s416504
08-29 04:15 PM
Any one knows , How is my GREEN Light turned to RED ?? Ways to turn back green
wallpaper Shortcake Hat - Party Hats
transpass
08-04 11:34 AM
Yep, how about a rally in front of Nebraska Service Center ;)
Yeah, may be a cycle rally...:p
Yeah, may be a cycle rally...:p
gemini23
07-31 04:44 PM
dont worry thats normal. when i was in florida, i always got a temp licence valid for 4 weeks. and then the actual renewed licence arrived within 3 weeks in mail .
:)
:)
2011 quot;confetti_amp;_party_hat.gifquot;
billbuff123
10-24 12:12 PM
Hi,
I am in the same situation.
I went to India to get married in sep 2008 and went for stamping for my wife and she got stamped for H4 untill 2011 feb. and we are back on to US. After reaching here I have my GC in my mail.
my PD is may 2006 I am waiting to add my wife to my GC I talked to the lawer and he said once the dates are current we can add her.
please let me know if we need to do any thing.. IS there any other way that I can add her or apply 485.
Just waiting for the dates to come
Thanks,
I am in the same situation.
I went to India to get married in sep 2008 and went for stamping for my wife and she got stamped for H4 untill 2011 feb. and we are back on to US. After reaching here I have my GC in my mail.
my PD is may 2006 I am waiting to add my wife to my GC I talked to the lawer and he said once the dates are current we can add her.
please let me know if we need to do any thing.. IS there any other way that I can add her or apply 485.
Just waiting for the dates to come
Thanks,
more...
x1050us
06-25 09:50 PM
you dont require to file I 539 since she is out of the country ,so currently she has no status .
I understand that. But does it have any negative impact ?
I understand that. But does it have any negative impact ?
ras
09-18 09:58 PM
Current Green Card Ajudication duration = {(PD Date) � (Current Date) + [security/Background Check (IBIS etc.)] + Name check + (1 OR 2 OR 3 FP�s) + (RFE�s AND RFE response times) + [nterview (if called for an interview)] + [Country AND Category(EB) specific Retrogression] + [(time behind applications which had older PD�s but later RD�s filed during Jun/Jul bulletin Fiasco)] + [USCIS errors (includes, sending FP�s to old address AND/OR other errors)]}
more...
good idea
03-13 12:43 PM
FBI Arrests DC Official (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/03/fbi-arrests-dc.html)
2010 4th Year Party Hat 1
setpit_gc
08-13 02:09 PM
What if that company not willing to offer any employment or no longer exists?.
more...
vnandster
03-17 11:35 AM
My wife's RFE was because they saw she used FNU as her 1st name. They wanted to know if she wanted to keep the same FNU name for GC or not.
Also they wanted proof of marriage (which I had already sent them in 2007).
Also they wanted proof of marriage (which I had already sent them in 2007).
hair Party Hat Balloon Weights Pink
Gravitation
06-15 12:41 PM
I have edited the poll to add that option. Literally.
Thanks Logiclife!
Thanks Logiclife!
more...
jetr
08-27 12:25 PM
Can you please Post the Dates of when you applied for I-140 & when you were APPROVED.
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
hot Propeller Hat clip art
mariusp
08-12 03:37 PM
I submitted my 485 on July 12 and I got an 08/05 LUD on my pending I-140. Could be coincidence or they checked my 140 as part of the initial 485 processing...
more...
house Jemima - Party Hat.
gg_ny
09-10 10:21 AM
My PD is dec 2004 and RD is Aug 2005, EB2, IND NIW. We got our GCs in the end of Aug. VB for Aug. was U at that time. That means the 60K numbers are being consumed even now. It would be so until the end of Sept 07 when the fiscal year ends. I have heard of quite a few cases approved in Aug even in IV. The dirty laundry is buried under the amnesty and all the new applicants got benefited (short-term) in the Aug 17 amnesty. Hopefully they approve as many AOS applicants as possible by the end of this month and follow the same strategy (albeit in a manageable form) next year too. The very reason for the amnesty deal itself was, I believe, more face-saving than avoid illegal exposure of illegal action as CIS was technically correct on paper and practically adventurous during July fiasco.
There are a few key lessons:
1) if your background check (incl FBI's) comes clean and FP is updated, your chances of getting GC approved is more irrespective of the PD listed on the VB. Of course one has to go by the waiting line based on PD and if necessary, RD of the application, though I am not sure how it works.
2) even if there is a quarterly flooding of visa numbers in the next year(as against control release mechanism until June 07), there are more chances for less number of visas going waste at the end of the year. The failed experiment leads to this obvious conclusion.
What are you guys trying to figure out here? The unanswered Q's have been unanswered for a lot of years now and July VB fiasco resolve was just a lid on the unanswered Q's that were coming out into lime light. While USCIS is not perfect and is culpable for the mishap, our focus should be on getting some relief. There is not a lot any one of us is going to gain by finding the cuplable and reasons behind. We will simply not get any answers in the current situation and hoping that USCIS will provide some thing like a used visas ticker through out their fiscal year, because of the July VB fiasco is nothing but being too naive.
Congress Women Lofgren would not go on witch hunting DOS/USCIS officials after they have honored the original VB. The simple reason being (GC's) visa numbers, though capped per year, allow USCIS to accept more applications than the visa numbers available. There is no one to one match between the available GC numbers and applications. USCIS OB submits an annual report and will report the number of visas used by USCIS in the fiscal year. Hopefully, after all this hooplah, we should see 100% utilization of visa numbers.
