mattresscoil
11-18 08:23 PM
Hello group:
Got this response from Ander Crenshaw - Member of Congress
What does this mean? is he going to support or not? should I follow-up and ask anything else?
=================
Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about immigration policy. I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts with me on this matter.
The basic law governing immigration and naturalization is contained in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952. The INA establishes a flexible level of permanent admissions. The Act provides for a permanent worldwide level of 675,000 immigrants each year. The worldwide level is flexible in that it may be exceeded in certain circumstances. The permanent immigrant level consists of the following components: (a) family-sponsored immigrants, including immediate relatives of U.S. citizens and family-sponsored preference immigrants; (b) employment-based preference immigrants; and (c) diversity immigrants, those immigrants with low admission levels who must have a high school education or its equivalent or a minimum of two years work experience in a profession requiring two years of training or experience. Additionally, the INA establishes per-country levels that are applicable to family-sponsored and employment-based preference immigrants only. The per-country level is not a "quota" set aside for individual countries. According to the State Department, the per-country level is not an entitlement but, rather, a barrier against monopolization of the immigration by one country in any given year.
Legal immigration has had a positive impact on the United States and our economy. Most immigrants come to this country with a support system already in place (e.g., family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants). The majority of the other legal immigrants are permitted to remain in this country for humanitarian reasons. Studies have also shown that within several short years, most immigrants are net producers, rather than net consumers, in our economy. While there is certainly a legitimate debate regarding the appropriate level of immigration, most would agree that an immigration policy which promotes family unity and requires a certain degree of self-support is generally acceptable.
However, there is a significant difference between legal and illegal immigration. Since my election to Congress in 2000, I have worked with my colleagues to ensure that our border is more secure and that we do not encourage people to come into our country illegally. Illegal aliens place a tremendous financial and social burden on our society, and we must work to stop this unfair practice.
The best way to get illegal immigration under control is to secure our borders. Our porous borders have allowed more than ten million people to cross into our country with no oversight, no accountability, and no record. We simply have no idea who they are, where they came from, and most importantly - why they entered our country illegally. I believe we must increase the size of the Border Patrol to 18,000 agents, we must actively construct a double barrier wall and utilize technological innovations, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, to conduct surveillance operations along the remaining border.
Once we have secured our borders, we must turn our attention to the more than 12 million illegal immigrants already residing here. There are varying proposals currently being debated here in Washington as to what is the most economically feasible approach to addressing this situation. I do not support amnesty for those individuals who have broken our laws and will work to deport those individuals who have become a financial and social burden on our society. I believe that we must establish an Employer Verification System that is easy to use and provides timely feedback to employers. Any employer that continues to knowingly employ illegal aliens should be assessed heavy fines and penalties.
I look forward to debating this issue during the year to come and assure you that I will continue to support revisions to our current immigration policy that provide meaningful reform and offer maximum protection for our borders. Additionally, I will oppose any attempts to provide amnesty to the more than 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in this country.
Again, I want to thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please feel free to contact me if I can be of any further assistance on this matter or if you would like additional information on this topic or other issues facing Congress, please visit my Web site at United States Congressman Ander Crenshaw - Florida's 4th District (http://crenshaw.house.gov).
Sincerely,
Ander Crenshaw
Member of Congress
==================
Got this response from Ander Crenshaw - Member of Congress
What does this mean? is he going to support or not? should I follow-up and ask anything else?
=================
Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about immigration policy. I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts with me on this matter.
The basic law governing immigration and naturalization is contained in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952. The INA establishes a flexible level of permanent admissions. The Act provides for a permanent worldwide level of 675,000 immigrants each year. The worldwide level is flexible in that it may be exceeded in certain circumstances. The permanent immigrant level consists of the following components: (a) family-sponsored immigrants, including immediate relatives of U.S. citizens and family-sponsored preference immigrants; (b) employment-based preference immigrants; and (c) diversity immigrants, those immigrants with low admission levels who must have a high school education or its equivalent or a minimum of two years work experience in a profession requiring two years of training or experience. Additionally, the INA establishes per-country levels that are applicable to family-sponsored and employment-based preference immigrants only. The per-country level is not a "quota" set aside for individual countries. According to the State Department, the per-country level is not an entitlement but, rather, a barrier against monopolization of the immigration by one country in any given year.
