engineer
10-03 03:30 PM
IV should propose a Premium Processing for FBI Namecheck/ Other Background checks. For certain extra fee UCIS/ FBI can do this on premium bases.
what you all think ?
what you all think ?
wallpaper 2010 Shia LaBeouf - GQ June
gondalguru
07-16 01:48 AM
Applying 485 through Spouse
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Priority date is Jan 2006, EB2-India category having approved I-140. My husband is in EB3-India having pd Jan'2004, already applied I-485 (140 is approved) and got his EAD and AP. He is already using his EAD. I am a dependent in his I-485 but did not use my EAD and still continuing on H1-B.
Since my case is EB2-India which is going to be current in August'2008. Am I eligible to apply for I-485 me being the primary and my husband being my dependent? If so would there be any problem when USCIS adjudicates my case?
Your valuable response is highly appreciated.
Interfiling I-485 is not possible in your case. Recommended option will be to file a second I-485 set to use your EB2 category benefit. Again talk to you attorney and get his expert advise.
Copy - Paste from usvisahelp website forum/blog
What if my spouse and I both have approved/ pending I-140s?
Some of our clients who have pending or approved I-140 petitions also have a spouse with a pending/ approved I-140 petition. The question arises of which I-140 petition to attach the I-485 filing to. This determination depends on several factors, including which spouse has greater job security; whether one spouse wishes to leave his/her employer; whether one spouse is in a preference category for which visa numbers will become available more quickly, etc.
In a recent meeting with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), USCIS officials stated that while the regulations do not prohibit the filing of multiple adjustment of status applications by one alien, if one person does file two such applications, they may pick one to deny since both cannot be approved. USCIS also stated that where one alien is the principal applicant and the other is the derivative, the I-485 applications cannot be transferred to the other spouse’s I-140 petition. Instead, the pending I-485s must be withdrawn and new I-485s must be filed with the other spouse listed as the principal applicant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Priority date is Jan 2006, EB2-India category having approved I-140. My husband is in EB3-India having pd Jan'2004, already applied I-485 (140 is approved) and got his EAD and AP. He is already using his EAD. I am a dependent in his I-485 but did not use my EAD and still continuing on H1-B.
Since my case is EB2-India which is going to be current in August'2008. Am I eligible to apply for I-485 me being the primary and my husband being my dependent? If so would there be any problem when USCIS adjudicates my case?
Your valuable response is highly appreciated.
Interfiling I-485 is not possible in your case. Recommended option will be to file a second I-485 set to use your EB2 category benefit. Again talk to you attorney and get his expert advise.
Copy - Paste from usvisahelp website forum/blog
What if my spouse and I both have approved/ pending I-140s?
Some of our clients who have pending or approved I-140 petitions also have a spouse with a pending/ approved I-140 petition. The question arises of which I-140 petition to attach the I-485 filing to. This determination depends on several factors, including which spouse has greater job security; whether one spouse wishes to leave his/her employer; whether one spouse is in a preference category for which visa numbers will become available more quickly, etc.
In a recent meeting with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), USCIS officials stated that while the regulations do not prohibit the filing of multiple adjustment of status applications by one alien, if one person does file two such applications, they may pick one to deny since both cannot be approved. USCIS also stated that where one alien is the principal applicant and the other is the derivative, the I-485 applications cannot be transferred to the other spouse’s I-140 petition. Instead, the pending I-485s must be withdrawn and new I-485s must be filed with the other spouse listed as the principal applicant.
punjabi
03-29 09:51 AM
I didn't see any news like this on the website you mentioned. Can you please share the link?
2011 Shia LaBeouf - GQ Magazine
jsb
10-08 04:21 PM
Still waiting, a July 2 filer, for CC or receipts. What do these weekly updates by USCIS suggesting that they are through for receipts for dates in August mean when July 2 filers are still waiting. Anybody got any clue??
more...
amoljak
07-21 09:41 PM
All these statistics are based on wage rate specified on LCA. But in many cases LCA wage is treated as a minimum wage by companies. I don't think many companies get a new LCA when the salary rises, I don't think they are supposed to. It also does not include bonuses as companies often don't know what the bonus is going to be when they apply for an LCA.
Even based on the LCA salaries 10% H1Bs in 2006 were for 100K or more. (Unlike what the programmer's guild wrongly says (1%) )
Even based on the LCA salaries 10% H1Bs in 2006 were for 100K or more. (Unlike what the programmer's guild wrongly says (1%) )
prem_goel
04-07 08:12 AM
I think this is very well said. As much as I'd want the predictions to come true, somehow I sense the same observation as below. It appears this has been said in the past, but all we see is very little movement. Secondly, as I recall, DOS had hinted that there'll be advance for EB2 India, I don't know if they mentioned EB2 China? Has anyone seen DOS themselves talking about EB2 C? The reason I am raising this here, is that maybe when DOS had said "substantial movement for EB2 India", did they mean that India will move to China's date (From May to Jul 06, 3 months movement)?
Guys,
We rode the same wave even last year with many of the same Guru;s predicting the same movement to 2007 and what we saw 2 weeks movement . There was one person called QSHEMK who after that went completely out of the picture or has rejoined with a new name .
Also I have analyzed that people who have a date in 2008 somehow predict that the dates might move to 2008 and people who have a PD of July predict that dates will move to August . This is just an observation and nothing more , and if you go through the threads thats exactly what you will see.
I will be equally benefited as you all will if the predictions come true , but be well prepared for a major heartbreak also like last year .
While it takes a lot of effort from some of the members to crunch such numbers I would be first to extend my sincere gratitude to them for doing this , I would also recommend you all to take the analysis and predictions with a grain of salt and not to raise your hopes too much on these predictions.
It has seldom worked for the last 6 years at least . Hope it does this time . I speak from experience in IV since 2006.
Guys,
We rode the same wave even last year with many of the same Guru;s predicting the same movement to 2007 and what we saw 2 weeks movement . There was one person called QSHEMK who after that went completely out of the picture or has rejoined with a new name .
Also I have analyzed that people who have a date in 2008 somehow predict that the dates might move to 2008 and people who have a PD of July predict that dates will move to August . This is just an observation and nothing more , and if you go through the threads thats exactly what you will see.
I will be equally benefited as you all will if the predictions come true , but be well prepared for a major heartbreak also like last year .
While it takes a lot of effort from some of the members to crunch such numbers I would be first to extend my sincere gratitude to them for doing this , I would also recommend you all to take the analysis and predictions with a grain of salt and not to raise your hopes too much on these predictions.
It has seldom worked for the last 6 years at least . Hope it does this time . I speak from experience in IV since 2006.
more...
goel_ar
04-06 06:16 PM
This needs to be advertised on the forums here or on the home page. Most people don't know what IV's expenses are.
A generic breakdown of costs, without going into specifics, would help members understand the expenses and provide some transparency.
It may even motivate new members to contribute more :)
I completely agree !!!
A generic breakdown of costs, without going into specifics, would help members understand the expenses and provide some transparency.
It may even motivate new members to contribute more :)
I completely agree !!!
2010 more shia labeouf gq. shahuja
fatjoe
10-05 03:23 PM
I m Aug-04, TSC, EB-2 .....still waiting!
Opened SR 9/5/2009...got letter from CRIS...wait 6 months.
For my wife , we got 60 days wait letter.
I m the primary applicant!
Has anyone ,tried to contact Congressman/Senetor's office?
How can i do it?
I m in Orange county, CA.
I don't think calling Senator's office is going to be of great help. At least it didn't help in my case.
You may google to find out the senator(s) for your state. Every senator must be having their own web-site. Get the phone # from their web site. Call them and tell them that you need help in Immigration and explaing them briefly. They will take your SRC # and contact TSC on behalf of you.
Opened SR 9/5/2009...got letter from CRIS...wait 6 months.
For my wife , we got 60 days wait letter.
I m the primary applicant!
Has anyone ,tried to contact Congressman/Senetor's office?
How can i do it?
I m in Orange county, CA.
I don't think calling Senator's office is going to be of great help. At least it didn't help in my case.
You may google to find out the senator(s) for your state. Every senator must be having their own web-site. Get the phone # from their web site. Call them and tell them that you need help in Immigration and explaing them briefly. They will take your SRC # and contact TSC on behalf of you.
more...
anotherone
01-30 01:42 PM
that the offer was taken back based on EAD status.
anyway, I understand the lawyers need to be paid! I just want them to stop changing the rules in the middle of the game. Its been a long frigging wait and now this.
My hope is that there was some misunderstanding and that they will just quietly remake the offer and give me the job back.
At will employment does not mean you can discriminate. Its akin to firing someone if they get pregnant or me leaving because I did not like the skin color of my boss. Both are discriminatory if they can be proven. In this case it can be.
anyway, I understand the lawyers need to be paid! I just want them to stop changing the rules in the middle of the game. Its been a long frigging wait and now this.
My hope is that there was some misunderstanding and that they will just quietly remake the offer and give me the job back.
