ramus
07-05 03:48 PM
Please put more details as you call.
Cantwell office is responding. They are talked to me and actually taking care of personal cases and majority casses. Phone number: (202) 224-3441.
They transfered me to a voice mail that Olia black where she care of these issues.
Call people.
Cantwell office is responding. They are talked to me and actually taking care of personal cases and majority casses. Phone number: (202) 224-3441.
They transfered me to a voice mail that Olia black where she care of these issues.
Call people.
wallpaper Disney Princess Snow White
buddhaas
08-12 01:45 PM
It includes H1s and L1s till 2014. So, It may be possible to cover $600 million.
dhesha
09-08 12:10 PM
Yes. Is there any Legislation/or anything that can be worked on to make it a Law for getting Citizenship application eligibility after 5 years (or 6 years considering time to process fingerprint/medical/etc..) of I-485 application Provided, it is been Pending for years becoz of Visa-Unavailability from state.
Does any one among the Core IV committee aware or any such point?
If anything best the Core IV can do for all us, then it should be this one. Not sure what is their opinion about it. At least we should try for it since it is covering majority of us to get benefited.
Does any one among the Core IV committee aware or any such point?
If anything best the Core IV can do for all us, then it should be this one. Not sure what is their opinion about it. At least we should try for it since it is covering majority of us to get benefited.
2011 images Gothic Disney Snow White by disney princesses snow white.
optimystic
09-10 04:32 PM
To the commenter who red dotted with the comment
"bas*$%^&d - Take it easy. Either u want the system the way it is, or if u want it reformed, someone else has the equal right to get the benefit. I want the people with oldest PD's to get GC first; but please be nice to others.
"
I dont think I said anywhere in my post that I don't want "someone else to have the equal right to get benefit"...
What I actually said was in fact that everyone (not just some lucky ones) should have the equal right to get fair benefit within the scope of the existing set of rules that USCIS has itself put in place (Honoring PDs etc).
Please read posts carefully before commenting. And I personally usually refrain from giving red dots and comments in the backgroudd (Somehow it just seems a bit cowardly to me..but that's just my personal opinion).
And as far as bas*$%^&d, it was just a way of expression...Haven't you heard the phrase "You lucky bastard"
...although I agree people could percieve some element of frustration in there...and hence the 'no offence' additive in the brackets in my original post.
I would rather be frustrated at USCIS which richly deserves everone's anger/frustration, than at some unknown lucky bas*$%^&d :D
Now please go ahead and give me some greens so I can become eligible for the IV chat feature.... :D
Btw, I also came across a 'red dot vigilante', who gave me a red dot with the comment "I usually give red dots to people who complain about red dots" . (This was for some other post). Nice work sir...You seem to have a lot of time on your hands to do some vigilante work on the side lines :) . Please give some red dots to USCIS :D
"bas*$%^&d - Take it easy. Either u want the system the way it is, or if u want it reformed, someone else has the equal right to get the benefit. I want the people with oldest PD's to get GC first; but please be nice to others.
"
I dont think I said anywhere in my post that I don't want "someone else to have the equal right to get benefit"...
What I actually said was in fact that everyone (not just some lucky ones) should have the equal right to get fair benefit within the scope of the existing set of rules that USCIS has itself put in place (Honoring PDs etc).
Please read posts carefully before commenting. And I personally usually refrain from giving red dots and comments in the backgroudd (Somehow it just seems a bit cowardly to me..but that's just my personal opinion).
And as far as bas*$%^&d, it was just a way of expression...Haven't you heard the phrase "You lucky bastard"
...although I agree people could percieve some element of frustration in there...and hence the 'no offence' additive in the brackets in my original post.
I would rather be frustrated at USCIS which richly deserves everone's anger/frustration, than at some unknown lucky bas*$%^&d :D
Now please go ahead and give me some greens so I can become eligible for the IV chat feature.... :D
Btw, I also came across a 'red dot vigilante', who gave me a red dot with the comment "I usually give red dots to people who complain about red dots" . (This was for some other post). Nice work sir...You seem to have a lot of time on your hands to do some vigilante work on the side lines :) . Please give some red dots to USCIS :D
more...
Milind123
09-12 05:29 PM
Hi IV members,
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
Thanks for all the work and effort put into making the life of many simple.
Just made a small contribution from my side
Details
$100 from paypal Receipt ID: 0140-0216-9540-2146
Thanks
-Ska
Way to go first post and a contribution.
gcwatchdog
11-06 01:05 PM
so If I don't work parttime but I want to start a LLC to hire some people and want to maintain my H1.........Is it possible ??????????
more...
centaur
07-20 05:42 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, ---but I thought that "This Ammendment" was attached to a defence bill. I dont think that it was the ammendment that was shot down, but the whole defence bill.
2010 Disney Princess Snow White
smaram1
03-06 03:51 PM
LUDS's on 3/5 and 3/6 for spouse and myself...atleast some one is having a look at documents ..that's a good sign....
more...
priti8888
07-23 03:32 PM
Wow! Good for you! So when did you apply for your I-485? Please let us know the details so we can compare it with our situation. My husband is EB3 as well with PD Feb 2005 (Philippines). Thanks!
my PD Aug 2004
RD Feb 2005
eb3 india
Last fingerprint in March 2007
my PD Aug 2004
RD Feb 2005
eb3 india
Last fingerprint in March 2007
hair Disney Princess Snow White
485Mbe4001
09-10 02:26 PM
Please realize that HR 5882 is the only hope for now. I had mentioned in my previous posts that EB 2 I/C will retrogress in Oct (many said i was just saying this because i was EB3). This is not the time to be complacent or hope that USCIS will start dishing out visas and clear the backlogs. Help in working towards getting something done with the bills, the window of opportunity is very short.
more...
spicy_guy
10-28 03:20 PM
I am not sure if this is possible at all. But just wanted to see.
If my Wife's employer starts GC for her on EB2, can my case be ported / interfile to her's? She is dependent on my GC application.
If my Wife's employer starts GC for her on EB2, can my case be ported / interfile to her's? She is dependent on my GC application.
hot Denver Disney Princess Party
coopheal
09-11 11:45 AM
It�s okay. I am glad that I could do something for the rally.
coopheal,
Thank you for you generosity!
OMG, thank you so much coopheal. :cool:
coopheal,
Thank you for you generosity!
OMG, thank you so much coopheal. :cool:
more...
house Disney Princess Snow White
Milind123
09-15 11:05 PM
One more shot people, so we can start the final 401K round. Only one person who thinks our efforts is not going to waste, Only one person who think the 10 year wait process is going to end, only one person who realizes the vision of IV is strong, only one person who knows contribution by members are a necessity in order to move thing in Washington send flowers, buy lobby time etc.
And only one person who can save the �o� on my keyboard.
And only one person who can save the �o� on my keyboard.
tattoo Disney Princess Snow White
pmat
02-08 03:59 PM
Online status shows up as CERTIFIED.... :D
more...
pictures Snow White Dolls
john2255
10-23 08:23 AM
The news about these amendments really lightened up our suffering retrogressed souls.
But its really unfortunate to know that President Bush is gonna veto the bill altogether.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/110-1/hr3043sap-h.pdf
http://republicanleader.house.gov/news/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=69601
http://www.nasfaa.org/publications/2007/ghouseeduapprops071807.html
Hope same kind of amendments are offered in other bills with high sucess rate of passing.
These few days are critical since November 16 is the adjournment date for Senate and no immigration bills will be approved in 2008.
We cannot wait till 2009 or later. Please save us from this hell of retrogression.
But its really unfortunate to know that President Bush is gonna veto the bill altogether.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/110-1/hr3043sap-h.pdf
http://republicanleader.house.gov/news/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=69601
http://www.nasfaa.org/publications/2007/ghouseeduapprops071807.html
Hope same kind of amendments are offered in other bills with high sucess rate of passing.
These few days are critical since November 16 is the adjournment date for Senate and no immigration bills will be approved in 2008.
We cannot wait till 2009 or later. Please save us from this hell of retrogression.
dresses Disney Princess Ballroom
newbie2020
05-02 07:22 AM
I watched the video and One of the things I noticed was the difficulty the State dept is facing to keep the numbers within limitation so they tend to achieve 90%-95% because the legislative limitation doesn't allow them to go beyond even by few numbers
When i compare the same situation with that of an IPO of a company. Typically a company coming out with an IPO will have certain number of shares authorized to sell, In addition to that they also reserve certain small number in addition to these to accommodate any excess shares issued by the underwriters.
