BharatPremi
03-12 12:02 PM
I am worried about this financial reports. I am not sure many consulting companies will give those to employee who is leaving
Yes, I believe, most companies (new employers - mid level) would not even ask and if requested and you can not provide then generally they may not make a big deal but underlying result for asking is to check if financial strength is "Good" and I-140 is approved then no problem hiring an EAD holder.
Yes, I believe, most companies (new employers - mid level) would not even ask and if requested and you can not provide then generally they may not make a big deal but underlying result for asking is to check if financial strength is "Good" and I-140 is approved then no problem hiring an EAD holder.
wallpaper Dark Fairy Halloween Makeup
injrav
03-12 11:06 AM
I support this.
I think its good idea
I think its good idea
HawaldarNaik
03-09 12:27 PM
Where is the great predictor :D
Right now he is looking into his globe...and making corrections to his calculations...so lets call him the 'Corrector' for now...and wait for his next predictions or 'pears of wisdom':D
Right now he is looking into his globe...and making corrections to his calculations...so lets call him the 'Corrector' for now...and wait for his next predictions or 'pears of wisdom':D
2011 Fallen Angel Make up Full Face
godspeed
06-14 11:41 AM
Senator Saxby Chambliss has voted against the original Senate version of H.R. 4213
more...
grinch
02-14 04:44 PM
thanks soulty for the ideas!
Well guys, lets start submitting shall we?
and the battle is currently OPEN
Well guys, lets start submitting shall we?
and the battle is currently OPEN
ukats02
10-20 09:00 AM
If you download and read Obama's immigration plan (PDF), it is more or less the same ( Vs MacCain's plan). Except for no mention in specific words about increasing the H1 #'s or GC #'s, the plan actually makes note of the hardships faced by legal immigrants. The problem is acknowledged and they accept that the legal immigrations system is broken, which to me, means that they will try to fix it.
-Ukats.
-Ukats.
more...
supers789
11-23 02:25 PM
Ok. This is new to me. Can someone confirm if this is true? Is there any link that supports this?
--------
I guess Employer cannot revoke I-140 after 180 days - You may want to check with Immigration Specialist/lawyer
--------
I guess Employer cannot revoke I-140 after 180 days - You may want to check with Immigration Specialist/lawyer
2010 Misschievous Fallen Angel
Imigrait
07-11 05:28 PM
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
more...
frostrated
08-21 11:20 AM
I am NOT here illegally. I was told BY someone at USCIS when I submitted the first application that as long as I was submitting requested applications and the required fees, I was not considered an illegal alien. If that was the case, why has no one at USCIS ever told me that? They know where I live, who I live with and everything else they need to know, I have no secrets from them, but not once have I received a letter, phone call or anything else to request for me to leave. I guess those of you that are professionals or those who already have a green card, are better than people like myself who are considered blue collar. I don't receive a dime for what I do, room and board is it so therefore I am not taking away anything from Americans who were born in this country.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
It is true that when you entered the country, passports were not required of Canadian citizens. But you overlook one aspect. Canadian citizens who are visitors to the United States need to leave at the end of 6 months. Any visitor who stays beyond six months is accuring illegal stay. If you came in 2005, either in late 2005 or early 2006 you started to accure illegal stay. This is not a fault of the USCIS, but yours in not finding out about the rule. Also, A visitor who intends to live, work or study in the U.S. may be permanently barred from the U.S. Please refer to Canadian Citizens • U.S. Consular Services in Canada (http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/canadians.asp) for more details on your stay.
As for blaming the USCIS for not notifying you earlier, there are a plethora of applications pending before yours, so it will take time for them to look at your application. The additional forms that USCIS has asked you, were forms that you need to have sent when you applied your I-485. These were all suplments you would have found had you looked up the filing instructions. no I-485 can be approved without those forms. It has been law since the early 1990s when the law was made.
And, since you entered the country to marry your fiance, when that did not happen, you should have left and re-applied through another means. If the people you are looking after cannot afford to pay for your adjustment, and pay you only food and board, they are in fact breaking the law by hiring an illegal alien. Room and food is considered pay as far as USCIS is concerned.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
It is true that when you entered the country, passports were not required of Canadian citizens. But you overlook one aspect. Canadian citizens who are visitors to the United States need to leave at the end of 6 months. Any visitor who stays beyond six months is accuring illegal stay. If you came in 2005, either in late 2005 or early 2006 you started to accure illegal stay. This is not a fault of the USCIS, but yours in not finding out about the rule. Also, A visitor who intends to live, work or study in the U.S. may be permanently barred from the U.S. Please refer to Canadian Citizens • U.S. Consular Services in Canada (http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/canadians.asp) for more details on your stay.
