madras1
01-27 12:38 PM
US needs EB1 and Ph.Ds
Others not contribute as much
Did you know your tri-valley university Ph.d does not count?
Others not contribute as much
Did you know your tri-valley university Ph.d does not count?
wallpaper londe hair red highlights. Short Blonde Hairstyle For Red
arjun007
02-07 10:17 PM
No .. I did not submit my i-94 while leaving for Canada...
drirshad
04-19 07:13 PM
Go to http://www.shusterman.com/
Got some updates as to whats going on behind the curtains ..
Gear up & give sometime to fight against the anti-immg groups who have already started contacting the law makers & congressmen ......
Got some updates as to whats going on behind the curtains ..
Gear up & give sometime to fight against the anti-immg groups who have already started contacting the law makers & congressmen ......
2011 red hair blonde highlights
roseball
07-12 04:29 PM
Mine was an e-filing. However my FP scheduling was quite weird.
I had my FP scheduled for 11/13
but my Card Production was Ordered on 11/12
I still went ahead and gave my FP on 11/13.
Thanks gc28262.
Is there anyone who e-filed their EAD renewal at TSC during May time frame. It would be helpful if you can tell me how long it took for approval. TIA.
I had my FP scheduled for 11/13
but my Card Production was Ordered on 11/12
I still went ahead and gave my FP on 11/13.
Thanks gc28262.
Is there anyone who e-filed their EAD renewal at TSC during May time frame. It would be helpful if you can tell me how long it took for approval. TIA.
more...
walking_dude
11-26 11:19 AM
Thanks. Please consider sending the E-mail to your friends as well. We need as many to participate as possible. If not possible to attend due to excruciating circumstances, at the least please consider contributing monetarily to this effort.
I contributed $20 to this cause.
I contributed $20 to this cause.
newuser
08-17 11:27 AM
ashkam
How many years do they renew the license based on I-485 receipt at Malvern DMV?
Thanks
I think the expiry date is based on EAD, not based on I-485 receipt notice.
How many years do they renew the license based on I-485 receipt at Malvern DMV?
Thanks
I think the expiry date is based on EAD, not based on I-485 receipt notice.
more...
hope2007
04-15 11:46 AM
changing job location...
2010 Girl With Blonde Hair And Red Highlights. londe, red, highlights
mita
08-05 06:17 AM
My husband's I485 was approved yesterday but mine and my son's, no change.
I got the magic mail today ---Card production ordered!!! Just for me.
The status of my wife's I485 remains the same ---> Received and pending?
Any one in similar situation?
I got the magic mail today ---Card production ordered!!! Just for me.
The status of my wife's I485 remains the same ---> Received and pending?
Any one in similar situation?
more...
gcformeornot
01-09 04:03 PM
Is this survey for only "those who lost a job while waiting for GC" or does it include anyone and everyone?
applies to general legal immigrant population.
applies to general legal immigrant population.
hair londe hair red highlights
hebron
08-16 03:26 PM
I have all proofs timesheets and bankstatements and email conversations. But, i am worried because he is threatening me saying he will go to court and sue me for working at the same client. Do i have chance to win the case if i fight back.
It all depends if you have a written agreement that prohibits you from working with the current employer. If there is no contract, you are safe. It seems that there is no such contract that either you signed with your ex-employer or middle-men.
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
It all depends if you have a written agreement that prohibits you from working with the current employer. If there is no contract, you are safe. It seems that there is no such contract that either you signed with your ex-employer or middle-men.
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
more...
NKR
04-21 03:07 PM
H1b does not exactly make one work "freely" in the US. Certainly not, if the employer is processing your GC as you are pretty much stuck with him.
Only L-1A allows faster GC processing as it does not require Labor and PDs are usually current. L-1B has no such short-cuts and is also plagued by the problem that it is valid only for 5 years. So if you cannot get into a 485 stage within those 5 years, then you are in trouble. On the other hand, a H-1b can be extended indefinitely once you cross a certain point in your GC processing.
So evaluate your options.
If you cannot renew L1, you can go back and work offshore. Remember that GC application is valid even if you are not in country and the process would continue (because GC is for future employment). This option is not bad when the company that sent you on L1 treats you well and you do not want to leave the company. Working at home while your GC is in process appeals to many who want a break from this lengthy and back breaking process.
Only L-1A allows faster GC processing as it does not require Labor and PDs are usually current. L-1B has no such short-cuts and is also plagued by the problem that it is valid only for 5 years. So if you cannot get into a 485 stage within those 5 years, then you are in trouble. On the other hand, a H-1b can be extended indefinitely once you cross a certain point in your GC processing.
So evaluate your options.
If you cannot renew L1, you can go back and work offshore. Remember that GC application is valid even if you are not in country and the process would continue (because GC is for future employment). This option is not bad when the company that sent you on L1 treats you well and you do not want to leave the company. Working at home while your GC is in process appeals to many who want a break from this lengthy and back breaking process.
hot dark rown hair red highlights
chanduv23
03-14 06:50 AM
If someone completes their residency in US and gets a license to practice medicine, will this MD degree be valid in Canada and Australia?
My wife is doing her residency and due to this retrogression we want to have a plan B, and for plan B we want to know if it is worth moving to Canada or Australia after she completes her Residency? While I am in IT, I think the job scene is almost same everywhere which is based on experience.
I am sure a lot of IV members are physicians and would be looking into these options also. Please share your thoughts.
My wife is doing her residency and due to this retrogression we want to have a plan B, and for plan B we want to know if it is worth moving to Canada or Australia after she completes her Residency? While I am in IT, I think the job scene is almost same everywhere which is based on experience.
I am sure a lot of IV members are physicians and would be looking into these options also. Please share your thoughts.
more...
house londe hair red highlights. Blonde Hair With Lowlights And
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
tattoo Emo Blonde Hair With Black Highlights. Blonde Highlights In Black
espoir
11-08 03:47 PM
Although July Fiasco was for EB only, there was a rush to file AOS for family based as well because of USCIS Fee increase from July 31st. Unless USCIS comes out with stats, everything else is guessing game. I guess that we can have better estimate after 3 or 4 bulletins and based on its forward movement.
more...
pictures rown hair with red highlights
go_gc_way
05-13 10:25 AM
That's really an idea , need a thought by all... pros and cons.
Specially a forum like IV, and then I believe it will be another effort to get it there.
Given retrogression has some what a known issue, does any one think ... this will be mentioned any way in the address.
Specially a forum like IV, and then I believe it will be another effort to get it there.
Given retrogression has some what a known issue, does any one think ... this will be mentioned any way in the address.
dresses hot londe and lack hair blonde
delax
08-03 01:08 PM
I remember very clearly from last year that NOT having an A# on your approved I-140 is not a problem - Sheela Murthy was very clear about this on her calls for her clients. The 485 receipt though should have an A#.
FP is a different story. You have to get it done for 485 approval.
Disclaimer: My approved I-140 has an A# that matches the A# on the 485 receipt
FP is a different story. You have to get it done for 485 approval.
Disclaimer: My approved I-140 has an A# that matches the A# on the 485 receipt
more...
makeup Hair Highlights, Hairstyle
mambarg
08-01 01:26 PM
But dont you guys expect improvement after all this fiasco ?
Do you not agree that INS will learn some lessons from this ?
Since DOS does not know or INS cannot tell DOS how many apps it has waiting for approval , then how will DOS decide on the monthly cutoff for EB categories ?
With all the fiasco. DOS will definitely ask INS and get the estimate before deciding cut off.
INS also promised that they will work with DOS to make this cutoff process proper ?
I dont know the details, but we may see a definite change henceforth.
So be ready for more surprises in coming months.
Enjoy the ride.............
Do you not agree that INS will learn some lessons from this ?
Since DOS does not know or INS cannot tell DOS how many apps it has waiting for approval , then how will DOS decide on the monthly cutoff for EB categories ?
With all the fiasco. DOS will definitely ask INS and get the estimate before deciding cut off.
INS also promised that they will work with DOS to make this cutoff process proper ?
I dont know the details, but we may see a definite change henceforth.
So be ready for more surprises in coming months.
Enjoy the ride.............
girlfriend Brown Hair Red Highlights
FUNTIMES
08-20 11:08 AM
I am also in the same situation. My GC has been approved on August 5th 2008 and my wife's case is still pending, with no LUD. Did anyone else receive any approval.
hairstyles londe hair highlights on
pani_6
12-07 10:50 PM
Please post the name,PH#,state of the senator..for making it easy for others to call please.....
Row the boat we are almost there
Row the boat we are almost there
InTheMoment
04-25 12:23 PM
Mail sent by CIS has a endorsment on their envelopes "Return Service Requested". USPS does NOT forward mail with such endorsements.
Even if online address change thru AR-11 has not taken effect, post office will forward your mail to your new address for 12 months - make sure you fill out change of address form with postal dept immediately
Even if online address change thru AR-11 has not taken effect, post office will forward your mail to your new address for 12 months - make sure you fill out change of address form with postal dept immediately
mita
12-05 11:59 AM
Kumar,
How do you distinguish between junk and not junk? It is holiday season and some families and students travel to India during this time. Some might get time to browse the net and some might not. If someone visits this forum they will be well informed about travel conditions back home and this was my only intention but I think you have an agenda here. If you like it read it or else just ignore rather than classifying or giving names. This is not a personal chat room or e-mail so don't show your anger here, just send them a PM, my 2 cents. Have a good weekend.
Mita, I am asking you not to paste junk URLs over here!
You can spend your time on TOI...no issues.
I was waiting for someone to spit venom at timesofindia but did not happen till today.
By the way, do you believe in the news from other billion news website? I think most of us visit other websites to verify if the info is correct so that there is no propoganda involved. If you think timesofindia is one of them than don't visit that website but you cannot request others to do the same.
How do you distinguish between junk and not junk? It is holiday season and some families and students travel to India during this time. Some might get time to browse the net and some might not. If someone visits this forum they will be well informed about travel conditions back home and this was my only intention but I think you have an agenda here. If you like it read it or else just ignore rather than classifying or giving names. This is not a personal chat room or e-mail so don't show your anger here, just send them a PM, my 2 cents. Have a good weekend.
Mita, I am asking you not to paste junk URLs over here!
You can spend your time on TOI...no issues.
I was waiting for someone to spit venom at timesofindia but did not happen till today.
By the way, do you believe in the news from other billion news website? I think most of us visit other websites to verify if the info is correct so that there is no propoganda involved. If you think timesofindia is one of them than don't visit that website but you cannot request others to do the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment