dan19
05-25 01:09 PM
PD : Sep 2002 (RIR)
45 Day letter: Dec 2004 (After that no news)
I had 2 queries when the case was pending with the state labour office before being shipped to BEC.
The issues were related to low wages and insufficient experience. The company fixed the issues and ammended the Labour petition.
Will that cause a problem when it comes to the approval stage? Again, will that negatively affect I-140?
45 Day letter: Dec 2004 (After that no news)
I had 2 queries when the case was pending with the state labour office before being shipped to BEC.
The issues were related to low wages and insufficient experience. The company fixed the issues and ammended the Labour petition.
Will that cause a problem when it comes to the approval stage? Again, will that negatively affect I-140?
wallpaper rob-lowe-post.jpg
Marphad
07-06 11:37 AM
Can you please let us know what gives you the right to call for a change the leadership?
Not that I say we need change, but this is a public organization. Everyone has a right to call for election. There is nothing wrong.
Only issue is, whoever wants to contest has to come out with public profile as mentioned by someone before. There are only few people who are openly public and with known real identity on this forum - thats sad!
I am surprised to see that IV has 450K asset! Where did that number come from?
Not that I say we need change, but this is a public organization. Everyone has a right to call for election. There is nothing wrong.
Only issue is, whoever wants to contest has to come out with public profile as mentioned by someone before. There are only few people who are openly public and with known real identity on this forum - thats sad!
I am surprised to see that IV has 450K asset! Where did that number come from?
swarnapuri
06-30 12:10 PM
There is a Similar thread in immigrationportal.com... where the statuses are maintained in a nice Excel sheet with lots of reports. It tracks the statuses of around 1800 people....
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1392408#post1392408
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1392408#post1392408
2011 Actor rob louise brooks, who has the vanity Vanity+fair+magazine+rob+lowe
ps57002
07-27 03:38 PM
any recent approvals...please let us know..give us hope....
more...
gunabcd
06-02 08:35 PM
Looks like most people are scared because of some kinda assumption that the politicians are determined to screw Indians and so have given the common sense a back seat. When the PERM system came in effect did they force the old labor petitioners to file in the new system? I've never heard of a law/provision that made people file a new and the money and time spent in earlier filing was wasted. It just does not make sense (there will be a class action law suit, if it happens).
So here's what i THINK: As long as immigration is accepting the I-140 petitions and you receive the receipt notice, you are in the old system, meaning your application is still valid and you are in line for GC. They will have to keep the old system running for the applications filed before the new system came if effect. This May 15/May 21, 2007/2008 cut-off date discussion just does not make sense.
It's possible that if your labor got cleared(backlog or PERM) after the new system is in effect, and in the new system there's no need of labor, then your labor will be obsolete (or wasted), but as per the old system concept you haven't lost anything as you can still go for the next step and file I-140 in the new system (although that I-140 may get processed based on new points system).
Looking at some of the ridiculous ammendments that have been added in the bill, i think the chances of this bill being passed are less than 50%, just my feeling.
-Gunvant
EB3 Labor filed Sep 2004
Labor approved(PBEC) Jan 2007
I-140 filed Apr-19-2007
PP filed May-31-2007
So here's what i THINK: As long as immigration is accepting the I-140 petitions and you receive the receipt notice, you are in the old system, meaning your application is still valid and you are in line for GC. They will have to keep the old system running for the applications filed before the new system came if effect. This May 15/May 21, 2007/2008 cut-off date discussion just does not make sense.
It's possible that if your labor got cleared(backlog or PERM) after the new system is in effect, and in the new system there's no need of labor, then your labor will be obsolete (or wasted), but as per the old system concept you haven't lost anything as you can still go for the next step and file I-140 in the new system (although that I-140 may get processed based on new points system).
Looking at some of the ridiculous ammendments that have been added in the bill, i think the chances of this bill being passed are less than 50%, just my feeling.
-Gunvant
EB3 Labor filed Sep 2004
Labor approved(PBEC) Jan 2007
I-140 filed Apr-19-2007
PP filed May-31-2007
srikondoji
08-02 03:42 PM
I have talked to a representative and he very patiently explained me about the mess.
He clearly and very clearly told me that they have a deadline to send all receipts for June end and July 2nd filers by friday (tomorrow) or worst case monday.
He mentioned that they are working hard to meet this deadline.
Hope this clears the anxiety.
This is true for NSC only.
He clearly and very clearly told me that they have a deadline to send all receipts for June end and July 2nd filers by friday (tomorrow) or worst case monday.
He mentioned that they are working hard to meet this deadline.
Hope this clears the anxiety.
This is true for NSC only.
more...
green_world
09-12 07:19 PM
How do I place the google order? This is going to be my first contribution..
2010 Rob Lowe Calls Charlie Sheen
geesee
03-03 01:57 PM
I don't think EB3-I would be U for more than a month, as I keep saying this year EB3 would be getting some share of spill-over. So even if it becomes U for April that would be temporarily and it would return back in May.
Thank's
MDix
I dont know why people add signature in a forum post ?
Regards
Geesee
Thank's
MDix
I dont know why people add signature in a forum post ?
Regards
Geesee
more...
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
hair Vanity+fair+magazine+rob+lowe Published the mar , detailsvanity fair
gc_bucs
03-10 11:28 AM
I'm not sure if the IV members were aware of this or not.
The following is from http://www.immigration-law.com/ which in turn is quoting AILA.
"However, the report indicates that the Judiciary Committee is working on a tight schedule as the Senate Majority leader Bill Frist reportedly threatened that unless the Committee completes the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill by March 27, 2006, he would bypass the Senate Judiciary Committee and attempt to have his own Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill totally focusing on the border security and enforcement issues only passed by the full Senate. It is thus critically important that the Judiciary Committee passes the bill in one form or another by March 27, 2006. Please stay tuned to this website for the breath-taking development. "
The following is from http://www.immigration-law.com/ which in turn is quoting AILA.
"However, the report indicates that the Judiciary Committee is working on a tight schedule as the Senate Majority leader Bill Frist reportedly threatened that unless the Committee completes the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill by March 27, 2006, he would bypass the Senate Judiciary Committee and attempt to have his own Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill totally focusing on the border security and enforcement issues only passed by the full Senate. It is thus critically important that the Judiciary Committee passes the bill in one form or another by March 27, 2006. Please stay tuned to this website for the breath-taking development. "
more...
jgh_res
07-20 03:09 PM
Contact TANA. I think they donated a million or so to clinton's.
Lest contact USINPAC!!!!!!!
Lest see what they can do...
Lest contact USINPAC!!!!!!!
Lest see what they can do...
hot Rob Pattinson V. Rob Lowe:
bkam
04-25 08:35 PM
Learning01 has stollen the idea ! :-)
I have already expressed my intention to sue the US government for the money I have put for so many years in the SS and Medicare funds when I leave the country. There will be always a greedy American lawyer (only one ?! :-) ready to get this done for one third of the prey. And I will still get back two thirds of my money. Much better than nothing.
And imagine that a bunch of "mirage chasers" like me unite and make it a class-suit, and everybody around the world who has been legally here and paid his taxes hears that and asks for his/her money back... The tick-skin-fat-ass politicians and government officials will suddenly become very nice, considered and cooperative (now they are just nice), the PBEC would miraculously clear the backlog within 6 months, the retrogression will disappear etc, etc.
Well, most probably all this will never happen but you never know, the snowball may start rolling... They are too many frustrated people in this mess...
I have already expressed my intention to sue the US government for the money I have put for so many years in the SS and Medicare funds when I leave the country. There will be always a greedy American lawyer (only one ?! :-) ready to get this done for one third of the prey. And I will still get back two thirds of my money. Much better than nothing.
And imagine that a bunch of "mirage chasers" like me unite and make it a class-suit, and everybody around the world who has been legally here and paid his taxes hears that and asks for his/her money back... The tick-skin-fat-ass politicians and government officials will suddenly become very nice, considered and cooperative (now they are just nice), the PBEC would miraculously clear the backlog within 6 months, the retrogression will disappear etc, etc.
Well, most probably all this will never happen but you never know, the snowball may start rolling... They are too many frustrated people in this mess...
more...
house the cover of Vanity Fair#39;s
vishwak
10-22 08:24 AM
Could you please provide some more information regarding this porting from EB3 to EB2?
Check this Thread...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum88-priority-dates-transfers-and-post-140-approval-options/18721-eb3-to-eb2-porting.html
Check this Thread...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum88-priority-dates-transfers-and-post-140-approval-options/18721-eb3-to-eb2-porting.html
tattoo I will never get over Rob Lowe
jonty_11
07-05 12:56 PM
Send email using AILA link to 20 senators an counting...Please continue to do...this is as important as campaigning for SKILL Bill...
Lets make ppl aware of waht injustice has been thrust upon us by the impotent DOC and USCIS combo.
Lets make ppl aware of waht injustice has been thrust upon us by the impotent DOC and USCIS combo.
more...
pictures rob lowe vanity fair photo
a1b2c3
09-10 12:08 PM
Just when you thought you had it you missed it :D
I think they will eventually open up EB2, unless their plan is to clear EB3-I first (which would not be unfair I think).
See one of my earlier posts, one of the core issues is the sudden forward and then sudden backward movements in the dates.
If the demand is anticipated correctly, there shouldn't be need for closing the window at all!
I think they will eventually open up EB2, unless their plan is to clear EB3-I first (which would not be unfair I think).
See one of my earlier posts, one of the core issues is the sudden forward and then sudden backward movements in the dates.
If the demand is anticipated correctly, there shouldn't be need for closing the window at all!
dresses Rob Lowe, Annie Leibovitz
mjdup
01-02 11:51 AM
That's very impressive yabadaba, you have excellent writing skills !
more...
makeup Rob Lowe talks to Vanity Fair
GCwaitforever
12-26 02:30 PM
http://www.cyrusmehta.com/News_Cyrus.asp?news_id=1426&intPage=85
II. News from the Department of Labor (�DOL�)
Progress at the Backlog Elimination Centers (�BEC�)
William Carlson, Administrator of the Office of Foreign Labor Certification, said that the BEC is on target for meeting its goal to clear up the backlog of Traditional and RIR cases by September 30, 2007. The BEC started with 365,000 cases that were filed prior to PERM. As of December 2006, 220,000 have been closed out and 142,000 are still pending. Of the pending cases, 59% are Traditional Applications and 41% are RIR Applications.
II. News from the Department of Labor (�DOL�)
Progress at the Backlog Elimination Centers (�BEC�)
William Carlson, Administrator of the Office of Foreign Labor Certification, said that the BEC is on target for meeting its goal to clear up the backlog of Traditional and RIR cases by September 30, 2007. The BEC started with 365,000 cases that were filed prior to PERM. As of December 2006, 220,000 have been closed out and 142,000 are still pending. Of the pending cases, 59% are Traditional Applications and 41% are RIR Applications.
girlfriend rob lowe vanity fair photo
sc3
09-14 11:08 AM
This is really sad. I dont expect Eb2s to understand EB3's plight, but to blame the EB2 backlogs on EB3, and the false accusation that we are getting EADs out of turn -- that is simply disgusting. While you are at it, why dont you blame EB3s for all the ills in the world, say the war in Iraq, Darfur issue, the gas prices, terrorism, the housing collapse in USA, Nazi genocide. Please feel free to explode the list at your will. You are obviously more wizened than EB3s, so we might be doing things without our knowledge.
I hope there is more and more EB3 interfiling, so that these "holier-than-thou" EB2s get their misplaced sense of superiority smashed to smithereens, and get to know the pain of waiting for long periods of time.
Most EB2 justify the need for getting their GCs sooner is because they have been here longer (throwing out numbers like 1995, and such). They dont even realize that the actual "wait counter" starts after filing for GC. If you could not hold on to a job or joined a job that did not sponsor your GC earlier. that is your fault. Not USCIS' not EB3s' yours. Get it. YOURS!.
If you are so special take some time to read the law. Labour substitution was not defined in the laws, which is why it got explicitly junked. PD porting is part of the law.
If you want to work on an action item work on 5882.
I hope there is more and more EB3 interfiling, so that these "holier-than-thou" EB2s get their misplaced sense of superiority smashed to smithereens, and get to know the pain of waiting for long periods of time.
Most EB2 justify the need for getting their GCs sooner is because they have been here longer (throwing out numbers like 1995, and such). They dont even realize that the actual "wait counter" starts after filing for GC. If you could not hold on to a job or joined a job that did not sponsor your GC earlier. that is your fault. Not USCIS' not EB3s' yours. Get it. YOURS!.
If you are so special take some time to read the law. Labour substitution was not defined in the laws, which is why it got explicitly junked. PD porting is part of the law.
If you want to work on an action item work on 5882.
hairstyles Rob Lowe on Vanity Fair.
tikka
07-18 04:03 PM
I just upgraded my monthly contribution too!
thank you!
thank you!
jthomas
03-18 11:46 AM
mmm...didnt knew about this..After living and working here for ten years, i am still in-eligible for the tax rebate...phew!!!! (filed jointly, no SSN for my wife)..maybe i will claim it all next year....I am eternally optimistic :-)
I understand your point. How about we group everybody who won't be eligible for tax rebate this year and then write letters/fax to law makers, and others working in that area.
That should make our Highly skilled immigrant community visible. Newspaper editors are always in a look out for new articles. Why don't we make an article and give it to all our local newspaper editors.
I understand your point. How about we group everybody who won't be eligible for tax rebate this year and then write letters/fax to law makers, and others working in that area.
That should make our Highly skilled immigrant community visible. Newspaper editors are always in a look out for new articles. Why don't we make an article and give it to all our local newspaper editors.
americandesi
05-02 11:10 PM
what king meant was that anyone could apply for 485 and get an EAD which has no work restrictions as a H1 and enjoy the same benifits someone with a GC holds..down the line(after years of wait) even if the 485 gets rejected he/she has njoyed all the privilages or work/travel by getting his/her AP/EAD...
well damn you king, issue GCs faster then!
King's statement doesn't make any sense. If you equate the same logic to GC holders, then they had enjoyed all the privileges of work/travel by getting his/her GC, even if their naturalization gets rejected down the line.
well damn you king, issue GCs faster then!
King's statement doesn't make any sense. If you equate the same logic to GC holders, then they had enjoyed all the privileges of work/travel by getting his/her GC, even if their naturalization gets rejected down the line.
No comments:
Post a Comment