gbof
08-27 09:14 PM
it is not to prevent 'de-magnetization' but to prevent rfid communication. All new passport and other govt id 'cards' ship with rfid chip in them which contains encrypted biometrics info. Since rfid info can be read even 10 meters away with right equipment, it is better to put it in a metallic sleeve (creating a Faraday cage) to prevent anyone from sniffing then biometrics info.
here is more info ..
SecureIDNews | New U.S. 'Green Card' using optical stripe, RFID technology (http://www.secureidnews.com/2010/05/12/new-u-s-green-card-using-optical-stripe-rfid-technology)
edit: some additional info, mythbusters did a segment on the myth of demagentized credit card. It would take a really very strong magnet to demagnetize the strip, definitely not the kind you would carry in your pocket.
Without getting into the science, I tried to pass on the tip to GC holders (and expectants) giving a simple example... btw: I appreciate your posting explaining to like minded......'joy the w'end
here is more info ..
SecureIDNews | New U.S. 'Green Card' using optical stripe, RFID technology (http://www.secureidnews.com/2010/05/12/new-u-s-green-card-using-optical-stripe-rfid-technology)
edit: some additional info, mythbusters did a segment on the myth of demagentized credit card. It would take a really very strong magnet to demagnetize the strip, definitely not the kind you would carry in your pocket.
Without getting into the science, I tried to pass on the tip to GC holders (and expectants) giving a simple example... btw: I appreciate your posting explaining to like minded......'joy the w'end
wallpaper 2011 quotes about change and
mirage
03-07 12:02 PM
I never said I'm doing any community service, I care for my green card, and I am not getting it because of the country cap. That is why country ca is my problem. But if I am able to convince a lawmaker and get something in place, while I get my Green card, thousands others will get it who are in line before me, and obviously people who are after me will move forward in line. May be with your kind of brains and temperament it is hard for you to understand, but it is simple for 60 plus people who are in our Yahoo group...
Look man, I don't know who you are and what's your story. But I do know this. Giving a false impression to others and misleading others on this forum and on any other forum is not going to help. You seem to project that only you care for the issue of country-limits. I think the better description is, you only care for the removal of country limits till the day you get your green card. You do NOT want to remove country limits on EB beyond the date you receive the approval of your application. Giving a false impression to a few on this forum that temporarily removal of country limits will be easier than permanent removal of country limits is just WRONG.
After IV admin posted for the media interview few days back, I sent them an email expressing my willingness to speak with the press. I spoke with Vivek Wadhwa at length last week about this issue. Vivek Wadhwa article in Washington Post covers the issue of country limits where as his previous articles have not covered this issue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/06/AR2009030601926.html
"Yet rather than welcome these entrepreneurs, the U.S. government is confining many of them to a painful purgatory. As of Sept. 30, 2006, more than a million people were waiting for the 120,000 permanent-resident visas granted each year to skilled workers and their family members. No nation may claim more than 7 percent, so years may pass before immigrants from populous countries such as India and China are even considered".
I also called a member of IV core yesterday evening and they told me that they have told you not to do whatever that you are doing. I was told that you are hurting their effort and you have been told this pretty clearly. But you continue with this senseless and direction less ranting and you continue to cause damage to the effort for the removal of country-limits.
Its disgusting that rather than working with others to fix this complicated and difficult issue, you continue to beat your own drum, without actually doing anything, but at the same time hurting the issue you claim you care for. And on top of that you want to remove the country limits only until you get your green card. Is that rationale to you in any which way?????? No. Is your action selfish????? YES.
.
Look man, I don't know who you are and what's your story. But I do know this. Giving a false impression to others and misleading others on this forum and on any other forum is not going to help. You seem to project that only you care for the issue of country-limits. I think the better description is, you only care for the removal of country limits till the day you get your green card. You do NOT want to remove country limits on EB beyond the date you receive the approval of your application. Giving a false impression to a few on this forum that temporarily removal of country limits will be easier than permanent removal of country limits is just WRONG.