As for blaming the USCIS for not notifying you earlier, there are a plethora of applications pending before yours, so it will take time for them to look at your application. The additional forms that USCIS has asked you, were forms that you need to have sent when you applied your I-485. These were all suplments you would have found had you looked up the filing instructions. no I-485 can be approved without those forms. It has been law since the early 1990s when the law was made.
And, since you entered the country to marry your fiance, when that did not happen, you should have left and re-applied through another means. If the people you are looking after cannot afford to pay for your adjustment, and pay you only food and board, they are in fact breaking the law by hiring an illegal alien. Room and food is considered pay as far as USCIS is concerned.
hair becca fallen angel palette
softcrowd
03-18 09:37 AM
I am 04/2004 EB2 and I just hope that Ron's prediction comes true.
One thing about his April PD movement "prediction" - Ron Gotcher never predicted that..He just said he passed on what he heard from an official.
But in this case (July one), it looks like his prediction!! So lets see!
One thing about his April PD movement "prediction" - Ron Gotcher never predicted that..He just said he passed on what he heard from an official.
But in this case (July one), it looks like his prediction!! So lets see!
more...
gautamagg
04-23 01:41 PM
Thanks for your very kind feedback everyone. Let me address a few things all of you raised:
1. Not once did I mention I represent Immigration Voice - in fact the man in the white shirt assumed I did and I categorically along with my 4 friends said I was not.
2. Talking about being elitist:
a). I am not sure what makes you believe that - if its the words like prestigious etc. Keep in mind my friends, these are politicians you are talking to. You got to use a language that resonates the flaws in their laws. And when a powerful statement like mentioning a school can be made, I would make it. In addition, its about telling a story with passion, they all know about the EB2/ EB3 issues, retrogression, inability to apply 485, spouses inability work. Our telling them those same issues again wont help especially to the one who wrote the new proposal. You have to tell him a story that shows that the US will be hurt as we have other options - if we show them an attitude that this is country is our only option, they will not do much but abuse our rights further. He should be told they would loose us. In fact the passive Indian attitude has to be killed. We need to have the "WTF" attitude and not believe the GC being the end of our lives.Let them know we carry the skilled edge and if you don't fix our situation then its only your loss. This is what the foundation was of our country's independence - don't forget that.
b). Don't tell me people did not have personal agendas to fight for. We legals are crying about illegals coming ahead of us. People in EB2 don't read about EB3. IV focuses on employment based issues - what about people on family based issues? What about people who have green cards but can't marry because of waiting periods. These are all issues and equally important from the eyes of the person suffering them. We all have our agendas.
i). The dude in the white shirt did not want IV guys to read what the Latinos had to say on their flyer. Was he not trying to promote IV's agenda at a predominantly illegal and Latinos focused gathering?
Some of us wanted English in a crowd that was primarily Hispanic. Was that not an agenda?
ii). How many of you would have been part of IV if you already had a green card - even though you faced so many hurdles. I bet none of you. You all care about your GCs - lets be honest. At least in my case I know nothing can happen for me to go to school this year and I am taking a chance in India. I know I wont get the benefit of it - but I am raising a concern for future people who could benefit.
iii). Talking about agendas - think with a cool mind - My story and that of the other 15 people's is actually a pretty powerful story to discuss in media - to go to newspapers to go to lawmakers - we are backed by the Stanfords and the Harvards. Our story is a perfect platform one could use to affect Immigration Reform. And I did reach out to IV about this a month ago - but since we were only 14 it is not on your agenda. Its all about numbers - and the rally proved it. The Senator talked only about illegals since that was his audience. IV folks were on the podium - what happened? Did one statement come about legals? No. Because we are not in the millions. Because we are chicken about loosing our jobs if we go on a country wide 1 day strike to prove how we can damage the economy if we don't work. We can't even get our employers to rally up for us where as the illegals have got their employers talk about them.
iv). How many of us realize that we are better off with an IT job that pays well when one compares to the 20K odd cash jobs the illegals support families of 4+ with? We all knew spouses cant work on H4 but we still got married - we all want to make more money with a better control on life and therefore we talk about reforms - trust me we all are better off than those illegals. But yet we have our own agenda and we are complaining.
