ADVERTISEMENTS
Jerrome
07-13 08:30 AM
Let us see the approvals trend till october. I am guessing the PD will move back to MID 2005 or 2004 by October for EB-2 India.
wallpaper Kate Beckinsale. Sept 09 2009
vine93
06-10 03:54 PM
sent
conchshell
07-28 11:00 AM
Instead of discussing this matter on IV forum ... please report it to Vishwa Hindu Parishad ( www.vhp.org ) They are actively searching for such issues.
2011 kate-eckinsale-pony-tail.jpg
msp1976
04-10 03:14 PM
Can apply through company A...
more...
Caliber
03-10 02:58 PM
From July-07 fiasco DOS and USICS work very closely on VB, I am referring to USCI and DOS. And USCIS is the one who influence DOS decision.
MDIX: I wish your forecast come true. But if you followed the thread, most of 2001/2002/2003 did not even have soft LUD's. While I agree that USCIS is working on EB3 I as many got RFE's, there are many more whose cases were not touched. I gave you green.
MDIX: I wish your forecast come true. But if you followed the thread, most of 2001/2002/2003 did not even have soft LUD's. While I agree that USCIS is working on EB3 I as many got RFE's, there are many more whose cases were not touched. I gave you green.
ajthakur
07-14 06:52 PM
I dont remember any LUD on 140 after it was approved. I didnt pay attention to it. I just know now there is a LUD for 7/13/2008.
7/13 LUD is inconclusive. There's a separate thread on IV discussing this where EB-2 folks have seen a 07/13 LUD w/o AC-21. Do you remember seeing a change in your I-140 LUD after approval in 2006 and before last week when they generated your RFE?
if there was a LUD, this is a high possibility that your previous employer revoked I-140.
This RFE can not be generated out of the blues. Using H-1B Xfr instead of EAD has absolutely nothing to do with validity of your AC-21. At least i am not aware of any correlation between the two.
7/13 LUD is inconclusive. There's a separate thread on IV discussing this where EB-2 folks have seen a 07/13 LUD w/o AC-21. Do you remember seeing a change in your I-140 LUD after approval in 2006 and before last week when they generated your RFE?
if there was a LUD, this is a high possibility that your previous employer revoked I-140.
This RFE can not be generated out of the blues. Using H-1B Xfr instead of EAD has absolutely nothing to do with validity of your AC-21. At least i am not aware of any correlation between the two.
more...
desi3933
01-30 02:08 PM
What I am not understanding is - why are they even looking at my case now? There are 4 years of applicants ahead of me, why cant the USCIS process those applications first?
I have a sickening feeling that this is going to become more and more common in this economic situation. There must a push from above to reduce the backlogs and if they cannot approve the cases they are going to find a way to deny them on some pretext or other.
Crazyghoda -
The popular myth is that application is processed only when PD is current. However, it is just that - a myth. While I-485 application can be approved only when PD is current, but it can be processed, RFE can be issued, and law even allows I-485 application to be denied irrespective of PD.
RFE for employer history is very common for pending I-485 applications. USCIS may ask for employment history with dates and salary details. Since 245(k) allow status check since last lawful admission, only details that matters is, since last admission. Please note that entry into US on AP does NOT count as lawful admission. It has to be non-immigrant visa.
245(k) allows a waiver of 180 cumulative days for out-of-status since last lawful admssion (i.e. on H1/H4/L1/L2/F1 etc).
Please have all AC-21 related documents for latest job (or job offer).
Good Luck.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I have a sickening feeling that this is going to become more and more common in this economic situation. There must a push from above to reduce the backlogs and if they cannot approve the cases they are going to find a way to deny them on some pretext or other.
Crazyghoda -
The popular myth is that application is processed only when PD is current. However, it is just that - a myth. While I-485 application can be approved only when PD is current, but it can be processed, RFE can be issued, and law even allows I-485 application to be denied irrespective of PD.
