yabadaba
07-09 04:26 PM
yea.. i did not read ur first post correctly..sorry
wallpaper 2011 Pokemon coloring pages
gc28262
09-01 06:27 PM
I'm in the same hole. Oct'2003 is my PD EB2I. had interview 3 months back. Was waiting so eagerly for this day. no update on my case. While I see Dec'2004 cases getting approved. Why can't USCIS do some organization and issue green card purely by priority dates rather than at the mercy of the officer. Why should they make lives of poor immigrants and green card applicants as miserable and touch as possible? Can't do anything more than feeling bad. :-(
If your PD is current, try creating a service request. This will force IO to look at your case. If it is ready for approval, he would probably approve it.
If your PD is current, try creating a service request. This will force IO to look at your case. If it is ready for approval, he would probably approve it.
.gif "POKEMON COLORING PAGES")
clazale
11-12 10:19 AM
can you share more details about your case?
Priority Date: Nov 2004 (EB3 - India)
Labor certification approved - march 2007
Applied I140 and I485 concurrently during the July 2007 fiasco (July 17th 2007 ... to be precise)
Used Cross-chargeability and crossed to EB3 ROW, so my priority date became current
I140 approved: Sept 08
GC Approved: Oct 08.
I dont know if cross-chargeability matters, but the main thing is that when my I485 was approved in Oct 08 the processing time was still showing June 2007 (roughly first week of june 2007), which is more than 1 month behind. And also the processing time was stuck on june 2007 for few months.
Good luck to you and I hope that good days come soon.
Priority Date: Nov 2004 (EB3 - India)
Labor certification approved - march 2007
Applied I140 and I485 concurrently during the July 2007 fiasco (July 17th 2007 ... to be precise)
Used Cross-chargeability and crossed to EB3 ROW, so my priority date became current
I140 approved: Sept 08
GC Approved: Oct 08.
I dont know if cross-chargeability matters, but the main thing is that when my I485 was approved in Oct 08 the processing time was still showing June 2007 (roughly first week of june 2007), which is more than 1 month behind. And also the processing time was stuck on june 2007 for few months.
Good luck to you and I hope that good days come soon.
2011 pokemon pictures to color.
Legal
07-11 04:58 PM
Alabaman,
It looks like you want to enjoy the freedom of expression
of the country that you are trying to immigrate.
Some stuck "moderators" may not like making fun of
Representatives on this "public forum"
regards,:rolleyes:
It looks like you want to enjoy the freedom of expression
of the country that you are trying to immigrate.
Some stuck "moderators" may not like making fun of
Representatives on this "public forum"
regards,:rolleyes:
more...
Steve Mitchell
July 9th, 2004, 07:22 AM
OK...so your main interests for this lens are landscape, concert, and sports phototography. First off, when I say the lens is variable aperture from 3.5 to 5.6, that means at the low end f the zomm the aperture will be 3.5. At the long end (200mm) the aperture will be 5.6. The higher the number, the smaller the aperture. The smaller the aperture, the less light gets let in. When less light gets in two things happen, your shutter has to be open longer. and you get more DOF. This will effect your intended shooting situations. Concert photography requires large apertures (smaller f#s). So shooting with that lens in a concert setting will be difficult on the short end, and almost impossible the majority of the time on the long end. 5.6 will require a very slow shutter speed in that circumstance. Same for indoor sports. For landscapes and daylight work, you should not have a problem.....hope this helps a little.
Actually Steve I've been doing some reading and research but I've always been some what of a "show me don't tell me" type person. At the present I only own the Kit lens that came with the D70 (AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED). So you have me at a disadvantage when you speak of limitations of a lens that goes to 5.6 on the long end. Basically I'm looking for a affordable zoom for landscape, concert and sport photography. I've read several favorable user reviews but then not knowing the source of these reviews you don't know if they also gave four and a half stars to a coke bottle. Reading through posts here on the forum I can tell who are the professional photographers by their equipment knowledge. So saying that there are opinions I would find more valuable than others. In a nutshell I have found the lens in question on Ebay at a current bid of 250 dollars. If I am correct this is half of what it lists for. I'd just like to know if it would be a good buy/good lens for a aspiring photographer to begin expanding his lens arsenal with.