Legal immigration has had a positive impact on the United States and our economy. Most immigrants come to this country with a support system already in place (e.g., family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants). The majority of the other legal immigrants are permitted to remain in this country for humanitarian reasons. Studies have also shown that within several short years, most immigrants are net producers, rather than net consumers, in our economy. While there is certainly a legitimate debate regarding the appropriate level of immigration, most would agree that an immigration policy which promotes family unity and requires a certain degree of self-support is generally acceptable.
However, there is a significant difference between legal and illegal immigration. Since my election to Congress in 2000, I have worked with my colleagues to ensure that our border is more secure and that we do not encourage people to come into our country illegally. Illegal aliens place a tremendous financial and social burden on our society, and we must work to stop this unfair practice.
The best way to get illegal immigration under control is to secure our borders. Our porous borders have allowed more than ten million people to cross into our country with no oversight, no accountability, and no record. We simply have no idea who they are, where they came from, and most importantly - why they entered our country illegally. I believe we must increase the size of the Border Patrol to 18,000 agents, we must actively construct a double barrier wall and utilize technological innovations, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, to conduct surveillance operations along the remaining border.
Once we have secured our borders, we must turn our attention to the more than 12 million illegal immigrants already residing here. There are varying proposals currently being debated here in Washington as to what is the most economically feasible approach to addressing this situation. I do not support amnesty for those individuals who have broken our laws and will work to deport those individuals who have become a financial and social burden on our society. I believe that we must establish an Employer Verification System that is easy to use and provides timely feedback to employers. Any employer that continues to knowingly employ illegal aliens should be assessed heavy fines and penalties.
I look forward to debating this issue during the year to come and assure you that I will continue to support revisions to our current immigration policy that provide meaningful reform and offer maximum protection for our borders. Additionally, I will oppose any attempts to provide amnesty to the more than 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in this country.
Again, I want to thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please feel free to contact me if I can be of any further assistance on this matter or if you would like additional information on this topic or other issues facing Congress, please visit my Web site at United States Congressman Ander Crenshaw - Florida's 4th District (http://crenshaw.house.gov).
Sincerely,
Ander Crenshaw
Member of Congress
==================
wallpaper small tattoos of doves.
GCcomesoon
11-06 02:51 PM
Hi
I have opened up 2 SR's & have taken 2 info-passes till now but I haven't received my FP yet.
GCcomesoon
Priority date - 05/2003
140 approved - 10/2006 from TSC
485,131,765 RD-6/04/2007 at TSC, notices received - 06/07/2007
CA, EB2
Wife's case returned due to some error,send it again & received on 06/17/2007 as per Fedex
Wife's case RD- 7/10/2007
LUD in my case - I131 - 7/10/07, approved - 7/24/07
LUD in my case - 1131,485,765, - 7/11/07
LUD in spouse's case - I131-7/11/07
EAD cleared for spouse - 08/20/07
FP for spouse - 08/08/07 , I rescheduled it.
FP scheduled - 10/03/07 - Done
AP approved for spouse - 09/12/07
EAD aproved - 10/25/2007 - for me
FP for me- ??????
Thanks
GCcomesoon
I have opened up 2 SR's & have taken 2 info-passes till now but I haven't received my FP yet.
GCcomesoon
Priority date - 05/2003
140 approved - 10/2006 from TSC
485,131,765 RD-6/04/2007 at TSC, notices received - 06/07/2007
CA, EB2
Wife's case returned due to some error,send it again & received on 06/17/2007 as per Fedex
Wife's case RD- 7/10/2007
LUD in my case - I131 - 7/10/07, approved - 7/24/07
LUD in my case - 1131,485,765, - 7/11/07
LUD in spouse's case - I131-7/11/07
EAD cleared for spouse - 08/20/07
FP for spouse - 08/08/07 , I rescheduled it.
FP scheduled - 10/03/07 - Done
AP approved for spouse - 09/12/07
EAD aproved - 10/25/2007 - for me
FP for me- ??????
Thanks
GCcomesoon
PD_Dec2002
07-08 11:27 AM
i agree.. thats being professional and ethical..