RFE for employer history is very common for pending I-485 applications. USCIS may ask for employment history with dates and salary details. Since 245(k) allow status check since last lawful admission, only details that matters is, since last admission. Please note that entry into US on AP does NOT count as lawful admission. It has to be non-immigrant visa.
245(k) allows a waiver of 180 cumulative days for out-of-status since last lawful admssion (i.e. on H1/H4/L1/L2/F1 etc).
Please have all AC-21 related documents for latest job (or job offer).
Good Luck.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
2010 kate beckinsale hair 2009. Kate Beckinsale curly hair
TomPlate
10-22 11:22 AM
So by your theory don't tax the rich at all. That way we will get all the money as wage from the rich. :D LOL. Do you really believe this? How is the trickle down economy working so far? BTW Clinton taxed the rich and the economy grew.
I mean tax everyone equally. During this tough economy time, consider everyone and not the middle class or upper class or lower class.
I mean tax everyone equally. During this tough economy time, consider everyone and not the middle class or upper class or lower class.
more...
sc3
10-16 01:49 PM
yesterday some one left a red saying "go and sleep in your bedroom or something like that" :D,
(which I find hilarious..because I don't exactly sleep on my couch :D:D)
then some left a green saying "nullifying red".
folks, I didn't leave a red for anyone (who cares abt them anyways)...don't assume immediately that I reacted.
giving either reds or greens will not impact anyone's gc process..or change their PDs!
Like itsnotfunny says, if you agree/disagree say it so. gave itsnotfunny a green to nullify the red.
let me reiterate though, that I am completely opposed to flower campaign because once bitten, twice shy.
USCIS has lot of autonomy and there is every likely of a repeat i.e july 07 part 2 as a reaction to gandhigiri part 2
instead focus on other avenues, there is an excellent thread on FOIA in addition to the other avenues
First: Disabuse yourself of the notion that Gandhigiri had anything to do with the backtrack of the July 07 fiasco. There were other more pressing (and effective) organizations that helped reverse the situation.
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
(which I find hilarious..because I don't exactly sleep on my couch :D:D)
then some left a green saying "nullifying red".
folks, I didn't leave a red for anyone (who cares abt them anyways)...don't assume immediately that I reacted.
giving either reds or greens will not impact anyone's gc process..or change their PDs!
Like itsnotfunny says, if you agree/disagree say it so. gave itsnotfunny a green to nullify the red.
let me reiterate though, that I am completely opposed to flower campaign because once bitten, twice shy.
USCIS has lot of autonomy and there is every likely of a repeat i.e july 07 part 2 as a reaction to gandhigiri part 2
instead focus on other avenues, there is an excellent thread on FOIA in addition to the other avenues
First: Disabuse yourself of the notion that Gandhigiri had anything to do with the backtrack of the July 07 fiasco. There were other more pressing (and effective) organizations that helped reverse the situation.
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
hair kate beckinsale hair 2009.
amsgc
12-21 10:35 PM
Lazycis,
For academic info:
You mentioned that 245(k) allows up to 180 "out of status". Does it also cover "unlawful presence"? If not, then what does?
I am getting a bit confused by the terminlogy. I understand that "out of status" impiles: Your I-94 has not expired, but you have violated the terms under which you were admitted.
And "unlawful presence" means you overstayed your I-94, or sneaked in.
Is this correct? Please clarify.
Thanks,
Ams
For academic info:
You mentioned that 245(k) allows up to 180 "out of status". Does it also cover "unlawful presence"? If not, then what does?
I am getting a bit confused by the terminlogy. I understand that "out of status" impiles: Your I-94 has not expired, but you have violated the terms under which you were admitted.
And "unlawful presence" means you overstayed your I-94, or sneaked in.
Is this correct? Please clarify.
Thanks,
Ams
more...
yagw
07-13 10:06 AM
Thanks...Excerpt from the same document
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the fourteenth under the 8th, etc.)
It is not a contradiction to the previous statement.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st, 8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the fourteenth under the 8th, etc.)
