probe
09-12 10:47 PM
Probe:
when did you file your I-140 was it concurrent or filed prior to filing I-485?
.
I filed I-140 in Nov 2006 and it is not a concurrent application
when did you file your I-140 was it concurrent or filed prior to filing I-485?
.
I filed I-140 in Nov 2006 and it is not a concurrent application
wallpaper Long hair Girl Emo Hairstyles
coolpal
08-02 10:10 AM
CA and NY were the two states which were always backlogged during those bad old days of labor processing. Now, CA application goes to TSC and NY goes to NSC and that might keep both the centers balanced going forward.
But I think rather than dividing based on the states, they should rather do a load balancing based on the request coming..just like our network works :)
Load balancing can be simply based on the round robin fashion..one goes to TSC other goes to NSC and so on.
How difficult is to build that kind of system and to keep it balanced and fair for all.
...and probably add more servers (err... service centers) to serve the demand ;)
pal :)
But I think rather than dividing based on the states, they should rather do a load balancing based on the request coming..just like our network works :)
Load balancing can be simply based on the round robin fashion..one goes to TSC other goes to NSC and so on.
How difficult is to build that kind of system and to keep it balanced and fair for all.
...and probably add more servers (err... service centers) to serve the demand ;)
pal :)
reedandbamboo
09-13 09:32 PM
How are you going to fund the lawsuit? (this is a genuine question, not trying to be a smart alec)
2011 Short Emo Hairstyles Your hair
vijayrudra
05-23 01:09 PM
Emailed to the listed and WI senators
more...
pyaradesi
07-20 10:34 PM
I have my reasons to stay here which you will never understand.
Is this fair? You only rebuked questions with Katrina, and your boss, why not rebuke all my questions?
And, I do not have to understand your reasons, as long as we all understand our reasons, that should stop us from coming to IV and whining.
Is this fair? You only rebuked questions with Katrina, and your boss, why not rebuke all my questions?
And, I do not have to understand your reasons, as long as we all understand our reasons, that should stop us from coming to IV and whining.
tonyHK12
02-18 06:32 PM
thanks SGP, devmaha
Total Contributions...........$6,675.00
Amount to be raised.......$43,325.00
.
.
Total Contributions...........$6,675.00
Amount to be raised.......$43,325.00
.
.
more...
pbuckeye
02-15 09:35 AM
Great initiative IV. Finally signed up for monthly contributions. If that doesn't count towards the event fund, will make a one time contribution as well.
Here is the paypal info for the monthly subscription:
Donation to Support Immigration Voice (User: pbuckeye)
Unique Transaction ID # 8TU01799C9450725Y
Subscription # S-55296973D5390092N
Here is the paypal info for the monthly subscription:
Donation to Support Immigration Voice (User: pbuckeye)
Unique Transaction ID # 8TU01799C9450725Y
Subscription # S-55296973D5390092N
2010 Emo Hairstyles For Short Hair
yabayaba
08-31 05:38 PM
I belongs to TSC category but my lawyer sent my application to Nebraska.When I check the status online, says "case received in TSC"!! but Only the AP and EAD Checks are cashed. The I485 & FP checks are not yet cashed. Do any one come across like this?.
----
PD: July/06/2004
AP&EAD Checks Cashed: Aug/29/2007
----
PD: July/06/2004
AP&EAD Checks Cashed: Aug/29/2007
more...
glus
05-23 11:50 AM
Guys,
E-mails are good, but if you can fax them too:
Fax numbers to key senators in DC offices:
Clinton: 202-228-2082
Schumer: 202-228-3027
Lott: 202-224-2262
Reid: 202-224-7327
Cornyn: 202-228-2856
Hagel: 202-224-5213
Martinez: 202-228-5171
McConnell: 202-224-2499
Obama: 202-228-4260
Kennedy: 202-224-2417
E-mails are good, but if you can fax them too:
Fax numbers to key senators in DC offices:
Clinton: 202-228-2082
Schumer: 202-228-3027
Lott: 202-224-2262
Reid: 202-224-7327
Cornyn: 202-228-2856
Hagel: 202-224-5213
Martinez: 202-228-5171
McConnell: 202-224-2499
Obama: 202-228-4260
Kennedy: 202-224-2417
hair Emo hairstyles for girls
velan
06-26 01:01 PM
Guys
Guys don't talk about what undocumented workers are going to get, every one has their own story. Instead of comparing like they are going to get these and those, we need to concentrate on what we want. We don't even need to spend lot of time to discuss in this forum about what undocumented workers are going to get, nobody knows when they will get these privileges. In USA you don't get anything that easily, you have to work hard to earn it.