After IV admin posted for the media interview few days back, I sent them an email expressing my willingness to speak with the press. I spoke with Vivek Wadhwa at length last week about this issue. Vivek Wadhwa article in Washington Post covers the issue of country limits where as his previous articles have not covered this issue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/06/AR2009030601926.html
"Yet rather than welcome these entrepreneurs, the U.S. government is confining many of them to a painful purgatory. As of Sept. 30, 2006, more than a million people were waiting for the 120,000 permanent-resident visas granted each year to skilled workers and their family members. No nation may claim more than 7 percent, so years may pass before immigrants from populous countries such as India and China are even considered".
I also called a member of IV core yesterday evening and they told me that they have told you not to do whatever that you are doing. I was told that you are hurting their effort and you have been told this pretty clearly. But you continue with this senseless and direction less ranting and you continue to cause damage to the effort for the removal of country-limits.
Its disgusting that rather than working with others to fix this complicated and difficult issue, you continue to beat your own drum, without actually doing anything, but at the same time hurting the issue you claim you care for. And on top of that you want to remove the country limits only until you get your green card. Is that rationale to you in any which way?????? No. Is your action selfish????? YES.
.
prem_goel
11-17 09:50 PM
done
2011 Symptom) of Slow Growth
nousername
02-02 01:14 PM
Minimalist....
First off, do not generalize H1 to IT industry only.. Trust me, Indian are present in other fields also and they are doing well there :)
Now about your comments, so I guess you truly believe in jungle raj.. Basically, do whatever you think benefits you.. Forget about what other people might need. May be you don't understand the mean of "society" and what makes humans different from animals. Sad, very sad..
About your example, I hope that does not happen to anyone but if it does then yes the employer should pay for the return flight back home but please do not mix two separate issues.
Anyway, I do not think I need to waist any more time with you because you fail to understand the underlining issue.
Good luck with you immigration because that seems to be the focus of your life.
nousername,If your would-be employer had sponsored the visa,it got selected and then he has to not hire you on Oct1st because of his business not doing so well, what would you do?
Ideally your employer should rescind your offer and buy you a ticket back home.
But in the IT industry, that is the reason most people still work with desi employer, even thouh they know that they will be taken advantage of.
Is it illegal? Yes. But there is a risk for the people involved.
Also, when someone tries to land H1 for the first time, it is really tough to find an employer who can apply 6 months in advance.Most american companies don't even go through the hassle unless they are hiring for non-IT positions. Then you have companies like Infosys who apply in bunches and keep them ready for the business they are expecting in future. Try and argue with them that they shouldn't do that as many people who have jobs lined up right now will not get H1s.
In my opinion most people who are on H1 n IT with american companies, either got in there via OPT- H1 or H1 transfer.
You gotta do what you gotta do. If you keep thinking about all deserving people,you would never take a step forward. At everypoint in life you will have certain options and every option woul cause some or other discomfort. Unless you are involved in clearcut criminal activity, everything else is fair, in my opinion.
First off, do not generalize H1 to IT industry only.. Trust me, Indian are present in other fields also and they are doing well there :)
Now about your comments, so I guess you truly believe in jungle raj.. Basically, do whatever you think benefits you.. Forget about what other people might need. May be you don't understand the mean of "society" and what makes humans different from animals. Sad, very sad..
About your example, I hope that does not happen to anyone but if it does then yes the employer should pay for the return flight back home but please do not mix two separate issues.
Anyway, I do not think I need to waist any more time with you because you fail to understand the underlining issue.
Good luck with you immigration because that seems to be the focus of your life.
nousername,If your would-be employer had sponsored the visa,it got selected and then he has to not hire you on Oct1st because of his business not doing so well, what would you do?
Ideally your employer should rescind your offer and buy you a ticket back home.
But in the IT industry, that is the reason most people still work with desi employer, even thouh they know that they will be taken advantage of.
Is it illegal? Yes. But there is a risk for the people involved.
Also, when someone tries to land H1 for the first time, it is really tough to find an employer who can apply 6 months in advance.Most american companies don't even go through the hassle unless they are hiring for non-IT positions. Then you have companies like Infosys who apply in bunches and keep them ready for the business they are expecting in future. Try and argue with them that they shouldn't do that as many people who have jobs lined up right now will not get H1s.
In my opinion most people who are on H1 n IT with american companies, either got in there via OPT- H1 or H1 transfer.
You gotta do what you gotta do. If you keep thinking about all deserving people,you would never take a step forward. At everypoint in life you will have certain options and every option woul cause some or other discomfort. Unless you are involved in clearcut criminal activity, everything else is fair, in my opinion.
more...
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.
mbawa2574
05-09 08:27 AM
Only logic I can think of is Obama is trying to make low-life irresponsible unskilled Americans happy at the cost of skilled Indian workers. How can this retrogress to 2000. This is insane. I miss the good old Bush days and hope that McCain would have been the President.
more...
fittan
09-28 04:23 PM
Hi
Both and spouse and I received my receipts for our I-485, I-140, EAD, AP 09/19/07. On 09/24/07 we received fingerprint notice and on 09/27/07 we received our EAD card. I am quite surprise by how fast it came. Here are my details :
Priority Date: 10/15/04
Type: EB3
I-140/I-485: Concurrently filing at NSC. Receipt date 07/07/07
Checks cashed: 09/10/07
Receipts received: 09/19/07
Fingerprint appt: 10/09/07
Fittan
Both and spouse and I received my receipts for our I-485, I-140, EAD, AP 09/19/07. On 09/24/07 we received fingerprint notice and on 09/27/07 we received our EAD card. I am quite surprise by how fast it came. Here are my details :
Priority Date: 10/15/04
Type: EB3
I-140/I-485: Concurrently filing at NSC. Receipt date 07/07/07
Checks cashed: 09/10/07
Receipts received: 09/19/07
Fingerprint appt: 10/09/07
Fittan
2010 All change is not growth,
ItIsNotFunny
05-01 09:57 AM
This is my first post.
My Employer's Inhouse Attorney ( one of big 4 ) says technically EB dependents ( all 1,2,3) must be classified under FAMILY quota. USCIS mis classifies them under EMPLOYMENT quota.
Is he technically correct ?
Since, Most of dependents will not be affected when they are classified under Family quota (as they have AP and EAD).
Can IV possibly consider for push for reclassification of Dependents under Family Quota ? This will reduce backlog.
Please don't take it out of context, I am not trying to hurt any EB dependents, I too have a spouse working part time using beneficiary EAD. This is more of an open question.
This is an excellent point. I would like to raise this up in next IV conference call.
My Employer's Inhouse Attorney ( one of big 4 ) says technically EB dependents ( all 1,2,3) must be classified under FAMILY quota. USCIS mis classifies them under EMPLOYMENT quota.
Is he technically correct ?
Since, Most of dependents will not be affected when they are classified under Family quota (as they have AP and EAD).
Can IV possibly consider for push for reclassification of Dependents under Family Quota ? This will reduce backlog.
Please don't take it out of context, I am not trying to hurt any EB dependents, I too have a spouse working part time using beneficiary EAD. This is more of an open question.
This is an excellent point. I would like to raise this up in next IV conference call.
more...
Macaca
07-08 09:28 PM
Macaca:
The anticipated demand (that is calculated based on Pending Applications, New Applications that might become approvable and plethora of other factors including guess work) on Oct 1 2005/Oct 1 2006 was MUCH higher than 140,000 that was available for the entire year. Infact you have to break 140,000 into four quarters and apply contry quota (7%) to it since EB-3 ROW was not current on these dates. Thus it was hardly a surprise that India and China and EB-3 ROW remained retrogress on these dates.
Now fast forward to June 2007, there were 40,000 visa available in that last quarter and EB-3 ROW was in no position to consume that many that means spillover would come to India and China EB3/EB3 or else visa would be wasted in big numbers. The solution was to increase the supply and hence everything was current overnight. Until USCIS came in to spoil the party. They didn't do it in any simple way instead they choose the route of complete exhashtion and hence shutting the door.
Bottom line is: Unless demand for EB-3 ROW subsides (or it becomes current leaving substantial numbers for spillover) India EB-2 will always be cap subjected to 3200 or so visas every year. The sad part is catching up with the demand for EB-3 ROW is a moving target and thus EB-2 India might NEVER qualify for spillovers. I hope I am proved wrong by someone who has more insight.
My analysis is minimally, if at all, dependent on India, China, ROW, ...
Offcourse I don't know all laws. I will believe DOS/USCIS URLs that explain how VB dates are set.
In general, it will be very useful to finds URLs that explain VB date setting and identify USCIS inconsistencies which they call LAW.
The anticipated demand (that is calculated based on Pending Applications, New Applications that might become approvable and plethora of other factors including guess work) on Oct 1 2005/Oct 1 2006 was MUCH higher than 140,000 that was available for the entire year. Infact you have to break 140,000 into four quarters and apply contry quota (7%) to it since EB-3 ROW was not current on these dates. Thus it was hardly a surprise that India and China and EB-3 ROW remained retrogress on these dates.
Now fast forward to June 2007, there were 40,000 visa available in that last quarter and EB-3 ROW was in no position to consume that many that means spillover would come to India and China EB3/EB3 or else visa would be wasted in big numbers. The solution was to increase the supply and hence everything was current overnight. Until USCIS came in to spoil the party. They didn't do it in any simple way instead they choose the route of complete exhashtion and hence shutting the door.
Bottom line is: Unless demand for EB-3 ROW subsides (or it becomes current leaving substantial numbers for spillover) India EB-2 will always be cap subjected to 3200 or so visas every year. The sad part is catching up with the demand for EB-3 ROW is a moving target and thus EB-2 India might NEVER qualify for spillovers. I hope I am proved wrong by someone who has more insight.
My analysis is minimally, if at all, dependent on India, China, ROW, ...
Offcourse I don't know all laws. I will believe DOS/USCIS URLs that explain how VB dates are set.
In general, it will be very useful to finds URLs that explain VB date setting and identify USCIS inconsistencies which they call LAW.
hair for change and growth in
simple1
05-01 03:27 PM
I repeat to avoid misunderstanding.
This thread tries to findout the correct interpretation of current law.
I am not proposing any change or correction of law. No lobbies or congress involved.
I also strongly believe families should be together and they will be ( as no one will be affected ).
It is a good point that some people have brought up and I am sure IV core will evaluate it to see if it will help more people or less.
However.........
I strongly believe that family should be together. Whatever GC and other immigration issues we have, one should strive for keeping the family together at all times. Missing out on even a few years of togetherness with your spouse and kids is not worth it.
Even in the current system where dependents come under EB quota, I have known people where one spouse got the GC and the other one had to wait for many years because of a name check or something. But the current laws (EAD/AP etc) made sure that atleast the family was not broken up.
If we are looking for a change or correction of law, we need to make sure that the new law has NO kinks that hinder family staying together. If primary applicant gets a GC and the spouse is still waiting for 5 more years (it is possible), then the primary applicant can get citizenship and apply for a new GC for the secondary. Like I said - This situation is possible even in the current system.
As long as kinks are discussed with the lawyers and smoothened out to preserve family togetherness, it should be fine.
This thread tries to findout the correct interpretation of current law.
I am not proposing any change or correction of law. No lobbies or congress involved.
I also strongly believe families should be together and they will be ( as no one will be affected ).
It is a good point that some people have brought up and I am sure IV core will evaluate it to see if it will help more people or less.
However.........
I strongly believe that family should be together. Whatever GC and other immigration issues we have, one should strive for keeping the family together at all times. Missing out on even a few years of togetherness with your spouse and kids is not worth it.
Even in the current system where dependents come under EB quota, I have known people where one spouse got the GC and the other one had to wait for many years because of a name check or something. But the current laws (EAD/AP etc) made sure that atleast the family was not broken up.
If we are looking for a change or correction of law, we need to make sure that the new law has NO kinks that hinder family staying together. If primary applicant gets a GC and the spouse is still waiting for 5 more years (it is possible), then the primary applicant can get citizenship and apply for a new GC for the secondary. Like I said - This situation is possible even in the current system.
As long as kinks are discussed with the lawyers and smoothened out to preserve family togetherness, it should be fine.
more...
reddymjm
06-12 07:18 PM
I got my receipts by mail on monday and checks cashed last friday. But my wifes did not clear yet. any one in similar situation please post.
hot Quotes About Change And Growth
vandanaverdia
11-21 03:36 PM
I agree with people who say that "Miracles happen"....
We had a really close friend who was diagnosed with the fatal disease. His will power alone made him survive for over 2 years more than his doctors told him he would...