It is not a contradiction to the previous statement.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
hot kate beckinsale hair 2009.
ajju
03-18 10:26 PM
I think Nixtor should explain why he even bothered to call Mr. Foggs' number. There are many many people in this forum with incorrect phone numbers. Why nixtor is not banning all of them. There is even a member with handle 'taliban'.
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
RED DOTS: Looks like lots of people are in excuse of getting offended.. and spreading RED DOTS... Good Luck...
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
RED DOTS: Looks like lots of people are in excuse of getting offended.. and spreading RED DOTS... Good Luck...
more...
house kate beckinsale hair 2009. 0512-kate-eckinsale-big-
Jaime
09-11 01:12 PM
This aint my fight... This aint your fight..
THIS IS OUR FIGHT!!!
We need to come together & let our voices be heard!!!
Come to DC...
There is very little time & lots to achieve...
There are miles to go before I sleep.....Well said! This is OUR fight! Let's go guys! EVERYONE TO DC!!!!
THIS IS OUR FIGHT!!!
We need to come together & let our voices be heard!!!
Come to DC...
There is very little time & lots to achieve...
There are miles to go before I sleep.....Well said! This is OUR fight! Let's go guys! EVERYONE TO DC!!!!
tattoo kate beckinsale hair 2009.
Jaime
09-12 01:52 PM
Hi,
I carnt make it to the DC Rally, as i am in the UK, but this morning i sent the Channel 4 News desk an email explaining our plight in the hope that they might cover the DC rally and get you guys some air time, i also sent the same email to the ITN news desk, so you never know you might be on TV over here.
Hope this counts as a contribution. ???
Regards
Ian lock
EB3 ROW
Just like Tesco says! Thanks!
I carnt make it to the DC Rally, as i am in the UK, but this morning i sent the Channel 4 News desk an email explaining our plight in the hope that they might cover the DC rally and get you guys some air time, i also sent the same email to the ITN news desk, so you never know you might be on TV over here.
Hope this counts as a contribution. ???
Regards
Ian lock
EB3 ROW
Just like Tesco says! Thanks!
more...
pictures tattoo kate beckinsale hair
lc1978
02-16 03:41 PM
You just made a payment of $ 100.00
Your receipt number for this payment is: 4704-4941-3704-4919.
All the best
Your receipt number for this payment is: 4704-4941-3704-4919.
All the best
dresses kate beckinsale hair 2009.
DDD
03-13 06:44 PM
I voted eilsoe. The reason being his model and render seems more fundamentally sound. Thirdworldwoman's was cool but the proportions were off. All in good work all of ya'll
more...
makeup kate beckinsale hair 2009.
guy03062
07-13 02:26 PM
I agree with you 100% for her delayed letter when everything falls in right place and may want to claim credit later on. But on other side, it is still good that she wrote a letter to add pressure on DHS. My 2 cents.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
girlfriend kate beckinsale hair 2009.
gsgskms
03-17 11:23 AM
EB3 India -
PD 03/2003
RD 06/2007 for I-485
approved LC & I140
PD 03/2003
RD 06/2007 for I-485
approved LC & I140
hairstyles wallpaper kate beckinsale hair
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
ksairi
08-15 04:32 PM
D. EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY FOR SEPTEMBER
Due to the return of unused July numbers by consular posts abroad, and the limited amount of pending demand eligible for final processing at consular posts, it has been possible to reestablish cut-off dates in many of the Employment preference categories.
Please link it.
Due to the return of unused July numbers by consular posts abroad, and the limited amount of pending demand eligible for final processing at consular posts, it has been possible to reestablish cut-off dates in many of the Employment preference categories.
Please link it.
valuablehurdle
02-10 07:38 AM
I also have Continental Airmiles that I can donate. Please PM me if anyone is interested. I will be driving to DC myself since I am just 4 hours away.
Post Title → kate beckinsale hair 2009
ADVERTISEMENTS