There are a few key lessons:
1) if your background check (incl FBI's) comes clean and FP is updated, your chances of getting GC approved is more irrespective of the PD listed on the VB. Of course one has to go by the waiting line based on PD and if necessary, RD of the application, though I am not sure how it works.
2) even if there is a quarterly flooding of visa numbers in the next year(as against control release mechanism until June 07), there are more chances for less number of visas going waste at the end of the year. The failed experiment leads to this obvious conclusion.
What are you guys trying to figure out here? The unanswered Q's have been unanswered for a lot of years now and July VB fiasco resolve was just a lid on the unanswered Q's that were coming out into lime light. While USCIS is not perfect and is culpable for the mishap, our focus should be on getting some relief. There is not a lot any one of us is going to gain by finding the cuplable and reasons behind. We will simply not get any answers in the current situation and hoping that USCIS will provide some thing like a used visas ticker through out their fiscal year, because of the July VB fiasco is nothing but being too naive.
Congress Women Lofgren would not go on witch hunting DOS/USCIS officials after they have honored the original VB. The simple reason being (GC's) visa numbers, though capped per year, allow USCIS to accept more applications than the visa numbers available. There is no one to one match between the available GC numbers and applications. USCIS OB submits an annual report and will report the number of visas used by USCIS in the fiscal year. Hopefully, after all this hooplah, we should see 100% utilization of visa numbers.
tattoo Party Hat | | Appears in the
extra_mint
10-12 08:47 PM
Question is why make it mandatory ??
There are thousands of prevention medicines and vaccines in the market. Do all of us take all of them !!!!
I think it is safe to assume that answer is NO
We have an option of making choice and it is upto us to either go for a vaccine or not. So fair thing should be not to enforce this on immigrants.
By the way, CDC has approved lots of medicines which are not safe and we figure their side effects later on. Please check the following link (few side effects of gardasil)
http://www.ennislaw.com/gardasil.html
I am not saying that this vaccine is bad for every women, I think it is unfair to make this mandatory and that too just on immigrants.
lawsuit?? oh come on. This is for a CDC recommended vaccine which might help prevent cancer!!
To my mind this is the ONLY fees that we are paying which really means something useful to us... After paying thousands of dollars in fees to USCIS (H1/485/EAD/AP), hundreds to DoS (visa stampings), and sponsoring multiple trips to Hawaii for my lawyer (his fees would make you faint) this is finally a fee that actually does something useful to the applicant, and I would gladly pay this for my family members.
There are thousands of prevention medicines and vaccines in the market. Do all of us take all of them !!!!
I think it is safe to assume that answer is NO
We have an option of making choice and it is upto us to either go for a vaccine or not. So fair thing should be not to enforce this on immigrants.
By the way, CDC has approved lots of medicines which are not safe and we figure their side effects later on. Please check the following link (few side effects of gardasil)
http://www.ennislaw.com/gardasil.html
I am not saying that this vaccine is bad for every women, I think it is unfair to make this mandatory and that too just on immigrants.
lawsuit?? oh come on. This is for a CDC recommended vaccine which might help prevent cancer!!
To my mind this is the ONLY fees that we are paying which really means something useful to us... After paying thousands of dollars in fees to USCIS (H1/485/EAD/AP), hundreds to DoS (visa stampings), and sponsoring multiple trips to Hawaii for my lawyer (his fees would make you faint) this is finally a fee that actually does something useful to the applicant, and I would gladly pay this for my family members.
more...
pictures A Party Hat to celebrate New
Nikhil2
02-09 10:34 PM
I plan to transfer the priority date of an old LC to a new one. My attorney said my case won't work, since the two LCs belong to the same company and the positions (job titles) are the same. She indicates at least one of them needs be different.
I spent a whole night and cannot find any info about this.
Do you happen to know this? Any comments or links would be appreciated.
I spent a whole night and cannot find any info about this.
Do you happen to know this? Any comments or links would be appreciated.
dresses party hat clip art.
ItIsNotFunny
01-16 11:31 AM
I voted. Please do it now.
more...
makeup PARTYHAT.gif 214KB Mar 21 2010
Berkeleybee
03-27 07:34 PM
Prolegalimmi,
Our team is in contact with NPR. Are you working with sunil on this?
Thanks,
Berkeleybee
Our team is in contact with NPR. Are you working with sunil on this?
Thanks,
Berkeleybee
girlfriend Party Hat Balloon Weights Red
rockstart
10-05 02:55 PM
That is a pretty impressive list of advisor's. Thank you IV for the great work.
hairstyles 2nd Annual Blog Party Outline:
sayonara
09-19 01:38 PM
Did everyone get receipt and transfer notice? I ask because I only got Transfer notice, and lawyer is not responding about whether he received a receipt notice(with July 2nd date ) also.
TIA
TIA
nixstor
08-21 10:19 PM
somegchuh
I am seriously considering starting a business as a partner with a Perm Resident. How ever, I have not delved into any details. Guys! Any input?
I am seriously considering starting a business as a partner with a Perm Resident. How ever, I have not delved into any details. Guys! Any input?
485_spouse
09-25 03:14 PM
She is not out of status but you need to move fast (first 180 days) and talk to some good lawyer.
In 2007 I had a long consultation with a lawyer and told about INS act 245(k)
Google it.
Furthermore. One of my co-worker was approved while his wife's case was not filled in 2007. they used 245(k) and there was no issue.
In 2007 I had a long consultation with a lawyer and told about INS act 245(k)
Google it.
Furthermore. One of my co-worker was approved while his wife's case was not filled in 2007. they used 245(k) and there was no issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment