abhisam
01-08 12:24 PM
I recently renewed our passports. I removed the I-94 (Which were stapled) to the passports and kept those with me, just to make sure it doesn't get lost. There was no question asked from Indian embassy regarding I-94, which is not the requirement, on the website.
i did not remove the i-94's and have already sent the passport for renewal. i do have a scanned copy of the i-94's. is there anything i can do at this point to get back the i-94's? i hope this does not pose a problem when i plan to travel outside the US. any advice is much appreciated.
i did not remove the i-94's and have already sent the passport for renewal. i do have a scanned copy of the i-94's. is there anything i can do at this point to get back the i-94's? i hope this does not pose a problem when i plan to travel outside the US. any advice is much appreciated.
wallpaper londe hair with red
bmoni
01-22 04:33 PM
Talk to your attorney. I think recent supreme court rule gives us the ability to appeal it. If it was an wrongful denial.
Don't lose your hope. Keep up the fight.
Don't lose your hope. Keep up the fight.
cox
June 6th, 2005, 09:58 PM
I found a photo from cox on this forum that has a similar light condition.
<Blush> Thanks, Kevin. Skagitswimmer, I often can't use Kevin's technique of getting close, since I am shooting animals most of the time, and they run/fly/swim away. I do something similar though.
If you use the center spot metering mode (the single dot on Canon products), and then pick a subject that is close to you and has a similar albedo (reflectivity/color) as your intended target, you can get a sanity check on exposure. Then take the meter of the real subject, making sure you're not too far off. Then shoot. Then bracket it, a stop up, shoot, and a stop down, shoot. If you're shooting RAW, this will give you enough coverage, and you WILL get the shot since you can adjust exposure again in PS or DPP or whatever you use.
You can get about six stops of range in three frames for a few clicks of a wheel, and that ain't bad. If you're using aperture priority (as I usually am to control DoF) or shutter priority, it's a quick couple of clicks to make the adjustments, and worth the effort. If you're shooting manual, it's a little more effort to decide what to change, but still do-able with stationary subjects. Let us know if these suggestions work for you, or if you come up with a different technique that works better for you. :)
Good Luck!
<Blush> Thanks, Kevin. Skagitswimmer, I often can't use Kevin's technique of getting close, since I am shooting animals most of the time, and they run/fly/swim away. I do something similar though.
If you use the center spot metering mode (the single dot on Canon products), and then pick a subject that is close to you and has a similar albedo (reflectivity/color) as your intended target, you can get a sanity check on exposure. Then take the meter of the real subject, making sure you're not too far off. Then shoot. Then bracket it, a stop up, shoot, and a stop down, shoot. If you're shooting RAW, this will give you enough coverage, and you WILL get the shot since you can adjust exposure again in PS or DPP or whatever you use.
You can get about six stops of range in three frames for a few clicks of a wheel, and that ain't bad. If you're using aperture priority (as I usually am to control DoF) or shutter priority, it's a quick couple of clicks to make the adjustments, and worth the effort. If you're shooting manual, it's a little more effort to decide what to change, but still do-able with stationary subjects. Let us know if these suggestions work for you, or if you come up with a different technique that works better for you. :)
Good Luck!
2011 strawberry blonde hair with
mambarg
08-01 01:03 PM
Here is my prediction.
With July Fiasco INS has learnt their lessons.
They have potential to process and approve 40K cases in one month.
Once all receipting is done by Sept 17th for all late Aug 17th filers, they will immediately start processing all oct 08 current cases.
I think they might even issue again 40K cases in october ?
Why not ?
So it is important to quickly do the FP and after FP within 3 weeks the name check gets cleared.
So anyone who does FP in Sept and who is current in oct , be ready to get your GC soon.
I would say dont be surprised if it takes just one month to approve ?????
With July Fiasco INS has learnt their lessons.
They have potential to process and approve 40K cases in one month.
Once all receipting is done by Sept 17th for all late Aug 17th filers, they will immediately start processing all oct 08 current cases.
I think they might even issue again 40K cases in october ?
Why not ?
So it is important to quickly do the FP and after FP within 3 weeks the name check gets cleared.
So anyone who does FP in Sept and who is current in oct , be ready to get your GC soon.
I would say dont be surprised if it takes just one month to approve ?????
more...
saimrathi
08-10 05:42 AM
Isnt this already in place in the form of US Visit (http://www.dhs.gov/xtrvlsec/programs/editorial_0525.shtm)
Para. 4
http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2007/08/09/735635.html
An outline of the announcement, obtained by The Associated Press from a congressional source, said the administration plans to expand the list of international gangs whose members are automatically denied admission to the U.S., reduce processing times for immigrant background checks, and install by the end of the year an exit system so the departure of foreigners from the country can be recorded at airports and seaports.
Para. 4
http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2007/08/09/735635.html
An outline of the announcement, obtained by The Associated Press from a congressional source, said the administration plans to expand the list of international gangs whose members are automatically denied admission to the U.S., reduce processing times for immigrant background checks, and install by the end of the year an exit system so the departure of foreigners from the country can be recorded at airports and seaports.
obviously
08-04 11:45 AM
Thanks for the 2 quick responses... albeit, opposite in recommendation :)
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
more...
hemanth22
07-21 09:24 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
2010 londe hair with lowlights
onemorecame
08-21 04:14 PM
There were twobiometrics. One was with initial application (probably Nov/Dec 2005) and another was in May 2007 when the first one expired (FP is valid for 15 months).
are you in EB2?
are you in EB2?
more...
skd043000
02-09 08:46 PM
what is NCR Region???
Delhi-noida-gurgaon-etc area
Delhi-noida-gurgaon-etc area
hair londe hair with lowlights
boreal
07-08 08:29 PM
None... as I did not seem to see anywhere in the filing instruction that W2 is needed... unless there is some change. Who knows nowadays...;)
Correct - None is the answer! My law firm (Fragomen) didnt ask for them when they submitted my docs on JUly 2. Maybe they are needed if the USCIS comes back with an RFE.
Correct - None is the answer! My law firm (Fragomen) didnt ask for them when they submitted my docs on JUly 2. Maybe they are needed if the USCIS comes back with an RFE.
more...
GSingh
07-13 10:44 AM
Its a good idea but make sure you guyz are comfortable. It must be hot out there.
hot strawberry blonde hair with
ramus
06-28 03:34 PM
Please don't create any new thred.. Please close it .. We already have 4 threds going with different rumers.. No need to put another one..
My answer is - No body knows what will happen.. So just chill and enjoy..
Did any one heard of EB3 India 485 Approved after June 26? Looks like EB3 visa numbers for this quarter for India is exhausted! If so then who many will be available in next quarter?
When will the 40K unused EB quota of visa numbers will be available /open? In mid September? Can any of the Gurus explain this?
My friend took info-pass and he was told that the EB3 India visa numbers are over for now and his case may be approved in next quota.
Looks like the first 40K in the 485 queue whose processing is done will get there 485�s approved in late September.
For some one like me who files 485 in June chances of approval in this year is less.:confused:
I just want to set the expectations real so that we will not be subjected to perpetual checking of online LUD/Status, forums and also avoid huge disappointment.
Pns27
***********************
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No
PD June 2002-non-RIR
I-140 approved from NSC
I485:--
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Receipt Date: 06/07/07
Notice Date: 06/22/07
FP Noticed Received on:?
My answer is - No body knows what will happen.. So just chill and enjoy..
Did any one heard of EB3 India 485 Approved after June 26? Looks like EB3 visa numbers for this quarter for India is exhausted! If so then who many will be available in next quarter?
When will the 40K unused EB quota of visa numbers will be available /open? In mid September? Can any of the Gurus explain this?
My friend took info-pass and he was told that the EB3 India visa numbers are over for now and his case may be approved in next quota.
Looks like the first 40K in the 485 queue whose processing is done will get there 485�s approved in late September.
For some one like me who files 485 in June chances of approval in this year is less.:confused:
I just want to set the expectations real so that we will not be subjected to perpetual checking of online LUD/Status, forums and also avoid huge disappointment.
Pns27
***********************
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No
PD June 2002-non-RIR
I-140 approved from NSC
I485:--
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Receipt Date: 06/07/07
Notice Date: 06/22/07
FP Noticed Received on:?
more...
house and lowlights on. red hair
sj2273
01-30 11:41 AM
Emailed Detroit News and Free Press
and NPR(Miradio.org)
and NPR(Miradio.org)
tattoo strawberry blonde hair with
reddymjm
09-16 03:05 PM
I called.
more...
pictures strawberry blonde hair with
pom
05-27 09:05 AM
The links page in Soul's site almost made me throw up, great work man :P
dresses Currently I am londe:
manish1905
10-07 12:34 PM
I got same audit in september as well
the guy came in to my desk and took pictures and i was asked to show my pay stubs
then they went to my hr and asked all questions
on being asked he said its the normal procedure
so no big deal , pls make sure if they coem to your office you should atleast have a copy of your paystubs
Thanks for your info!!!!!
the guy came in to my desk and took pictures and i was asked to show my pay stubs
then they went to my hr and asked all questions
on being asked he said its the normal procedure
so no big deal , pls make sure if they coem to your office you should atleast have a copy of your paystubs
Thanks for your info!!!!!
more...
makeup strawberry blonde hair with
abhijitp
11-16 06:44 PM
I sent in my I-140,I-485,EAD & AP applications to Nebraska Service Center which was the nodal agency to receive all I-140 applications during July -August 2007. They then would transfer some of the cases to TSC for processing. Due the visa bulletin fiasco, my applications were transferred to VSC for data entry and all my receipts have an EAC number. I received my EAD & AP and also a transfer notice informing that my I-485 was transferred to TSC as my job is in a state that comes under TSC's jurisdiction. But I did not hear anything about my I-140 being transferred to TSC. So we called up USCIS to check on it. We were informed that VSC would process my I-140 application and it was not necessary for it to be transferred to TSC unlike I-485.
