lost_in_migration
05-29 04:43 PM
Guantanamo may be kept open just for us .... and they will charge us $5000/$10000 per extension which is due per year ;)
I thought Guantanamo was being closed soon. They might ship us to detention centers in Afganistan or Iraq. :D Hope they have more high tech jobs there.
I thought Guantanamo was being closed soon. They might ship us to detention centers in Afganistan or Iraq. :D Hope they have more high tech jobs there.
wallpaper love quotes letting go.
x1050us
07-19 03:20 PM
I am with you on that one :) No point taking a risk for a few dollars.
As I already mentioned it is not about $$$. It is about getting an appointment at consulate. Anyways, I managed to prepone the appointment now. So everything should be smooth.
As I already mentioned it is not about $$$. It is about getting an appointment at consulate. Anyways, I managed to prepone the appointment now. So everything should be smooth.
gcformeornot
12-07 10:31 AM
please.
2011 quotes about letting go of
shantak
08-23 09:00 AM
I can guarantee that u r screwed for next 3+ years if it was EB2 and next 6+ years if it was EB3.
Well, go ahead and cry in the bathroom now instead of actively supporting IV.
How can you be so mean specially at a time when he is under tremendous pressure. IV should try to comfort him and suggest him some alternatives. Contact your attorney ASAP and ask him to try to have a good write up and send the application again, who knows USCIS might accept your application (worst case ur app will come back again), but make it fast dont delay anymore.
Well, go ahead and cry in the bathroom now instead of actively supporting IV.
How can you be so mean specially at a time when he is under tremendous pressure. IV should try to comfort him and suggest him some alternatives. Contact your attorney ASAP and ask him to try to have a good write up and send the application again, who knows USCIS might accept your application (worst case ur app will come back again), but make it fast dont delay anymore.
more...
mallu
12-02 02:40 PM
12/02/2007: News of DHS Plan to Approve Immigration Applications Without FBI Name Check Results After Certain Months Stirs Confusion
A couple of sources reported lately that DHS was planning to place a cap on the FBI fingerprint check period and should the agency fail to receive the FBI report within certain undisclosed period of time, the agency will proceed with adjudication of pending immigration applications. Reportedly, the information was released at a DHS meeting with the immigration stakeholders but there are no details of information available about the so-called plan of change of course in managing homeland security matter.
This reminds of the agency's past history in 1998 acting on the backlogs in CIA clearance for over one year causing a huge I-485 backlogs for years and announcing that the INS would adjudicate pending I-485 applications without waiting for the CIA completion of the security clearance on a condition that should the CIA report indicate a negative information, the INS would "revoke" the approved I-485 applications. The people who suffered the most from the lack of coordination betweren the INS and the CIA at the time were Chinese. The INS stop-gap action stirred some political concern and short-lived. The CIA clearance backlogs gradually improved afterwards helping the INS to remove the 485 backlogs over a period of time.
Such unusual stop-gap action was taken "before" 9/11. Since 9/11, the security and name checks have presented the DHS with a challenging task of balancing betweein securing homeland and reducing clearance time. The FBI name checks have presented a serious problem of backlogs particularly in two areas: One is name check backlogs in the new hires of federal government employees and the other is the immigration backlogs. According to the CIS Ombudsman reports, in 2006 the DHS had about 82,824 backlogs pending more than one year. and in 2007 the number increased to 106,738 cases. Such backlogs induced federal litigations in the form of mandamus actions by the applicants with some successful results. The burden of such litigations on the DHS financial and litigation resources has mounted over the years. In order to deal with the problem, the USCIS one time "informally" handled such problem by approving applications (I-485 and natulalization cases) when the applicants brought mandamus actions in the federal courts. Such action had brought a boom of business for some immigration lawyers rushing to filing of a sort of "massive" mandamus actions. Obviously, this action raised a serious polical outcry for the agency compromising the nation's security by adjudicating applications without the name check results, leading to suspension of the DHS informal policy and a subsequent announcement that the agency would not give any favorable consideration in adjudication of applications where a federal lawsuit was pending.
The environment of the agency's security management indeed changed before and after 9/11 and the precedent of INS approving I-485 applications without name check results without prejudice to potential revocation of such approved I-485 applications afterwards may not be that easily reintroduced as the agency will have to overcome two hurdles: A political pressure in the upcoming national election and a potential compromise of security. There was a legislative proposal in the Congress in one of the FY 2008 appropriation bills (CJS Appropriation Bill) which mandated the DHS to adjudicate immigration and naturalization applications, should the FBI fail to clear the name checks within six months from the effective date of the legislation. This legislation has yet to be finalized. Please stay tuned.