Yes, but I won't be surprised if the USCIS lawyers interpret the law to suit their convenience. And even worse, the judge buys it.
Thanks,
Jayant
Yes, but I won't be surprised if the USCIS lawyers interpret the law to suit their convenience. And even worse, the judge buys it.
Thanks,
Jayant
2011 wallpaper Print Dove Tattoos
bomber
07-03 03:29 PM
07/03/2007: Congresswoman Lofgren's Statement on July Visa Bulletin Revision and USCIS 485 Rejection
* Rep. Lofgren released the statement expressing concern on the incident. The statement indicates that she sent Secretaries Rice and Chertoff letters asking them to reconsider any mid-month updates of the July Visa Bulletin. As people know, she is the powerful Chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee. Her statement is very important in two areas. One is the political attention we desperately need. The other is potential impact on the House action on employment-based immigration legislation as impacted by the incidents. Very important development politically.
* Rep. Lofgren released the statement expressing concern on the incident. The statement indicates that she sent Secretaries Rice and Chertoff letters asking them to reconsider any mid-month updates of the July Visa Bulletin. As people know, she is the powerful Chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee Immigration Subcommittee. Her statement is very important in two areas. One is the political attention we desperately need. The other is potential impact on the House action on employment-based immigration legislation as impacted by the incidents. Very important development politically.
more...
vinabath
03-25 04:35 PM
Thats not true. My PD is March 2005. When my PD comes, I have to apply for EAD whereas others will get GC. Oh such a screwed up system.
It is true. I will take a bet. If your PD does not go to March 2005 by Sep 2009, I will give you $100. It it goes give me $100:D
It is true. I will take a bet. If your PD does not go to March 2005 by Sep 2009, I will give you $100. It it goes give me $100:D
sledge_hammer
01-30 05:06 PM
Don't confuse between taking legal risk with doing something illegal. You must be an idiot to think they are the same.
Poeple that sold $500K home to those who make $40K were not doing anything illegal. What they were doing was irresponsible. It is the guy that was making $40K, but lied on his application that he was making $80K that is the criminal.
And your assumption is that we are complaining about unethical behavior because we are in the US and we think that everyone in the US is ethical? How stupid are you? Sorry to burst your bubble, but we do not think so. I, and many like me, think we should do the right thing no matter where we are, here, India, or elsewhere.
I can't help but laugh at all these taking moral high ground. They talk like this even after looking at what is happening in so called highly ethical american corporates.
There are rules and people smart enough and daring enough go ahead and push it/bend it as much as possible to achive what interests them most.
As of April 2009, the person who asked the original question and the consultant who asked the question assumed they should be able to land a contract job once October rolls around.
It is a common practice, without going into how it is unfair for the numerous others who have job offers in hand.
Now what would you say to the people who sold houses worth 500,000$ to the people who are making 40K per annum or so? The people who took the risk bear the reward or repercussions.
The person who took a risk by applying for H1 without a client offer, and the consultant would have been rewarded financially if they were able to land a job.
Now that they can't, they have this potential of being illegal stay/out of status or whatever that they have to deal with.
So I suppose, if we can help him with answers to the questions he is seeking and provide any guidance that will help him deal with the results of his decision , as many are doing on thread, that is great. If not, don't have get so preachy/flamey.
Peace out.
PS:Aksham,this is not directed at you.
Poeple that sold $500K home to those who make $40K were not doing anything illegal. What they were doing was irresponsible. It is the guy that was making $40K, but lied on his application that he was making $80K that is the criminal.
And your assumption is that we are complaining about unethical behavior because we are in the US and we think that everyone in the US is ethical? How stupid are you? Sorry to burst your bubble, but we do not think so. I, and many like me, think we should do the right thing no matter where we are, here, India, or elsewhere.
I can't help but laugh at all these taking moral high ground. They talk like this even after looking at what is happening in so called highly ethical american corporates.
There are rules and people smart enough and daring enough go ahead and push it/bend it as much as possible to achive what interests them most.
As of April 2009, the person who asked the original question and the consultant who asked the question assumed they should be able to land a contract job once October rolls around.
It is a common practice, without going into how it is unfair for the numerous others who have job offers in hand.