Actually Steve I've been doing some reading and research but I've always been some what of a "show me don't tell me" type person. At the present I only own the Kit lens that came with the D70 (AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED). So you have me at a disadvantage when you speak of limitations of a lens that goes to 5.6 on the long end. Basically I'm looking for a affordable zoom for landscape, concert and sport photography. I've read several favorable user reviews but then not knowing the source of these reviews you don't know if they also gave four and a half stars to a coke bottle. Reading through posts here on the forum I can tell who are the professional photographers by their equipment knowledge. So saying that there are opinions I would find more valuable than others. In a nutshell I have found the lens in question on Ebay at a current bid of 250 dollars. If I am correct this is half of what it lists for. I'd just like to know if it would be a good buy/good lens for a aspiring photographer to begin expanding his lens arsenal with.
4move
10-19 10:25 PM
One of my family member went through this, in a routine medical exam (this was not for immigration office) and he referred us to a infectious disease control specialist. After chest x-rays and several other tests the specialist mentioned that tb screening test can be positive some times for BCG vaccination or exposure to TB bacteria from a person who has active TB. This is not a disease (called latent tb), but there is 5% chance that it could develop into a active TB disease (in case the positive was because of exposure to TB bacteria. Initially, he prescribed Isoniazid (300mg), which has severe lever side effects, for 9 months with blood exam to monitor lever function. But, she could not tolerate this medicine even for 5days because of several other side effects (lever funtion test was normal though). Then he switched her to Rifamfin (600mg) for 4 months. There was not any noticeable side effects of this, and level function tests was after 2 weeks for the first time and once in two months after that. But one thing to note that TB screen test would be +ve rest of the life after this and you need to carry a certificate from this physican that you have completed this course of medicine and nothing needs to be done. Hope this helps.
Can anyone point me to any documentation for physicians that suggests repeated follow-ups even after the medical report has been signed, sealed and submitted to the immigration office?
As with a lot of applicants from India, I tested positive for tuberculin because of the type of immunization we receive and had the requisite skin test and chest x-rays done. After this the doctor signed the medical report and gave me the sealed envelope. He has then put me on a 6-month medication program for tuberculosis. The medication is quite strong and is supposed to affect the liver. He also wants me to come in on a regular basis (and spend $80 every time) to get blood work done to "make sure the medication is in my blood stream".
I am not sure why I am being put on this medication for such a long period as I don't have tuberculosis. When I questioned my doctor, he said it was necessary - not giving any more details.
Have others gone through such an experience? Am I a source of residual income for his office?
Thanks in advance,
V
Can anyone point me to any documentation for physicians that suggests repeated follow-ups even after the medical report has been signed, sealed and submitted to the immigration office?
As with a lot of applicants from India, I tested positive for tuberculin because of the type of immunization we receive and had the requisite skin test and chest x-rays done. After this the doctor signed the medical report and gave me the sealed envelope. He has then put me on a 6-month medication program for tuberculosis. The medication is quite strong and is supposed to affect the liver. He also wants me to come in on a regular basis (and spend $80 every time) to get blood work done to "make sure the medication is in my blood stream".
I am not sure why I am being put on this medication for such a long period as I don't have tuberculosis. When I questioned my doctor, he said it was necessary - not giving any more details.
Have others gone through such an experience? Am I a source of residual income for his office?
Thanks in advance,
V
more...
veni001
02-02 08:57 PM
Hello,
I would need some suggestion pertaining this stage. My company has 100+ employees and has rock-solid financials showing profitability. As a part of documentation, should just the company's tax documents suffice? I am told that even audited financial documents are required. While the former is easier to fetch, the later is a bit cumbersome process and lengthy.
Please let me know if we can proceed thru this stage if only company's federal tax returns are shown (without audited financial docs).
Thank you
Not to scare you but please be ready for any thing and every thing, if you are porting with the same employer please read this (http:///2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html).
Good luck.;)
I would need some suggestion pertaining this stage. My company has 100+ employees and has rock-solid financials showing profitability. As a part of documentation, should just the company's tax documents suffice? I am told that even audited financial documents are required. While the former is easier to fetch, the later is a bit cumbersome process and lengthy.
Please let me know if we can proceed thru this stage if only company's federal tax returns are shown (without audited financial docs).
Thank you
Not to scare you but please be ready for any thing and every thing, if you are porting with the same employer please read this (http:///2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html).
Good luck.;)
2010 POKEMON COLORING PAGES
lostinbeta
10-21 04:20 AM
I guess the team that is on the ball that night is the one that deserves to win :)
Alright.... 4:20am here.... I should probably at least try and get some sleep or something.
Goodnight:)
Alright.... 4:20am here.... I should probably at least try and get some sleep or something.