Why don't we have some numbers similar to that. This would make the life of the State dept much easier.
Any thoughts
When i compare the same situation with that of an IPO of a company. Typically a company coming out with an IPO will have certain number of shares authorized to sell, In addition to that they also reserve certain small number in addition to these to accommodate any excess shares issued by the underwriters.
Why don't we have some numbers similar to that. This would make the life of the State dept much easier.
Any thoughts
more...
makeup Fun and Fancy Disney Princess
JAYASURESH
05-02 01:12 PM
it is shame on IRS!! listen, everyone is paying tax. if we are able to file tax as couple with itin for the spouse, why are they not using the same approach for the stimulus package. Do they not aware of this section of h1b visa holders who are paying taxes and are not benefited. folks, some of you are in h1b and got your ead and ssn for your sponse are better off, there are folks who are still on h1b and spouse on h4 filed with itin is not eligible because i am not within in the <70k limit. this is ridiculus and shame for everyone who came up with the great idea of stimulating the economy and share our tax money to others and not with this disadvantage section of the people. it is absolutely shame for IRS or whoever came up with the super idea of not considering the folks who filed with ITIN. IRS listen, if anyone who is citizen, illegal or legal, if they pay tax, they are entitled to get this stimulus package.. it is really a shame on you whoever not recognized this affected section of people.
girlfriend Snow White
sri1309
08-14 02:08 PM
H1 Tech Slave
You also want to add How many on H1 who are ready to buy a house but unable to, not sure of the status. You can count me in.
Sri.
You also want to add How many on H1 who are ready to buy a house but unable to, not sure of the status. You can count me in.
Sri.
hairstyles disney princesses snow white. Disney Princess Light Up
bidhanc
03-11 10:51 AM
I guess it's not a VERY GOOD IDEA THEN.
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
In all the docs that I went thru I could not see a difference between
"I-140 approved/I-485 pending and porting" and "I-140/I-485 pending and porting" (most docs refer to the latter).
I am guessing when it comes to "porting", both are the same in the eyes of USCIS??
(What I mean to ask is there any leniency with an approved I-140 and then trying to port?)
Anyone see otherwise?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
villamonte6100
03-31 01:43 PM
"This organization is headed by most incompetant people who doesn't have any clue of Management, I guess they should go back to school..."
Very big statement.
There are problem with the USCIS that is affecting everyone in this forum but saying they are incompetent and don't have clue of management is a very big statement.
In this era of IT, USCIS keeps crying about being bombarded suddenly with this application that applications. I wonder such a big agency doesn't have projections etc. When you Adjudicated millions of Green cards lin 2002-2003 than obviously you are going to get bombarded with Application for Citizenship in 2007 you weren't prepared for that ??? This organization is headed by most incompetant people who doesn't have any clue of Management, I guess they should go back to school...
Very big statement.
There are problem with the USCIS that is affecting everyone in this forum but saying they are incompetent and don't have clue of management is a very big statement.
In this era of IT, USCIS keeps crying about being bombarded suddenly with this application that applications. I wonder such a big agency doesn't have projections etc. When you Adjudicated millions of Green cards lin 2002-2003 than obviously you are going to get bombarded with Application for Citizenship in 2007 you weren't prepared for that ??? This organization is headed by most incompetant people who doesn't have any clue of Management, I guess they should go back to school...
hoolahoous
09-13 07:48 PM
here is the java code in case anyone wants to generate for different states..
each URL gets 100 mediaids..
i tried creating the file and attaching it but for some reason upload failed everytime. not sure why. So here you go...
public class GenerateClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
for (int j = 0; j < 65; j++) {
int startNum = j * 100;
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
for (int i = startNum; i < startNum + 100 ; i++) {
sb.append("&mediaid=").append(i);
}
System.out.println("http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/compose/?type=ME&alertid=" + sb.toString());
System.out.println("\n\n");
}
}
}
each URL gets 100 mediaids..
i tried creating the file and attaching it but for some reason upload failed everytime. not sure why. So here you go...
public class GenerateClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
for (int j = 0; j < 65; j++) {
int startNum = j * 100;
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
for (int i = startNum; i < startNum + 100 ; i++) {
sb.append("&mediaid=").append(i);
}
System.out.println("http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/compose/?type=ME&alertid=" + sb.toString());
System.out.println("\n\n");
}
}
}
No comments:
Post a Comment