Now what would you say to the people who sold houses worth 500,000$ to the people who are making 40K per annum or so? The people who took the risk bear the reward or repercussions.
The person who took a risk by applying for H1 without a client offer, and the consultant would have been rewarded financially if they were able to land a job.
Now that they can't, they have this potential of being illegal stay/out of status or whatever that they have to deal with.
So I suppose, if we can help him with answers to the questions he is seeking and provide any guidance that will help him deal with the results of his decision , as many are doing on thread, that is great. If not, don't have get so preachy/flamey.
Peace out.
PS:Aksham,this is not directed at you.
more...
gc_chahiye
07-08 01:10 AM
if it takes 2 or 3 years to fight this case, what is the use
even if AILF wins in say 2 years:
0. there are people with 2006/2007 India PDs, for whom I-485 filing is going to take 4 years or so, and this ruling, even if it comes in 2 years, cuts down the time by half!
1. USCIS wont f@ck with future generations the way they did with us. We wont have to eye the VB with suspicion everytime its published.
2. Its delayed, but its atleast justice and puts blame where it should lie. If this goes unchallenged, then essentially what USCIS did would be right/correct when people look back on this.
even if AILF wins in say 2 years:
0. there are people with 2006/2007 India PDs, for whom I-485 filing is going to take 4 years or so, and this ruling, even if it comes in 2 years, cuts down the time by half!
1. USCIS wont f@ck with future generations the way they did with us. We wont have to eye the VB with suspicion everytime its published.
2. Its delayed, but its atleast justice and puts blame where it should lie. If this goes unchallenged, then essentially what USCIS did would be right/correct when people look back on this.
2010 tattoos of doves. arunmohan
gagbag
07-04 10:47 PM
When I joined Company X (prior employer) I paid for H1b transfer fee and h1b renewal fee(total $3200 + $3000).
They agreed to sponsor my green card(just to give required paperwork) and they asked me to pay GC cost, So far I have paid $1500 for labor +$1700 advertisement + $1700 for I-140 + $3750 just now to file I-485 for me and for my spouse as dates were current to my lawyer . I have labor and I-140 approved from Company X.
I was compromising my personal life by staying away from my family and company X didn't find any client near to my home. I decided to stay at home hoping Company X will find some client near to my home. I was on a bench(no salary for a month).When I asked for a "employment letter "to file I-485 Comapny X said they can't give because they are
not paying me , I said I will resign and then you give me "future employement letter". I resiged Company X( i found company Y near to my home), in 10 days they cancelled my H1b visa without informing me, gladly I found Company Y and H1b transfer took place before they could cancel my H1b. Company X is reluctant even today to give future emplyement
letter.They are ready to do corp-to-corp, for that I have to pay them H1b tranfer cost of $3200(as my prior h1b got cancelled by company X) . I don't beleive its worth going back to them , but at the same time never wanted to lose $8650 green card cost. To join Company Y again I paid h1b transfer fee and , company Y expects me to pay Green card cost again. I am on 7th year extension. New H1b is valid till 2010(3 yr extension on I-140 approval from company X).
Shall I start green card again with company Y ?
Company X doesn't respond to emails/calls. There should some law to protect us from such employers. BTW Employer X was an american employer and wants to follow book-rules.Example .. informing USCIS to windraw H1b petition.
Did you know I-140 dates are prtable from X to Y after 140 is approved? I am sorry to hear your pain, but you can check if you can atleast maintain your priority dates.
They agreed to sponsor my green card(just to give required paperwork) and they asked me to pay GC cost, So far I have paid $1500 for labor +$1700 advertisement + $1700 for I-140 + $3750 just now to file I-485 for me and for my spouse as dates were current to my lawyer . I have labor and I-140 approved from Company X.