Goodnight:)
more...
shana04
07-31 03:17 AM
Dear Friends, Gurus,
I have applied for EAD for the second time for my self and my wife (received the receipts only - renewal)
No FP till now. Opened two SR, it is of no use.
Called twice, first time IO was not that help full. Second time atleast he wanted to do some help.
No other go, so called my attorney for help. He has put a letter along with all the receipts explaining that no FP for my client. He has also send the same documentation and advised me to take an infopass, which I took. And it is in Dallas TX (early morning 8 AM)
So, please suggest if you have experience with infopass in Dallas TX
1. When to be there
2. What documentation to carry
3. How about parking
4. Any questions (so that I can compile and ask)
Any suggestions, help is highly appreciated.
Thanking in advance.
Shana
I have applied for EAD for the second time for my self and my wife (received the receipts only - renewal)
No FP till now. Opened two SR, it is of no use.
Called twice, first time IO was not that help full. Second time atleast he wanted to do some help.
No other go, so called my attorney for help. He has put a letter along with all the receipts explaining that no FP for my client. He has also send the same documentation and advised me to take an infopass, which I took. And it is in Dallas TX (early morning 8 AM)
So, please suggest if you have experience with infopass in Dallas TX
1. When to be there
2. What documentation to carry
3. How about parking
4. Any questions (so that I can compile and ask)
Any suggestions, help is highly appreciated.
Thanking in advance.
Shana
hair Pokemon coloring pages of Team
VSS2007
05-27 06:29 PM
I also paper filed EAD on 05/13/2008, Cheques cashed very next day and also received receipt notice by mail on 05/16/2008. So far no FP notices. I also read somewhere in the forum saying no FP's when paper file.
Thanks
ram
Thanks
ram
more...
swethanjit
07-24 11:18 PM
Thank you for the clarification!
Also, is it possible to cancel / withdraw my H1-B with company X, so that I can continue to work with my OPT with company Y. (Checking this option as I am not sure if company Y will be willing to sponsor for my H1-B).
Regards,
Swetha.
Also, is it possible to cancel / withdraw my H1-B with company X, so that I can continue to work with my OPT with company Y. (Checking this option as I am not sure if company Y will be willing to sponsor for my H1-B).
Regards,
Swetha.
hot pokemon coloring pages arceus.
nixone
05-05 04:55 PM
You are right... you should not submit documents with your LC first submission. In my case, they asked for some documents after my submisission(what it's called Audit); one of them was the Ad which they were not satisfied with it, so they Denied my case. However we appealed sending the whole Ad page making them change the case back to 'In Process'.
If you are still around, I just wanted to let you know that my PERM labor got approved on May 1st. It was filed on Oct 31st. No audit. Looking at your signature, looks like they also approved your LC. Congratulations!
If you are still around, I just wanted to let you know that my PERM labor got approved on May 1st. It was filed on Oct 31st. No audit. Looking at your signature, looks like they also approved your LC. Congratulations!
more...
house color pokemon pc
Sai gc
05-15 09:00 AM
I would not worry about it at this point, this seems to be an internal matter, cases are often transferred to other service centers for speedy processing, sometimes it could be an error also, whatever this might be, this is not something you have control over. If the I-140 becomes overdue you should have your employer call or write to the service center.
Hi Attorney,
Today i saw hard LUD on my I -140 and i got an email again from uscis stating that my I-140 is PE and will be processed in the service center where it is transferred to.(recently transferred to NSC from TSC)
(as i already mentioned my 140 was approved in 2007 :confused:).
Please suggest .
Any one had similar experiences ?
Hi Attorney,
Today i saw hard LUD on my I -140 and i got an email again from uscis stating that my I-140 is PE and will be processed in the service center where it is transferred to.(recently transferred to NSC from TSC)
(as i already mentioned my 140 was approved in 2007 :confused:).
Please suggest .
Any one had similar experiences ?
tattoo you can color it nice
Filipo
07-11 11:46 AM
they might be annoyed...and the message thats represent the flowers will become meaningless...
more...