A couple of sources reported lately that DHS was planning to place a cap on the FBI fingerprint check period and should the agency fail to receive the FBI report within certain undisclosed period of time, the agency will proceed with adjudication of pending immigration applications. Reportedly, the information was released at a DHS meeting with the immigration stakeholders but there are no details of information available about the so-called plan of change of course in managing homeland security matter.
This reminds of the agency's past history in 1998 acting on the backlogs in CIA clearance for over one year causing a huge I-485 backlogs for years and announcing that the INS would adjudicate pending I-485 applications without waiting for the CIA completion of the security clearance on a condition that should the CIA report indicate a negative information, the INS would "revoke" the approved I-485 applications. The people who suffered the most from the lack of coordination betweren the INS and the CIA at the time were Chinese. The INS stop-gap action stirred some political concern and short-lived. The CIA clearance backlogs gradually improved afterwards helping the INS to remove the 485 backlogs over a period of time.
Such unusual stop-gap action was taken "before" 9/11. Since 9/11, the security and name checks have presented the DHS with a challenging task of balancing betweein securing homeland and reducing clearance time. The FBI name checks have presented a serious problem of backlogs particularly in two areas: One is name check backlogs in the new hires of federal government employees and the other is the immigration backlogs. According to the CIS Ombudsman reports, in 2006 the DHS had about 82,824 backlogs pending more than one year. and in 2007 the number increased to 106,738 cases. Such backlogs induced federal litigations in the form of mandamus actions by the applicants with some successful results. The burden of such litigations on the DHS financial and litigation resources has mounted over the years. In order to deal with the problem, the USCIS one time "informally" handled such problem by approving applications (I-485 and natulalization cases) when the applicants brought mandamus actions in the federal courts. Such action had brought a boom of business for some immigration lawyers rushing to filing of a sort of "massive" mandamus actions. Obviously, this action raised a serious polical outcry for the agency compromising the nation's security by adjudicating applications without the name check results, leading to suspension of the DHS informal policy and a subsequent announcement that the agency would not give any favorable consideration in adjudication of applications where a federal lawsuit was pending.
The environment of the agency's security management indeed changed before and after 9/11 and the precedent of INS approving I-485 applications without name check results without prejudice to potential revocation of such approved I-485 applications afterwards may not be that easily reintroduced as the agency will have to overcome two hurdles: A political pressure in the upcoming national election and a potential compromise of security. There was a legislative proposal in the Congress in one of the FY 2008 appropriation bills (CJS Appropriation Bill) which mandated the DHS to adjudicate immigration and naturalization applications, should the FBI fail to clear the name checks within six months from the effective date of the legislation. This legislation has yet to be finalized. Please stay tuned.
EdenMN
06-27 02:20 PM
Hi
We got our photos from SEARS . It is expensive(36$ for 8 photos ,(no option of ordering just 6 photos) )but quality is great !!!!
tell them you need photo for immigration documentation purpose , they are aware of USCIS requirement.
so if u care about quality go to SEARS ,if u don't care about quality go to CVS
We got our photos from SEARS . It is expensive(36$ for 8 photos ,(no option of ordering just 6 photos) )but quality is great !!!!
tell them you need photo for immigration documentation purpose , they are aware of USCIS requirement.
so if u care about quality go to SEARS ,if u don't care about quality go to CVS
more...
mhb
07-06 03:16 PM
they have daily podcasts of the news... we can watch it on those
as per NBC our news podcast has been bumped to tommorow as they got breaking news tonight. cannot put affiliations under the name as it might be against their policy.
as per NBC our news podcast has been bumped to tommorow as they got breaking news tonight. cannot put affiliations under the name as it might be against their policy.