I was compromising my personal life by staying away from my family and company X didn't find any client near to my home. I decided to stay at home hoping Company X will find some client near to my home. I was on a bench(no salary for a month).When I asked for a "employment letter "to file I-485 Comapny X said they can't give because they are
not paying me , I said I will resign and then you give me "future employement letter". I resiged Company X( i found company Y near to my home), in 10 days they cancelled my H1b visa without informing me, gladly I found Company Y and H1b transfer took place before they could cancel my H1b. Company X is reluctant even today to give future emplyement
letter.They are ready to do corp-to-corp, for that I have to pay them H1b tranfer cost of $3200(as my prior h1b got cancelled by company X) . I don't beleive its worth going back to them , but at the same time never wanted to lose $8650 green card cost. To join Company Y again I paid h1b transfer fee and , company Y expects me to pay Green card cost again. I am on 7th year extension. New H1b is valid till 2010(3 yr extension on I-140 approval from company X).
Shall I start green card again with company Y ?
Company X doesn't respond to emails/calls. There should some law to protect us from such employers. BTW Employer X was an american employer and wants to follow book-rules.Example .. informing USCIS to windraw H1b petition.
Did you know I-140 dates are prtable from X to Y after 140 is approved? I am sorry to hear your pain, but you can check if you can atleast maintain your priority dates.
more...
unitednations
03-08 04:21 PM
I came on extension. I think they are more critical about the companies with whom you are working for. All my friends with extended their visa with no problems. I it is very hard to conclude on this. But scares every one if we keep saying they can not extend their visa.
Be prepared with good documentation and you should be fine.
Following is an e-mail I received from a person on L-1 with IBM.
Adding to my conversation with you, its unfortunate that my L1 extension has just got denied this week. I was going to leave this company anyways but this makes the COS difficult. My case took unusually long and now finally i have the denial notice as per USCIS website. My company has not yet received the papers, but once they do i may have to go back to India for converting my status. I think cannot go to Mexico or Canada as my I-94 has expired.
In the meantime i am following a lead i have for a project in Atlanta. Nothing sure but i will let you know if it culminates to something.
I was also informed that there is a new rule in place which does not allow people to go to Mexico or Canada for H1 stamping if they have entered US on a different visa . People are being sent back to home country for stamping.
What do you suggest i do? Shall i get H4 stamped in India or shall i go for H1 stamping. I will still have at least a month's grace period and if things don't work out after i come back, i will then convert to H4 then.
Looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Be prepared with good documentation and you should be fine.
Following is an e-mail I received from a person on L-1 with IBM.
Adding to my conversation with you, its unfortunate that my L1 extension has just got denied this week. I was going to leave this company anyways but this makes the COS difficult. My case took unusually long and now finally i have the denial notice as per USCIS website. My company has not yet received the papers, but once they do i may have to go back to India for converting my status. I think cannot go to Mexico or Canada as my I-94 has expired.
In the meantime i am following a lead i have for a project in Atlanta. Nothing sure but i will let you know if it culminates to something.
I was also informed that there is a new rule in place which does not allow people to go to Mexico or Canada for H1 stamping if they have entered US on a different visa . People are being sent back to home country for stamping.
What do you suggest i do? Shall i get H4 stamped in India or shall i go for H1 stamping. I will still have at least a month's grace period and if things don't work out after i come back, i will then convert to H4 then.
Looking forward to hearing from you soon.
hair house Small+dove+tattoos+on+
gjoe
10-09 06:18 AM
Why do you think FIFO is scientifically impossible? If you beleive that weather forecast is reliable like most of the Americans do, making the FIFO system work more effeciently without wasting even a single visa is possible.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
more...
immigrant2007
09-10 12:20 AM
IV:
What are plans and strategy for EB3?
We all morons wont still learn, we will still start prediting for next visa bulletin hoping that a reincarnation of god will ome and deliver us visa numbers.
Unless we all make a collective effort no one is going to listen to us. I know the fate of my post we all people are busy to get our post noted or express our opinion that we have lost our fous of what our main problem is. I think we deserve this perhaps I dont think if we continue like this we even deserve GCs.
What are plans and strategy for EB3?
We all morons wont still learn, we will still start prediting for next visa bulletin hoping that a reincarnation of god will ome and deliver us visa numbers.