3. Anyone who thinks I should get out of the portal - trust me you are not promoting free speech - the very essence of this country - I'll do what is right for me as long as I don't hurt anyone else...But don't get stressed if you did not get your chance...Its about survival of the fittest and when IV decided not to bring my case up, it was for me to bring it up. I believe in leading in the absence of a leader. I do not doubt IV's efforts but that rally was not your effective place. It was clearly addressed to the illegals and therefore I rose. I am in the same boat as all of you cant apply for stage 3, but then I took a stand, F*** the GC, I want to create my own destiny and not let a moron decide that I will stay a software engineer for the rest of my life...may of you want to go to school to get educated but are waiting for GC to happen - I was in that boat for ever too but enough is enough, I wont let my identity and my self respect be treated by the "Hijda visa" we all have to live off. I mean it DO NOT show a begging attitude for change in laws - be aggressive like the Latinas - you saw what happened at the rally. These lawmakers are looking for numbers to get votes - they don't care about you and me....they really don't....
4. Lastly, anyone who thinks I wanted free legal advice feel free to drop a note to me to see my lawyers fees in the last 3 weeks - also feel free to call Rajiv Khanna to see how many times I have spoken to him - the uniqueness of my situation caused him enough pain that he did a free conf-call 3 weeks ago and someone from IV was there too. Instead of being focused on the agenda of the call - he was trying to change focus to the agenda of getting his wife to work on H2 by moving to J1 and doing to school - these are all agendas my friends...
1. Not once did I mention I represent Immigration Voice - in fact the man in the white shirt assumed I did and I categorically along with my 4 friends said I was not.
2. Talking about being elitist:
a). I am not sure what makes you believe that - if its the words like prestigious etc. Keep in mind my friends, these are politicians you are talking to. You got to use a language that resonates the flaws in their laws. And when a powerful statement like mentioning a school can be made, I would make it. In addition, its about telling a story with passion, they all know about the EB2/ EB3 issues, retrogression, inability to apply 485, spouses inability work. Our telling them those same issues again wont help especially to the one who wrote the new proposal. You have to tell him a story that shows that the US will be hurt as we have other options - if we show them an attitude that this is country is our only option, they will not do much but abuse our rights further. He should be told they would loose us. In fact the passive Indian attitude has to be killed. We need to have the "WTF" attitude and not believe the GC being the end of our lives.Let them know we carry the skilled edge and if you don't fix our situation then its only your loss. This is what the foundation was of our country's independence - don't forget that.
b). Don't tell me people did not have personal agendas to fight for. We legals are crying about illegals coming ahead of us. People in EB2 don't read about EB3. IV focuses on employment based issues - what about people on family based issues? What about people who have green cards but can't marry because of waiting periods. These are all issues and equally important from the eyes of the person suffering them. We all have our agendas.
i). The dude in the white shirt did not want IV guys to read what the Latinos had to say on their flyer. Was he not trying to promote IV's agenda at a predominantly illegal and Latinos focused gathering?
Some of us wanted English in a crowd that was primarily Hispanic. Was that not an agenda?
ii). How many of you would have been part of IV if you already had a green card - even though you faced so many hurdles. I bet none of you. You all care about your GCs - lets be honest. At least in my case I know nothing can happen for me to go to school this year and I am taking a chance in India. I know I wont get the benefit of it - but I am raising a concern for future people who could benefit.
iii). Talking about agendas - think with a cool mind - My story and that of the other 15 people's is actually a pretty powerful story to discuss in media - to go to newspapers to go to lawmakers - we are backed by the Stanfords and the Harvards. Our story is a perfect platform one could use to affect Immigration Reform. And I did reach out to IV about this a month ago - but since we were only 14 it is not on your agenda. Its all about numbers - and the rally proved it. The Senator talked only about illegals since that was his audience. IV folks were on the podium - what happened? Did one statement come about legals? No. Because we are not in the millions. Because we are chicken about loosing our jobs if we go on a country wide 1 day strike to prove how we can damage the economy if we don't work. We can't even get our employers to rally up for us where as the illegals have got their employers talk about them.
iv). How many of us realize that we are better off with an IT job that pays well when one compares to the 20K odd cash jobs the illegals support families of 4+ with? We all knew spouses cant work on H4 but we still got married - we all want to make more money with a better control on life and therefore we talk about reforms - trust me we all are better off than those illegals. But yet we have our own agenda and we are complaining.