We need to concentrate on IV goals to remove the retrogression and backlog elimination by spreading IV its agenda to our friends to get more funds and members. I believe this approach will help us to achieve our goals, instead talking about about legal vs. illegal.
Guys don't talk about what undocumented workers are going to get, every one has their own story. Instead of comparing like they are going to get these and those, we need to concentrate on what we want. We don't even need to spend lot of time to discuss in this forum about what undocumented workers are going to get, nobody knows when they will get these privileges. In USA you don't get anything that easily, you have to work hard to earn it.
We need to concentrate on IV goals to remove the retrogression and backlog elimination by spreading IV its agenda to our friends to get more funds and members. I believe this approach will help us to achieve our goals, instead talking about about legal vs. illegal.
more...
psk79
09-12 02:48 PM
I am in exactly same boat, with no idea about my pending application.
Absolutely hate this feeling.
Don't worry! It will soon be up. Its just where your app is located in the stack of stuff.. I worried so much until a couple of days when the checks are cashed..however no receipts yet...its just crazy..some spouses got EADs while principal applicants status is still pending...
Absolutely hate this feeling.
Don't worry! It will soon be up. Its just where your app is located in the stack of stuff.. I worried so much until a couple of days when the checks are cashed..however no receipts yet...its just crazy..some spouses got EADs while principal applicants status is still pending...
hot for short hair girls
JazzByTheBay
09-28 04:36 PM
Given the number of questions and concerns IV members have about AC21 in general and "what after EAD/AP", it makes sense to coordinate with USCIS (and lawmakers if required) on this and get some favorable responses that allay everyone's concerns.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
more...
house tattoo scene hairstyles for short emo hairstyles for short hair girls. emo
lutherpraveen
10-14 09:27 AM
Processed at NSC.
WAS IT ALSO A LIN#? I AM PATIENTLY WAITING......HOPING TO BE NEXT.
WAS IT ALSO A LIN#? I AM PATIENTLY WAITING......HOPING TO BE NEXT.
tattoo Emo Haircuts Girls Gallery 1
obviously
03-08 08:53 AM
and reduce your depression!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...?t=3361&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...?t=3361&page=2
more...
pictures short hair emo haircuts
simple1
05-01 03:14 PM
exactly, spouse/derivate doesn�t get affected at all (other than a shorter or longer delay, depending on calculations).
Anyways, regardless EAD/AP or green card the derivate cant leave the country longer time. There will be no diff for her.
They have no strings attached EAD. Look at ours/primary? Can a programmer-EAD take up Project manager Job? Categorically No.
If the primary gets greencard earlier both (primary with GC, spouse with open-ead) can work/move any place they want.
Plus it is fair this way for some primary waiting in the queue and there is no law tying EBdependent with EBquota.
Again, I am waiting to hear a forum-Attorney or IV-core�s interpretation.
I support finding the fact...
Following two concerns were raised but the answers should satisfy....
1) Spouse may not get EAD/AP?
The document clearly states that if the primary's priority date is current then the primary can file I-485 and the spouse can file I-485 as dependent.
Once spouse files his/her I-485 he/she becomes eligible for EAD/AP and there are no restrictions on what and where the spouse can work on EAD/AP.
The document only says that the visa must be used from family quota and not from employment quota.
How does it then matter whether the spouse gets green card even after 10 years if he/she can work anywhere, any occupation and full time/part time?
2) Spouse may get GC long after?
Look at it this way currently we have pool of 140K to share among primary and dependents. What if this pool becomes 200K (if we assume 60K from family quota for illustration purpose)? Which one will be faster. It has to be 200K pool.
In any case let the correct rules be followed.
Anyways, regardless EAD/AP or green card the derivate cant leave the country longer time. There will be no diff for her.
They have no strings attached EAD. Look at ours/primary? Can a programmer-EAD take up Project manager Job? Categorically No.
If the primary gets greencard earlier both (primary with GC, spouse with open-ead) can work/move any place they want.
Plus it is fair this way for some primary waiting in the queue and there is no law tying EBdependent with EBquota.