Unless we all make a collective effort no one is going to listen to us. I know the fate of my post we all people are busy to get our post noted or express our opinion that we have lost our fous of what our main problem is. I think we deserve this perhaps I dont think if we continue like this we even deserve GCs.
hot hot Small tattoos for girls
GCStatus
09-16 06:07 PM
Nothing really matters as of now, what does matter is this
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21393
So Please Call
Tell us to call, DONT TELL its doesnt matter
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21393
So Please Call
Tell us to call, DONT TELL its doesnt matter
more...
house white dove tattoos.
gjoe
02-15 09:44 AM
No FP yet... NSC Received Date July 12, 2007 - Notice Date TSC Sept. 10, 2007. All in all, almost 6 months and no sign of a biometrics appointment... bummer.
Called yestery they said I don't need a FP now. :)
"If required they will schedule me". I liked this one from the CS agent
Called yestery they said I don't need a FP now. :)
"If required they will schedule me". I liked this one from the CS agent
tattoo small tattoos for girls.
grupak
07-30 11:10 AM
As other have noticed, I also got two emails. One on July 29 other July 30 about the case.
more...
pictures small tattoos for girls.
nochoice
09-06 03:21 PM
I received FP notice today.
EB2-NIW, PD Sept 30, 2005
I-485 application mailed: July 18, 2007
Service Center: Nebraska
Application delivered: July 20, 2007
I-485 Receipt Notice date: Aug 16, 2007
EB2-NIW, PD Sept 30, 2005
I-485 application mailed: July 18, 2007
Service Center: Nebraska
Application delivered: July 20, 2007
I-485 Receipt Notice date: Aug 16, 2007
dresses dove bird tattoos
eers
07-09 10:55 PM
may be some one can draft a news and post at wiki news
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Main_Page
more...
makeup Small Tattoos On Back Of Neck.
desi3933
08-25 11:29 AM
Please don't get me started now. Almost everyone on this forum lurks because of self interest. If one has to do public service , I would join a organization like CRY etc.
Regarding yourself, you lurk on this forum to show you are better than others now that you have your "citizenship". I doubt you have contributed even a single cent to the cause or written any letter or contacted any lawmaker. And I don't blame you because you have no reason to do that.
But I strongly suggest that you should get a life!!!
>> Regarding yourself, you lurk on this forum to show you are better than others now that you have your "citizenship".
Oh really!! How did you come to that conclusion? Could you be kind enough to show me any of my post that remotely suggests that? BTW, I joined this forum 18 months ago and I became US citizen last week.
>> I doubt you have contributed even a single cent to the cause or written any letter or contacted any lawmaker.
Incorrect.
>>But I strongly suggest that you should get a life!!!
Thanks for your suggestion.
Have a good day!
Regarding yourself, you lurk on this forum to show you are better than others now that you have your "citizenship". I doubt you have contributed even a single cent to the cause or written any letter or contacted any lawmaker. And I don't blame you because you have no reason to do that.
But I strongly suggest that you should get a life!!!
>> Regarding yourself, you lurk on this forum to show you are better than others now that you have your "citizenship".
Oh really!! How did you come to that conclusion? Could you be kind enough to show me any of my post that remotely suggests that? BTW, I joined this forum 18 months ago and I became US citizen last week.
>> I doubt you have contributed even a single cent to the cause or written any letter or contacted any lawmaker.
Incorrect.
>>But I strongly suggest that you should get a life!!!
Thanks for your suggestion.
Have a good day!
girlfriend 2011 Cute Small Tattoos For
kysrek
06-14 03:40 PM
It was applied to Nebraska. But I guess it was forwarded.
hairstyles makeup pictures hot small tattoos small tattoos designs.
chapper
08-13 05:20 PM
Congrats! Can you please tell us where your I140 was approved from. Are the checks cashed?
I got my I485 receipt notice today. Our applications are delivered on July 2nd.
Receipt Date: 07/02/07
Notice Date: 08/06/07
I got my I485 receipt notice today. Our applications are delivered on July 2nd.
Receipt Date: 07/02/07
Notice Date: 08/06/07
gcboy442
09-11 11:03 PM
Mine was received on July 2nd at 10:25 AM signed by J.Barrett@NSC
amitjoey
11-17 05:33 PM
Posted on the Northern California chapter.
Chapter leaders- Please post on your chapter groups.
If you know your state chapter leaders, please ask them to post on the yahoo groups.
Chapter leaders- Please post on your chapter groups.
If you know your state chapter leaders, please ask them to post on the yahoo groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment