drona
07-11 02:49 PM
Let's discuss ways to communicate with the Governor and to make him aware of our situation. I am going to do some research on his views on immigration but I think it might be good.
As Schwarzenegger has said multiple times:
"I think the most important thing to note is I am a champion of immigrants. I promote immigration. I am an immigrant myself. I think it's extremely important that we do it in a legal way."
�Polls Push Governor to the Border�, LA Times, April 30, 2005
http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/050503_schwarzenegger.htm
As Schwarzenegger has said multiple times:
"I think the most important thing to note is I am a champion of immigrants. I promote immigration. I am an immigrant myself. I think it's extremely important that we do it in a legal way."
�Polls Push Governor to the Border�, LA Times, April 30, 2005
http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/050503_schwarzenegger.htm
wallpaper on Banner: Emma Stone
vin13
01-10 08:58 AM
What do you mean by
"Can an attorney force me to file AC-21 even if i dont want to?"
Are you asking if the attorney would file the change of employment letter?
Please clarify your question
"Can an attorney force me to file AC-21 even if i dont want to?"
Are you asking if the attorney would file the change of employment letter?
Please clarify your question
needhelp!
11-16 01:09 PM
http://picasaweb.google.com/niloufer78/DFWDiwaliMela2007
2011 Pink Peony: ~Emma Stone Quote
dsneyog
01-15 09:49 AM
Just checked my case status and it show PDA
Post-Decision Activity
On January 14, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I131 APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283
So it should be in mail in days right
Should I do happy dance now???
Post-Decision Activity
On January 14, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I131 APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283
So it should be in mail in days right
Should I do happy dance now???
more...
geve
11-08 01:45 PM
Austin, Houstin and Dalls not less than 10000 H1B candiadates. Atleaset target for 1000 (10%).
Come on guys.
Come on guys.
tigerk
10-02 01:52 PM
You can apply. Depends on type of loan. May not require a cosigner also. Enjoy US free market economy.
Can you please provide some more information on applying for a student loan without a co-signer, when you are not a GC holder or US Citizen? Thanks
Can you please provide some more information on applying for a student loan without a co-signer, when you are not a GC holder or US Citizen? Thanks
more...
gc_chahiye
07-16 11:57 PM
My 140 was filed last week and I don't have the receipt number. Can I file 485 without I140 receipt number?
From what I have heard so far, you need the receipt number. Talk to your lawyer asap.
From what I have heard so far, you need the receipt number. Talk to your lawyer asap.
2010 emma stone yum gif. friends
tnite
06-27 11:11 AM
I filed my 485 last week and didn't file for EAD. My spouse is filing 485 next week and i will be a dependent in that application. If i apply for EAD in his application, can i use it to invoke AC21 if i have to change job after 6 months under my 485?
I have read here that EAD is not necessary for AC21, but my lawyer said its needed.
You cannot file 2 AOS petitions. Did your lawyer tell you that?
To apply for EAD thru your husband you would have to apply for I485 again , which you cannot.
You can file one AOS and one CP
I have read here that EAD is not necessary for AC21, but my lawyer said its needed.
You cannot file 2 AOS petitions. Did your lawyer tell you that?
To apply for EAD thru your husband you would have to apply for I485 again , which you cannot.
You can file one AOS and one CP
more...
papajon
06-19 10:06 AM
You will get your H1B extended pending appeal on PERM.
Thank you! So technically, there is nothing for me to worry at this time? Is this correct? I know I am losing time but my priority is not current...
Thank you! So technically, there is nothing for me to worry at this time? Is this correct? I know I am losing time but my priority is not current...
hair Emma Stone and Ryan
needhelp!
11-16 01:09 PM
http://picasaweb.google.com/niloufer78/DFWDiwaliMela2007
more...
flex
10-02 02:23 PM
Eilsoe - save some of that inspiration for the game.
hot Emma Stone covers ELLE
diptam
08-14 03:58 PM
This is going crazy - If your Receipt doesn't comes in another 3-4 weeks will you Diefard fans of Robin Williams planning to visit him or send him flowers ??
We all are going nuts beyond limit - I'm not excluding myself :D
I am also a July 2nd 7:55 filer at NSC, signed for by R Williams. No receipts yet!
PD 04/2006 EB2 INDIA
I-140 NSC AP 10/2006
SELF:
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
WIFE
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
We all are going nuts beyond limit - I'm not excluding myself :D
I am also a July 2nd 7:55 filer at NSC, signed for by R Williams. No receipts yet!
PD 04/2006 EB2 INDIA
I-140 NSC AP 10/2006
SELF:
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
WIFE
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-131 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
I-765 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND Pending
more...
house Emma Stone is fast becoming
eastindia
04-26 02:53 PM
Can you please clear your point for asking these here ?
I want to know if some of us knew of Green card wait time when we applied or came to USA?
I want to know if some of us knew of Green card wait time when we applied or came to USA?
tattoo Emma Stone and Disney star
sbajaj80
09-12 02:49 PM
Thanks tnite. Enjoy!!!
I am July2 filer at NSC....based on LUD, I suspect, it has gone to TSC and no information ever since....
Where do guys see the LUD? And what number do you call the USCIS on? Thanx.
I am July2 filer at NSC....based on LUD, I suspect, it has gone to TSC and no information ever since....