pictures Pokemon Coloring Pages
Saarissimo
05-31 12:11 AM
Dear Madame/Sir,
I am a 33% owner of an LLC, and I need to be employed by the company. The company is a viable company, tech start-up, and all three owners need to actually work in the company (to ensure its success). The company is profitable and our yearly revenue is a little short of $1M. However, the reason I have been here in US in the last 6 years is because I have been sponsored (by my previous employer) through an H1B visa. I now wish to transfer my H1B to the LLC I partially own. My questions are:
1. Is it possible
2. If so, what is the mechanism I can be considered as an employee in an LLC structure
Thank you in advance for your attention
I am a 33% owner of an LLC, and I need to be employed by the company. The company is a viable company, tech start-up, and all three owners need to actually work in the company (to ensure its success). The company is profitable and our yearly revenue is a little short of $1M. However, the reason I have been here in US in the last 6 years is because I have been sponsored (by my previous employer) through an H1B visa. I now wish to transfer my H1B to the LLC I partially own. My questions are:
1. Is it possible
2. If so, what is the mechanism I can be considered as an employee in an LLC structure
Thank you in advance for your attention
dresses pokemon coloring pages
beautifulMind
08-02 06:07 PM
seems like too much trouble
more...
makeup pokemon coloring pages.
Dingdong
02-27 10:34 PM
You can get your FICA taxes back for the period you were on F1. I did the same several years ago. You will need to search the IRS website for the right refund form. Make sure you were NOT already having less taxes withheld when you were on F1.
girlfriend Color Picture
Blog Feeds
01-09 02:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirut-8a7nSD8jax05MG0D1VLGanL_Q0StrxpRg5J3rOhfgjPtC5p_NsXWbNT70hyAgW6iiov-zWh5ipgZOTyWspYtnk4SLnEewbF_j-1qSYpjwOa6HH3OFH1u5EIqir0z1ZXMB-wtdfew/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirut-8a7nSD8jax05MG0D1VLGanL_Q0StrxpRg5J3rOhfgjPtC5p_NsXWbNT70hyAgW6iiov-zWh5ipgZOTyWspYtnk4SLnEewbF_j-1qSYpjwOa6HH3OFH1u5EIqir0z1ZXMB-wtdfew/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirut-8a7nSD8jax05MG0D1VLGanL_Q0StrxpRg5J3rOhfgjPtC5p_NsXWbNT70hyAgW6iiov-zWh5ipgZOTyWspYtnk4SLnEewbF_j-1qSYpjwOa6HH3OFH1u5EIqir0z1ZXMB-wtdfew/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirut-8a7nSD8jax05MG0D1VLGanL_Q0StrxpRg5J3rOhfgjPtC5p_NsXWbNT70hyAgW6iiov-zWh5ipgZOTyWspYtnk4SLnEewbF_j-1qSYpjwOa6HH3OFH1u5EIqir0z1ZXMB-wtdfew/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
hairstyles pokemon pictures to color.
.jpg "Pokemon coloring pages brings")
cgeek4u
09-07 08:42 PM
Based on my experience, employer can't damage your GC process. H1 is like an offer. Its up to you to join that company or not. You can apply for multiple H1b's at the same time. So even if your employer cancel the H1 it should not affect you. But it may be worth confirming with a lawyer if you are worried.
Hope this helps.
Hope this helps.
sanjay
04-22 02:37 PM
This is ONLY EB2- India Priority dates from prior visa bulletins. Just FYI - no guesses no assumptions.
Jan-05 C
.
.
.
.
Apr-08 1-Dec-03
May-08 1-Jan-04
What's the deal here? I think this info is posted a lot of times. Any reason to post it again? Just trying to find reason.
Jan-05 C
.
.
.
.
Apr-08 1-Dec-03
May-08 1-Jan-04
What's the deal here? I think this info is posted a lot of times. Any reason to post it again? Just trying to find reason.
coolmanasip
06-18 09:54 PM
Bachelors+5yrs is also fine for EB2----- As per my lawyer at the time of my filing....EB2 requires either MS or BS+yrs.....
I agree with the earlier post....look at how it was advertized.....in my case, we did only MS since I had MS and did not have 5 yrs then...so the advertisement said only MS as requirement....
If your advertisement does not require MS, then this should be solved by a simple letter explaining the same......If by mistake it says only MS then the RFE is right in asking for MS certificate....however if the advertisement said either MS or BS+5 yrs ...you are covered......
Another important question is did you have 5 yrs when your labor was filed...becos that justifies ur EB2.....
Thanks....
I agree with the earlier post....look at how it was advertized.....in my case, we did only MS since I had MS and did not have 5 yrs then...so the advertisement said only MS as requirement....
If your advertisement does not require MS, then this should be solved by a simple letter explaining the same......If by mistake it says only MS then the RFE is right in asking for MS certificate....however if the advertisement said either MS or BS+5 yrs ...you are covered......
Another important question is did you have 5 yrs when your labor was filed...becos that justifies ur EB2.....
Thanks....
No comments:
Post a Comment