Miracles DO happen...
And remember... you will be in all our thoughts & prayers....
We had a really close friend who was diagnosed with the fatal disease. His will power alone made him survive for over 2 years more than his doctors told him he would...
Miracles DO happen...
And remember... you will be in all our thoughts & prayers....
more...
house Quote on Change and
raghav235
08-15 01:26 PM
EB3_SEP04,
My Receipt and Notice date is July 03, 2008, however there was a soft LUD on my case on July 08, 2008. And again another LUD on August 14, 2008 which is the approval.
Thanks
Raghav235
Raghav, congrats and thanks for the update.
Is July 08, 2008 also the Notice Date on your receipt notice? I'm wondering if generally there is one more LUD after the notice date and before the approval, when they pull the file off the shelf and start working on the case.
for me no LUD after notice date.
My Receipt and Notice date is July 03, 2008, however there was a soft LUD on my case on July 08, 2008. And again another LUD on August 14, 2008 which is the approval.
Thanks
Raghav235
Raghav, congrats and thanks for the update.
Is July 08, 2008 also the Notice Date on your receipt notice? I'm wondering if generally there is one more LUD after the notice date and before the approval, when they pull the file off the shelf and start working on the case.
for me no LUD after notice date.
tattoo quotes about change and growth
gc_aspirant_prasad
07-05 02:00 PM
AILF is ready to take the cause up, then why not ? Fragmon & Rajiv Khanna are just two opinions. I think the Congresswoman who spoke out on this issue used to be an immigration lawyer prior to taking up public office & she mentions in her letters to DHS that this may be a potential violation of the law.
more...
pictures makeup Quotes; change amp; growth. quotes about change and growth.
Jimi_Hendrix
12-13 11:52 AM
I agree whole-heartedly.
Senators/Congressmen are rational, smart and intelligent people. We HAVE to apprise them of our situation.
We have a legitimate, common sense and good cause on our side.
In this time of globalization and increased competition, do the senators/congressmen really want this country to lose half a million highly skilled, experienced and trained-in-America-for-years people to India and China, and to Europe and canada?
If they put 'holds' or refuse to take up our cause after they are fully aware of our situation, then atleast you know that they are doing it out of racism and/or narrow political and parochial motives.
But unless we make our situation known to these guys, we shouldn't really blame them.......Also, those with kids born in America might get more of a response from the legislators.
It is pathetic that there is a thread from NJ, and the guy is begging people to join/respond; it is mind-boggling that there are only seven members from NJ. It is absolutely ridiculous that the only two responses on the 'Calling all Wisconsin members' have been from myself, and another person. And that other person is from Illinois......
Can there be any guidance from the core team about personalizing our stories, and making those known to the legislators?
Alisa, sadly that is the problem. Not enough people want to pick up the spade and work with the NJ or other chapters. I hope that more and more people will realize that creating awareness among politicians is the first step to getting their support when some bill comes up for discussion.
Senators/Congressmen are rational, smart and intelligent people. We HAVE to apprise them of our situation.
We have a legitimate, common sense and good cause on our side.
In this time of globalization and increased competition, do the senators/congressmen really want this country to lose half a million highly skilled, experienced and trained-in-America-for-years people to India and China, and to Europe and canada?
If they put 'holds' or refuse to take up our cause after they are fully aware of our situation, then atleast you know that they are doing it out of racism and/or narrow political and parochial motives.
But unless we make our situation known to these guys, we shouldn't really blame them.......Also, those with kids born in America might get more of a response from the legislators.
It is pathetic that there is a thread from NJ, and the guy is begging people to join/respond; it is mind-boggling that there are only seven members from NJ. It is absolutely ridiculous that the only two responses on the 'Calling all Wisconsin members' have been from myself, and another person. And that other person is from Illinois......
Can there be any guidance from the core team about personalizing our stories, and making those known to the legislators?
Alisa, sadly that is the problem. Not enough people want to pick up the spade and work with the NJ or other chapters. I hope that more and more people will realize that creating awareness among politicians is the first step to getting their support when some bill comes up for discussion.
dresses growth quote $1.50
Naveen
05-04 09:03 PM
thanks vbkris,
I was about to post similar reply.