Where do guys see the LUD? And what number do you call the USCIS on? Thanx.
more...
pictures Quote This Post :: PM
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
dresses Emma Stone is pretty dang
pal351
05-27 04:35 PM
I called and my employer called them. they said case is ending no further info. is available.
thanks for replys.
thanks for replys.
more...
makeup quote 1 floor. Emma Stone
transpass
08-04 11:17 AM
Hey, great example and at a good time.
....Now that PD is current for a large number of EB2s, you will see approvals coming randomly (not in order of PDs or RDs); largely due to inefficiency of USCIS. They simply dont have enough resources or mechanism to utilize current resources to deal with what they are dealing with. And so, we come across issues like these. It is unfortunate and sad that things at USCIS are running worse than any government office in third world countries....
May be we should suggest CIS that anyone of us at IV can VOLUNTEER for CIS so that they have more resources...
I think we can do a fantastic job in sorting the thousands of mail pieces according RD, PD, etc. In that way everyone will be happy...The immigrant community will be happy because now everything is in FIFO order and CIS will be happy because they cannot be blamed for approving cases haphazardly without following FIFO rule...:D
....Now that PD is current for a large number of EB2s, you will see approvals coming randomly (not in order of PDs or RDs); largely due to inefficiency of USCIS. They simply dont have enough resources or mechanism to utilize current resources to deal with what they are dealing with. And so, we come across issues like these. It is unfortunate and sad that things at USCIS are running worse than any government office in third world countries....
May be we should suggest CIS that anyone of us at IV can VOLUNTEER for CIS so that they have more resources...
I think we can do a fantastic job in sorting the thousands of mail pieces according RD, PD, etc. In that way everyone will be happy...The immigrant community will be happy because now everything is in FIFO order and CIS will be happy because they cannot be blamed for approving cases haphazardly without following FIFO rule...:D
girlfriend Emma Stone Skins amp; Layouts
KbK
04-09 11:50 PM
Hi friends
I am sure lot of applicants are hold up in labor certification at Backlog Processing Centers. The implication of this delay are; even if the current bill is passed and all the provisions in the current bill are implemented, still it will be of NO USE to the applicants who are awaiting labor certification.
The other option is to apply through PERM and try to get certification quickly. But the catch here is, if the PERM application is approved then the original labor application is cancelled and priority date would become 2006. For example, if someone's application is pending since year 2002 and now if that person applies through PERM and if it gets approved within three months then that person would loose the priority date of 2002 and will have a priority date of 2006. If the green card numbers are not current then it would be a big disadvantage.
On the other hand if someone had applied through PERM in 2004 and his/her labor is approved then, with this new proposed bill, there is a good chance that he/she might get green card immediately because priority dates would have moved up to 2004. The reason I think this is a possibility is because, the quota numbers are going to increase substantially and BPC is very slow in approving labor certification. Hence there is a good chance that priority dates would move up fast.
If this happens then people who had applied earlier and waited for such a long time, will be at very big disadvantage.
I propose that we should request for change in law to allow existing applicants to apply through PERM and keep the old priority dates even after the application is approved.
This will not only help all of us but also help the authorities; as it would reduce the work load on BPC.
Friends at the end, may I request you to please send your thoughts on this?
Thanks
I am sure lot of applicants are hold up in labor certification at Backlog Processing Centers. The implication of this delay are; even if the current bill is passed and all the provisions in the current bill are implemented, still it will be of NO USE to the applicants who are awaiting labor certification.
The other option is to apply through PERM and try to get certification quickly. But the catch here is, if the PERM application is approved then the original labor application is cancelled and priority date would become 2006. For example, if someone's application is pending since year 2002 and now if that person applies through PERM and if it gets approved within three months then that person would loose the priority date of 2002 and will have a priority date of 2006. If the green card numbers are not current then it would be a big disadvantage.
On the other hand if someone had applied through PERM in 2004 and his/her labor is approved then, with this new proposed bill, there is a good chance that he/she might get green card immediately because priority dates would have moved up to 2004. The reason I think this is a possibility is because, the quota numbers are going to increase substantially and BPC is very slow in approving labor certification. Hence there is a good chance that priority dates would move up fast.
If this happens then people who had applied earlier and waited for such a long time, will be at very big disadvantage.
I propose that we should request for change in law to allow existing applicants to apply through PERM and keep the old priority dates even after the application is approved.
This will not only help all of us but also help the authorities; as it would reduce the work load on BPC.
Friends at the end, may I request you to please send your thoughts on this?
Thanks
hairstyles Emma Stone i lt;3 so much!
shanti
08-03 02:31 PM
Ok, what I posted is from these guidelines http://www.hooyou.com/lc/perm_eb2vseb3.html , EB2 used to be easier before PERM, it is also possible if position is job zone 4 but SVP is 8 or higher to go via EB2- PERM, I hope you are right in disagreeing though.
ItIsNotFunny
09-22 03:06 PM
Please post how many people you called!
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
wandmaker
02-24 12:22 AM
Case reopened or reconsidered based on USCIS determination, and the case is now pendiDid anyone see this kind of status on their approved H1b application?
Please share your views.
The approved H1B case status will change to this status only when (1) the employer requests to withdraw/cancel the H1B petition or (2) USCIS reopened the case due to fraud or misrepresentation. In your case, your employer must have notifed USCIS.
Please share your views.
The approved H1B case status will change to this status only when (1) the employer requests to withdraw/cancel the H1B petition or (2) USCIS reopened the case due to fraud or misrepresentation. In your case, your employer must have notifed USCIS.
No comments:
Post a Comment