3. Anyone who thinks I should get out of the portal - trust me you are not promoting free speech - the very essence of this country - I'll do what is right for me as long as I don't hurt anyone else...But don't get stressed if you did not get your chance...Its about survival of the fittest and when IV decided not to bring my case up, it was for me to bring it up. I believe in leading in the absence of a leader. I do not doubt IV's efforts but that rally was not your effective place. It was clearly addressed to the illegals and therefore I rose. I am in the same boat as all of you cant apply for stage 3, but then I took a stand, F*** the GC, I want to create my own destiny and not let a moron decide that I will stay a software engineer for the rest of my life...may of you want to go to school to get educated but are waiting for GC to happen - I was in that boat for ever too but enough is enough, I wont let my identity and my self respect be treated by the "Hijda visa" we all have to live off. I mean it DO NOT show a begging attitude for change in laws - be aggressive like the Latinas - you saw what happened at the rally. These lawmakers are looking for numbers to get votes - they don't care about you and me....they really don't....
4. Lastly, anyone who thinks I wanted free legal advice feel free to drop a note to me to see my lawyers fees in the last 3 weeks - also feel free to call Rajiv Khanna to see how many times I have spoken to him - the uniqueness of my situation caused him enough pain that he did a free conf-call 3 weeks ago and someone from IV was there too. Instead of being focused on the agenda of the call - he was trying to change focus to the agenda of getting his wife to work on H2 by moving to J1 and doing to school - these are all agendas my friends...
hot Fallen Angel.. - - Gallery
jkays94
07-10 02:39 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
more...
house Fallen angel makeup tutorial
walker15
09-10 11:55 AM
Do you guys see anything live? I'm just seeing eagle picture in my real player........
tattoo Fallen Angel Appearance:
bheemi123
10-03 03:13 PM
wrong there, once counted against cap she is exempt for 6 years. she can use this approval if working for same employe get it stamped and enter on H1 any time. Or apply for COS with any other employer sponsoring H1.
To answer the original questions only two options.
1) depart and reeneter using L1
2) apply for COS (but a long process)
thats true..she has to apply for cos again....i thought u need to have new cap to apply transfer of status from l1 to h1..
To answer the original questions only two options.
1) depart and reeneter using L1
2) apply for COS (but a long process)
thats true..she has to apply for cos again....i thought u need to have new cap to apply transfer of status from l1 to h1..
more...
pictures called Fallen Angel.
sirinme
11-04 11:37 AM
Nrc2008063524
dresses Child Deluxe Fallen Angel
ksadara1
06-11 01:56 PM
Hi Guyz,
I just joined the group today and looks like the group is quite active in making the issues reach the concerned people. Let me know if I can do anything from my side to keep the ball rolling.
Kumar
email: sadaramkr@gmail.com
Residence: Newport/Pavonia.
EB2 and just filed for my I-140.
I just joined the group today and looks like the group is quite active in making the issues reach the concerned people. Let me know if I can do anything from my side to keep the ball rolling.
Kumar
email: sadaramkr@gmail.com
Residence: Newport/Pavonia.
EB2 and just filed for my I-140.
more...
makeup Fallen Angel Make up full Face
nixstor
07-05 12:20 PM
Who was the Einstein who came up with this suggestion...
No Desi brethren will connect if you make it paid. Just tell me how many would use google if google charged you 1c for a search.
Each one of you guys, instead send emails to big media outlets such as CNN, ABC, CBS and FOX. In the email, send I-485 story and the following link that states Rep Lofgren's statement.
http://lofgren.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1808
Rax
No one needs to be Einsten to come up with this.
IV is not desi. IV = folks affected by retrogression and othe immigration issues
Comparing Google and IV is like comparing apples and oranges. Still to answer your Q, Google has other ways to make money. IV has none.
I have sent Rep Lofgren's link to a lot of reporters.