Naveen,
We need INA language. nothing more nothing less.
All,
As of this post. I could not find the law linking ebdependents with ebquota.
wow its pouring reds and uncivilised comments for pointing out this. Ok. well i am going to continue anyway!
INA: ACT 203 - ALLOCATION OF IMMIGRANT VISAS \ Act 203(c) \ Section (d)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=setDoc&doc_keytype=tocid&doc_key=2dae084742aac42ac9134cc4466287e7
(d) Treatment of Family Members. - A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1) shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c), be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
I was about to post similar reply.
Naveen,
We need INA language. nothing more nothing less.
All,
As of this post. I could not find the law linking ebdependents with ebquota.
wow its pouring reds and uncivilised comments for pointing out this. Ok. well i am going to continue anyway!
INA: ACT 203 - ALLOCATION OF IMMIGRANT VISAS \ Act 203(c) \ Section (d)
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=setDoc&doc_keytype=tocid&doc_key=2dae084742aac42ac9134cc4466287e7
(d) Treatment of Family Members. - A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1) shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c), be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
more...
makeup Tagged: quoteswantchangegrowth
InTheMoment
06-16 11:45 AM
Concurrent I-140/I-485: Yes
Mailed From State: MA
Mailed to NSC: June 11
Received at NSC: June 12
Transferred to TSC: ?
140 approved : ?
Receipt Date : ?
Notice Date : ?
Mailed From State: MA
Mailed to NSC: June 11
Received at NSC: June 12
Transferred to TSC: ?
140 approved : ?
Receipt Date : ?
Notice Date : ?
girlfriend To change your happiness,
glus
09-03 08:33 AM
I765 (EB3) Renewal
TSC USCIS Receipt Date 07/08/2008
Card Production Ordered Date: 09/02/2008.
There was no LUDs all the way and they did not ask me to do FPs. FPs were done in 10/2007 for I485.
TSC USCIS Receipt Date 07/08/2008
Card Production Ordered Date: 09/02/2008.
There was no LUDs all the way and they did not ask me to do FPs. FPs were done in 10/2007 for I485.
hairstyles quotes on change and growth.
Saralayar
03-16 06:57 PM
some useful info from Ron gotcher
http://imminfo.com/Newsletter/2009-3/2009-03.html
I do not see any article related to the EB3 prediction in the URL link you have provided.
http://imminfo.com/Newsletter/2009-3/2009-03.html
I do not see any article related to the EB3 prediction in the URL link you have provided.
kumarc123
05-08 03:53 PM
So who is the leader who is responsible of DOING stuff with that money when I contribute
You are the leader, because your are paying for it. Instead lets maybe assign a florist, we pay through google pay have them deliver the flowers too Dc or Obama administration for living up to their promises and how USCIS is promoting racism. Obama just came out with the article on how education is important and how unemployed people should consider going to college and state departments should offer help.
We should question in our conquest, is this what president is referring too? Is this what this nation wants?
Please lets make this happen! Lets find a florist and we can place our orders.
You are the leader, because your are paying for it. Instead lets maybe assign a florist, we pay through google pay have them deliver the flowers too Dc or Obama administration for living up to their promises and how USCIS is promoting racism. Obama just came out with the article on how education is important and how unemployed people should consider going to college and state departments should offer help.
We should question in our conquest, is this what president is referring too? Is this what this nation wants?
Please lets make this happen! Lets find a florist and we can place our orders.
gsc999
03-26 06:27 PM
Man, this website relieves my stress as it makes me realize that there are people whole lot depressed than I am , and it puts my life into perspective. Stress is only a state of mind.
For you sir, please live up to your username and cheer up. First thing you need to do is make a baby, everything will fall in it's place, trust me.
---
Well, I agree with your partially. Not with the baby making part. There are other avenues where we can channel our mind. In this case, volunteering for IV, especially now will be fruitful.
For you sir, please live up to your username and cheer up. First thing you need to do is make a baby, everything will fall in it's place, trust me.
---
Well, I agree with your partially. Not with the baby making part. There are other avenues where we can channel our mind. In this case, volunteering for IV, especially now will be fruitful.
No comments:
Post a Comment