2010 it is letting go.
ssa
02-04 05:40 PM
Sent letters for me and my wife to White House and IV
more...
styrum
01-19 06:46 PM
Sent mine today, asked three imm. lawyers I personally know to forward the link to their clients, asked all my US friends to sign.
hair love quotes letting go. sad
breddy2000
04-02 05:22 PM
Sent both faxes
more...
ps57002
10-11 05:25 PM
Wish I could say something to help those who missed feel better. I was fortunate. My PERM (atlanta center which is another slow goer but nowhere like BECs) got approved on Aug 14. I filed aug 17 but don't think I submitted all needed docs due to unavailabilty of some. I saw some people at Atlanta center wait for much longer than PERM should take and they gave up. My heart goes out to everyone. We do need to become involved with IV...be it those who are ahead in the game, be those stuck in Atlanta PERM, be those stuck in BEC and/or coming out of it now. Each and every person must join so as to fix this broken immigration system. People are stuck in differnet stages and it's not fair, so do get involved and help IV in helping you.
hot hairstyles love quotes about
Madhuri
02-14 03:57 PM
Hi, our first set of APs are expired and we never renewed since we did not plan to go out of the US. Now we need to apply for new AP, is it possible to apply online or since w eMUSt apply by mail since we don't have a valid AP at present.
Anybody in similar situation? Can somebody PM the cover letter to me?
Thanks,
Madhuri
Anybody in similar situation? Can somebody PM the cover letter to me?
Thanks,
Madhuri
more...
house quotes about letting go of love and moving on. quotes about letting go and
needhelp!
01-12 11:21 AM
Birth & Womens Center in Dallas. (birthcenter.net)
I know several ladies from my Bradley class who have delivered their babies there and have great reviews.
Their total fee is $4,950 for all the prenatal care and normal pregnancy and delivery (no insurance).
Also anyone who wants to avoid medicated deliveries should check out Bradley classes.
I know several ladies from my Bradley class who have delivered their babies there and have great reviews.
Their total fee is $4,950 for all the prenatal care and normal pregnancy and delivery (no insurance).
Also anyone who wants to avoid medicated deliveries should check out Bradley classes.
tattoo quotes about letting go and
bachelor
09-24 11:30 AM
YOu can surrender your GC letting know the USCICS that, it got approved when the PD was not current. I had read this on murthy.com. Browse the website to learn more about it or contact murthy.com attorney's.
How am I so sure...?? Even I am one amoung them praying for 485 not getting approved untill I get married. My PD is 2006, so I guess I don't have to worry too much.
Thanks for the reply tabletpc, but my GC was approved when the PD was current. i was wondering about the options i've to get my future wife to USA.
Thanks again
How am I so sure...?? Even I am one amoung them praying for 485 not getting approved untill I get married. My PD is 2006, so I guess I don't have to worry too much.
Thanks for the reply tabletpc, but my GC was approved when the PD was current. i was wondering about the options i've to get my future wife to USA.
Thanks again
more...
pictures house love quotes about letting go love quotes about letting go. love quotes
H1B-GC
05-14 10:03 PM
Good find Aadimanav. Way to go Ms.Lofgren !! Thanks for all your Efforts and we all really appreciate your work.
dresses hot love quotes letting go. quotes quotes about letting go of love and. love
kaisersose
06-05 03:00 PM
if they did what u say they did.. they violated the law. thats what gotcher is talking about.
Where is the law that says they can release visa numbers only on a quarterly basis? If that is true, then
1. The Feb bulletin would not have said EB-2 India had used up its annual limit.
2. The June Bulletin would not have said EB-3 will retrogress or become unavailable starting July [which starts a new quarter].
Both make no sense. Or alternatively, there is no such law and DOS can release visa numbers without the "quarterly" constraint. It may have been a practise in the past, but clearly since 2007, they have become keen to see visa numbers not go waste and they appear to have changed the trend.
Only a tiny fraction of applications are on . It really is nowhere enough to draw a meaningful analysis of approval trends.
Where is the law that says they can release visa numbers only on a quarterly basis? If that is true, then
1. The Feb bulletin would not have said EB-2 India had used up its annual limit.
2. The June Bulletin would not have said EB-3 will retrogress or become unavailable starting July [which starts a new quarter].
Both make no sense. Or alternatively, there is no such law and DOS can release visa numbers without the "quarterly" constraint. It may have been a practise in the past, but clearly since 2007, they have become keen to see visa numbers not go waste and they appear to have changed the trend.
Only a tiny fraction of applications are on . It really is nowhere enough to draw a meaningful analysis of approval trends.
more...
makeup love quotes letting go.
karanp25
06-05 06:37 PM
About 2 weeks back Murthy posted an article in it's bulletin "new AC-21 regulations expected soon" http://www.murthy.com/mb_pdf/050208_P.html which i believe was a result of some discussions USCIS had with AILA?