My concern is VSC is taking for ever to process I-140's and currently are processing Apr 06 applications. I believe the dates have remained like that for a while now. Atleast TSC says clearly that they will process I-140 in 6 months, but VSC has no such processing times mentioned. Due to no fault of mine, my application ended up in VSC and is stuck there until some kind folks pick them for reviewing..which may take more than a year going by the current processing times. Is there anything I could do to have it transferred to TSC? Are there other members in the same situation? There is no likelihood of PPS starting anytime soon....what are my options to fix this problem? I thought under the new bi-specialization procedures only NSC & TSC processed I-140 applications...
How did you know your I-140 went to VSC?
I am curious because a lot of I-140's from my office (all filed in March 2007) are still pending approval with TSC. When we called USCIS for the status they asked us to call back after a couple of weeks (they need 30 days past the 6 months processing timeline). I am curious if these apps in fact got re-routed to some other service center. I hope they would send out a notification if they decided to do that!
BTW, to answer your question, I think there is no way out, except to wait for VSC processing timelines to show up! (I assume you are saying they are not showing a processing timeline for I-140's at VSC.)
My concern is VSC is taking for ever to process I-140's and currently are processing Apr 06 applications. I believe the dates have remained like that for a while now. Atleast TSC says clearly that they will process I-140 in 6 months, but VSC has no such processing times mentioned. Due to no fault of mine, my application ended up in VSC and is stuck there until some kind folks pick them for reviewing..which may take more than a year going by the current processing times. Is there anything I could do to have it transferred to TSC? Are there other members in the same situation? There is no likelihood of PPS starting anytime soon....what are my options to fix this problem? I thought under the new bi-specialization procedures only NSC & TSC processed I-140 applications...
How did you know your I-140 went to VSC?
I am curious because a lot of I-140's from my office (all filed in March 2007) are still pending approval with TSC. When we called USCIS for the status they asked us to call back after a couple of weeks (they need 30 days past the 6 months processing timeline). I am curious if these apps in fact got re-routed to some other service center. I hope they would send out a notification if they decided to do that!
BTW, to answer your question, I think there is no way out, except to wait for VSC processing timelines to show up! (I assume you are saying they are not showing a processing timeline for I-140's at VSC.)
girlfriend londe hair with lowlights.
Joozz
09-21 08:39 AM
Thanks a lot guys for answers and advices.
Another interesting thing that happened to me. After I got this extension I went to Canada and got a new visa in my passport and it’s also valid for two more years. If my H1B extension was made by mistake it looks like I committed a fraud asking visa in my passport based on documents that are not valid.
I am so confused now. Can anybody please recommend a good layer who can give me a legal advice, preferably from central PA?
Another interesting thing that happened to me. After I got this extension I went to Canada and got a new visa in my passport and it’s also valid for two more years. If my H1B extension was made by mistake it looks like I committed a fraud asking visa in my passport based on documents that are not valid.
I am so confused now. Can anybody please recommend a good layer who can give me a legal advice, preferably from central PA?
hairstyles my hair strawberry blonde.
mbartosik
11-19 12:14 PM
For Nebraska:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
For Texas:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
Summary for I485:
Nebraska has processed most applications that it has had for 7 months (filed on or before April 14 2007).
Texas has processed most applications that it has had for 6 months.
Since 6 months is the target, Texas can be considered to be caught up, and Nebraska will likely have caught up next month.
For I485 that makes the visa bulletin the main issue.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
For Texas:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
Summary for I485:
Nebraska has processed most applications that it has had for 7 months (filed on or before April 14 2007).
Texas has processed most applications that it has had for 6 months.
Since 6 months is the target, Texas can be considered to be caught up, and Nebraska will likely have caught up next month.
For I485 that makes the visa bulletin the main issue.
n2b
07-17 02:12 PM
can you please help me link the connection between my request and my contribution to IV? I fail to undersand your point!
given that u have just joined the group, let me say welcome aboard...
u made a wise decision to join this effort.. however regretfully I beg to defer , for you to be too quick to ask questions or updates and be more patient..
please aks yourself..what did u do for IV....what can u expect...
if u are a very active member and did contribute to IV, please accept my apologies
given that u have just joined the group, let me say welcome aboard...
u made a wise decision to join this effort.. however regretfully I beg to defer , for you to be too quick to ask questions or updates and be more patient..
please aks yourself..what did u do for IV....what can u expect...
if u are a very active member and did contribute to IV, please accept my apologies
waitin_toolong
07-30 03:41 PM
some 15-25 yrs back this used to be possible. I know of someone whos mom was air-hostess, and delivered the baby here and all of the family members got GC based on that baby.
But they closed this loophole sometime back.
But they closed this loophole sometime back.
No comments:
Post a Comment