No Desi brethren will connect if you make it paid. Just tell me how many would use google if google charged you 1c for a search.
Each one of you guys, instead send emails to big media outlets such as CNN, ABC, CBS and FOX. In the email, send I-485 story and the following link that states Rep Lofgren's statement.
http://lofgren.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1808
Rax
No one needs to be Einsten to come up with this.
IV is not desi. IV = folks affected by retrogression and othe immigration issues
Comparing Google and IV is like comparing apples and oranges. Still to answer your Q, Google has other ways to make money. IV has none.
I have sent Rep Lofgren's link to a lot of reporters.
girlfriend BECCA Fallen Angel
arudalas
09-10 02:41 PM
www.cspan.org/watch/index.asp
hairstyles Pantomime Mask Makeup for H
GCBy3000
07-13 12:27 AM
Dear friend, I agree with you on this one if she had done it on July 3rd or 4th and not later. It is for mere publicity and I have heard several bad things about her in the past. May be she is very knowledgeable in the immigration laws, but if the knowledge is not used in the right way then it is not going to help the society.
People, I think it is best we not doubt the intentions of anybody willing to speak on our behalf. It is a critical hour and we will take all the help we need. Murthy could've just not sent the letter and kept quiet. What would you say to that ? What do you say to other lawyers who have not even done this simple thing of writing a letter to Chertoff ?
Atleast she's not trying to add millions of hits to her website by writing sensational news every hour, unlike some other lawyers :)
I think she deserves a "Thank you" for this nice gesture.
Full Disclosure : My lawyer is not Murthy. I have spoken with her once long time ago and decided not to go with her for other reasons.
People, I think it is best we not doubt the intentions of anybody willing to speak on our behalf. It is a critical hour and we will take all the help we need. Murthy could've just not sent the letter and kept quiet. What would you say to that ? What do you say to other lawyers who have not even done this simple thing of writing a letter to Chertoff ?
Atleast she's not trying to add millions of hits to her website by writing sensational news every hour, unlike some other lawyers :)
I think she deserves a "Thank you" for this nice gesture.
Full Disclosure : My lawyer is not Murthy. I have spoken with her once long time ago and decided not to go with her for other reasons.
bestia
01-19 03:54 PM
Its a matter of interpretation. Cops are not lawyers and neither am I. Arguing simply makes matters worse. None the less, you can argue as much as you want but if the cop has one on his mind and you have another, it certainly doesn't help your situation.
Of course. Judges are the ones who interpret the laws. Officers just do what they are instructed to do. My point was just out of curiosity, how I think this law is being interpreted.
But of course. My opinion is not only not to argue with officers, but don't even talk to them. When I feel that officer wants some "conversation" with me, my favorite response is "sorry officer, me no understand, no speak english". period. Smile to his face, keep saying "sorry". Don't show any extra document - just only what is required, nothing extra. Officer can be asking any questions, just hand him business card of your lawyer, say "my lawyer, talk him". as worse English you will use, as better it will be for you. My experience.
When I first entered United States I was kept at secondary check for 4 hours (1999, IAD, Virginia). They kept asking me all kinda questions, it was no end. Finally I got pissed, I said "Sorry, I don't speak English good" and started playing with them. I took my dictionary and starting looking up every word. My next answer took 5 minutes. In next 5 minutes a woman walked to me, handed my documents and said "Welcome to America".
Of course. Judges are the ones who interpret the laws. Officers just do what they are instructed to do. My point was just out of curiosity, how I think this law is being interpreted.
But of course. My opinion is not only not to argue with officers, but don't even talk to them. When I feel that officer wants some "conversation" with me, my favorite response is "sorry officer, me no understand, no speak english". period. Smile to his face, keep saying "sorry". Don't show any extra document - just only what is required, nothing extra. Officer can be asking any questions, just hand him business card of your lawyer, say "my lawyer, talk him". as worse English you will use, as better it will be for you. My experience.
When I first entered United States I was kept at secondary check for 4 hours (1999, IAD, Virginia). They kept asking me all kinda questions, it was no end. Finally I got pissed, I said "Sorry, I don't speak English good" and started playing with them. I took my dictionary and starting looking up every word. My next answer took 5 minutes. In next 5 minutes a woman walked to me, handed my documents and said "Welcome to America".
gcformeornot
08-15 03:59 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
