-working people.
abc, just one suggestion for you. If you can, hold off until your I-140 gets approved. Once that happens, your 2003 priority date will stick and you can take it with you ( USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual for your reference ... http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I wish you all the best with your life.
lwpd
I have decided to switch with a better job and restart with PERM. Anyway, EB3/2003 PD is no GOLD.
Even if some law gets passed in 2007. With new EB2, I will get GC may be max 1/2 years later.
What do you think?
You guys won't believe how glad I am to read a few posts here where some people are standing up for themselves and refusing to take bullshit from certain lousy employers. This will send a message to those kinds of employers that they can't use the immigration system and treat employees like shit while continuing to profit from these hard-working people.
abc, just one suggestion for you. If you can, hold off until your I-140 gets approved. Once that happens, your 2003 priority date will stick and you can take it with you ( USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual for your reference ... http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I wish you all the best with your life.
lwpd
girlfriend Nicole Richie now has a
velan
06-30 09:18 PM
Thanks for the update.
hairstyles nicole richie lyrics
downthedrain
02-03 10:31 AM
Thanks desi3933, couple more questions...
do I have to submit only the job offer letter?
Should it be the old(one I originally got) one or get one from the employer saying I am currently employed as permamenet for the same salary as in I140?
Do I have to send the W2 from last year?
Do I have to send 2 paystubs from this year?
do I have to submit only the job offer letter?
Should it be the old(one I originally got) one or get one from the employer saying I am currently employed as permamenet for the same salary as in I140?
Do I have to send the W2 from last year?
Do I have to send 2 paystubs from this year?
vin13
02-22 06:44 PM
I am keeping track of the air miles donors and those requesting tickets. I may not get the time to acknowledge receiving the messages.
I will reach out to individuals as i get to coordinate the available miles with those who are in need.
Thanks
I will reach out to individuals as i get to coordinate the available miles with those who are in need.
Thanks
crystal
02-15 04:48 PM
Can you let me know, why US is applying this logic to 15% of EB immigrants only, while leaving it open with out any limits for FBs and Others which constitues to the major part of immigration?
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps. :)
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps. :)
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'