Now is this new AC-21 memo released today the one being referred to in the above mentioned Murthy bulletin? OR i should still hold my breath for more AC-21 changes coming from USCIS, so they can jeopardize status of people by changing their interpretation of laws every now and then? Anyone?
From Murthy:
AC21 Regulations under Revision
The liaison notes made brief reference to an AC21 regulation being under revision, with publication expected in the near future. AC21 became law in October 2000 and has been interpreted through a series of Legacy INS and USCIS memos, rather than regulations. There have been previous announcements of anticipated regulations on AC21, so it is unclear whether something is finally in the offing.
Now is this new AC-21 memo released today the one being referred to in the above mentioned Murthy bulletin? OR i should still hold my breath for more AC-21 changes coming from USCIS, so they can jeopardize status of people by changing their interpretation of laws every now and then? Anyone?
From Murthy:
AC21 Regulations under Revision
The liaison notes made brief reference to an AC21 regulation being under revision, with publication expected in the near future. AC21 became law in October 2000 and has been interpreted through a series of Legacy INS and USCIS memos, rather than regulations. There have been previous announcements of anticipated regulations on AC21, so it is unclear whether something is finally in the offing.
girlfriend letting go, Love, quote
whitecollarslave
02-12 06:41 PM
He sent me an email to pay $3500, do you think he will go legal for this, I did not sign any contract with him.
If he goes to court will i loose(he may create documents) or will i be in trouble if he wins the case.
Please suggest.
All this for $3500? Its going to cost him a lot more if he wants to file a lawsuit.
I don't think anybody will tell you for sure what the court will rule. Even if you pay a lawyer he will not tell you that - not in writing. Chances are that this will not even go to court and based the discussion on this thread its very unlikely if this will hold in any court.
BTW, how did he come up with the figure 3500? Is that the salary that was paid to you while you were working for another company? As somebody pointed out earlier if this was the money paid to you as compensation when you did not work for him then he might be reasonable in asking you to re-pay.
Let us know if you any information on what the 3500 figure is for.
An email does not mean anything. You can just ignore it. Unless you have a certified notice from court you have nothing to worry about.
If he goes to court will i loose(he may create documents) or will i be in trouble if he wins the case.
Please suggest.
All this for $3500? Its going to cost him a lot more if he wants to file a lawsuit.
I don't think anybody will tell you for sure what the court will rule. Even if you pay a lawyer he will not tell you that - not in writing. Chances are that this will not even go to court and based the discussion on this thread its very unlikely if this will hold in any court.
BTW, how did he come up with the figure 3500? Is that the salary that was paid to you while you were working for another company? As somebody pointed out earlier if this was the money paid to you as compensation when you did not work for him then he might be reasonable in asking you to re-pay.
Let us know if you any information on what the 3500 figure is for.
An email does not mean anything. You can just ignore it. Unless you have a certified notice from court you have nothing to worry about.
hairstyles house love quotes letting go. quotes about letting go of love and. quotes
laborchic
07-06 04:21 PM
Go IV .. Great going...
ppt.b
04-09 11:42 AM
Agreed 100%. Last year I was part of this lottery system, had a genuine job offer but was not lucky enough to be selected in the lottery. I know so many people who were lucky to get thru the lottery but are still hunting for jobs.
I hope this changes....may be after Presidential elections....
I hope this changes....may be after Presidential elections....
nixstor
01-13 06:07 PM
We are not sure of the chronology of events such as your wife's pregnancy, Your job change, your insurance start date. If you guys had individual insurance before your wife's conceiving, insurance cannot deny coverage as pre existing condition. Make sure you put these events in a time line and rule out the possibility of coverage. if you have done so, you have to explore other options.
As far as changing job is concerned, make sure your job requirement matches the same and similar concept. If you have used AC21, why not use it one more time? Of course, your PD and other personal issues might be stopping you from doing so. But if you are just thinking about using AC21 again, dont worry. Talk to a good attorney and drink the kool aid again.
The easiest way to get through this is to get under group coverage. I will let you know if there is any way you can sneak into group coverage. but the one I can think right on top of my head is joining an employer with health insurance
As far as changing job is concerned, make sure your job requirement matches the same and similar concept. If you have used AC21, why not use it one more time? Of course, your PD and other personal issues might be stopping you from doing so. But if you are just thinking about using AC21 again, dont worry. Talk to a good attorney and drink the kool aid again.
The easiest way to get through this is to get under group coverage. I will let you know if there is any way you can sneak into group coverage. but the one I can think right on top of my head is joining an employer with health insurance