Again, I am waiting to hear a forum-Attorney or IV-core�s interpretation.
I support finding the fact...
Following two concerns were raised but the answers should satisfy....
1) Spouse may not get EAD/AP?
The document clearly states that if the primary's priority date is current then the primary can file I-485 and the spouse can file I-485 as dependent.
Once spouse files his/her I-485 he/she becomes eligible for EAD/AP and there are no restrictions on what and where the spouse can work on EAD/AP.
The document only says that the visa must be used from family quota and not from employment quota.
How does it then matter whether the spouse gets green card even after 10 years if he/she can work anywhere, any occupation and full time/part time?
2) Spouse may get GC long after?
Look at it this way currently we have pool of 140K to share among primary and dependents. What if this pool becomes 200K (if we assume 60K from family quota for illustration purpose)? Which one will be faster. It has to be 200K pool.
In any case let the correct rules be followed.
dresses Emo Hairstyles For Long Hair
sparklinks
08-26 11:13 AM
Congratulation. That was quick. I applied for EAD renewal for me and my wife RD 7/9/2008 and still waiting.
Any one waiting near 6/18 ?
Any one waiting near 6/18 ?
more...
makeup Trendy Sexy Emo Girls
v2neha
09-03 10:03 AM
Don't know why my file is still pending (RD 6/18), present EAD expiring in 2 weeks..:)
My EAD renewal is pending as well - RD 6/18 - present EAD expiring on 9/25. I requested expediting processing on 8/13 and received a letter yesterday saying they are reviewing my request and will have a decision in 60 days : :rolleyes:
My EAD renewal is pending as well - RD 6/18 - present EAD expiring on 9/25. I requested expediting processing on 8/13 and received a letter yesterday saying they are reviewing my request and will have a decision in 60 days : :rolleyes:
girlfriend emo hairstyles for short hair
EADplease
09-21 11:56 AM
For me, since my 140 was approved in TSC, my attorney sent 485 to TSC.
Hi
I have also files on the same day, how do you guys make out that your file have been trabsfered to texas and CSC, because my 140 was approved in texas and my attorney has sent the 485 to NSC , Thanks for you reply.
Hi
I have also files on the same day, how do you guys make out that your file have been trabsfered to texas and CSC, because my 140 was approved in texas and my attorney has sent the 485 to NSC , Thanks for you reply.
hairstyles Sexy emo girls haircuts.
BrazilianCitizen
06-15 12:09 PM
Package received by Nebraska SC: June/4.
Check cashed: June/14 (it shows LIN# on the back).
Querying status using this number shows a receipt date of June/12!
Check cashed: June/14 (it shows LIN# on the back).
Querying status using this number shows a receipt date of June/12!
h1techSlave
03-28 11:16 AM
You have predicted that EB3-India cut of date would become June 2003. But your PD is July 2003. Usually people do not predict that way. They predict their own PD would become current pretty soon.:D
At one end it is bad that USCIS moved back Nebraska Processing date to June 08 2007 (More than one month backword) but it looks like USCIS is preparing itself to kick EB3-India ahead... It is too early to say this confidently.. But my feeling is that USCIS will keep processing dates tied to June 2007 and will kick EB3-India ahead. I am keeping my fingers crossed. Though as per murthy's web site in May bulletin EB3-India dates will remain same, I am feeling that if my guess is correct then at least from June bulletin we will see 2 patterns 1) Nebraka processing date would not move ahead for some months or will
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
At one end it is bad that USCIS moved back Nebraska Processing date to June 08 2007 (More than one month backword) but it looks like USCIS is preparing itself to kick EB3-India ahead... It is too early to say this confidently.. But my feeling is that USCIS will keep processing dates tied to June 2007 and will kick EB3-India ahead. I am keeping my fingers crossed. Though as per murthy's web site in May bulletin EB3-India dates will remain same, I am feeling that if my guess is correct then at least from June bulletin we will see 2 patterns 1) Nebraka processing date would not move ahead for some months or will
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
AabTuAgaGC
08-30 07:12 PM
Got receipt notice for I-485/AP/EAD/ from USCIS today (8/30/2007). My package was delivered to Nebraska center on July/27/2007. Notice date is August 21st, 2007. My priority date is Dec/23rd/2003.
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
No comments:
Post a Comment