At will employment does not mean you can discriminate. Its akin to firing someone if they get pregnant or me leaving because I did not like the skin color of my boss. Both are discriminatory if they can be proven. In this case it can be.
hair Shia LaBeouf GQ
yabadaba
06-29 07:34 PM
murthy news flash
NewsFlash! DOS Expected to Revise July Visa Bulletin
Posted Jun 29, 2007
�MurthyDotCom
We have received news from the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) that they have reliable information that the July Visa Bulletin will be revised on Monday, July 2nd, or Tuesday, July 3rd. This Visa Bulletin is expected to retrogress many of the categories that were announced as being "Current" for July. It is expected that at least some of the categories will become completely "unavailable." The reason for this is that the USCIS apparently engaged in extraordinary efforts to approve cases in June, once there was some forward movement of the Visa Bulletin. They did this to try to avoid the tide of cases expected in July. Each green card approval uses one visa number. If the numbers are all used for the year, then the DOS will issue a revised Visa Bulletin reflecting "unavailable" in the particular category or categories.
�MurthyDotCom
DOS Input
�MurthyDotCom
While there is no 100 percent assurance about this matter, we at the Murthy Law Firm were given a 95-98 percent confirmation of the expectation regarding the Visa Bulletin by a very reliable source. The most vulnerable categories, of course, are those that are typically the victims of retrogression: EB2 and EB3 for India, China, and (potentially) Mexico. If this unprecedented action should occur, it will mean is that the USCIS will reject I-485 cases based upon the anticipated Visa Bulletin revision, if it should, in fact indicate that visa numbers are not available in a particular category.
�MurthyDotCom
Legal Fight Brewing
�MurthyDotCom
There is substantial legal wrangling ongoing because of the anticipation of this unprecedented occurrence. The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) has announced plans to file suit against the USCIS for any cases rejected due to a revised Visa Bulletin.
�MurthyDotCom
Conclusion
�MurthyDotCom
It is difficult to formulate words in reaction to this matter. So, for the time being, we will let our clients and readers know that our full sympathies are with them, as they face yet another potential disappointment. We also let them know that we have been long-time supporters and contributors to AILF and we will fully do our part to fight what comes.
�MurthyDotCom
Please return to this page for updates on this topic.
NewsFlash! DOS Expected to Revise July Visa Bulletin
Posted Jun 29, 2007
�MurthyDotCom
We have received news from the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) that they have reliable information that the July Visa Bulletin will be revised on Monday, July 2nd, or Tuesday, July 3rd. This Visa Bulletin is expected to retrogress many of the categories that were announced as being "Current" for July. It is expected that at least some of the categories will become completely "unavailable." The reason for this is that the USCIS apparently engaged in extraordinary efforts to approve cases in June, once there was some forward movement of the Visa Bulletin. They did this to try to avoid the tide of cases expected in July. Each green card approval uses one visa number. If the numbers are all used for the year, then the DOS will issue a revised Visa Bulletin reflecting "unavailable" in the particular category or categories.
�MurthyDotCom
DOS Input
�MurthyDotCom
While there is no 100 percent assurance about this matter, we at the Murthy Law Firm were given a 95-98 percent confirmation of the expectation regarding the Visa Bulletin by a very reliable source. The most vulnerable categories, of course, are those that are typically the victims of retrogression: EB2 and EB3 for India, China, and (potentially) Mexico. If this unprecedented action should occur, it will mean is that the USCIS will reject I-485 cases based upon the anticipated Visa Bulletin revision, if it should, in fact indicate that visa numbers are not available in a particular category.
�MurthyDotCom
Legal Fight Brewing
�MurthyDotCom
There is substantial legal wrangling ongoing because of the anticipation of this unprecedented occurrence. The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) has announced plans to file suit against the USCIS for any cases rejected due to a revised Visa Bulletin.
�MurthyDotCom
Conclusion
�MurthyDotCom
It is difficult to formulate words in reaction to this matter. So, for the time being, we will let our clients and readers know that our full sympathies are with them, as they face yet another potential disappointment. We also let them know that we have been long-time supporters and contributors to AILF and we will fully do our part to fight what comes.
�MurthyDotCom
Please return to this page for updates on this topic.
more...
eb_retrogession
01-27 04:56 PM
1.
RNC Bows to Bush, Kills Immigration Resolution
By John Gizzi
Human Events Online, January 22, 2006
. . .
Given the growing chasm between the Administration and GOP grass-roots activists on the issue of illegal immigration, the Pullen measure could well have paved the way for the most incendiary debate at an RNC meeting since the party�s ruling members eight years ago voted down a measure to deny funding to candidates opposed to a ban on partial birth abortion.
. . .
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/blog-detail.php?id=11790
2.
The Illegal Immigration Lobby
By Don Feder
GrasstopsUSA.com, January 17, 2006
. . .
Similarly, every call for immigration reform is answered with lusty shouts of racism by the self-styled champions of �immigrant rights.�
You want to start protecting our borders? You�re a racist. You think illegal aliens are responsible for a disproportionate share of crime, disease, poverty and social disintegration? You�re a racist. You believe America has a national language, and it isn�t Spanish? You�re a xenophobic, hate-monger (even if you�re an immigrant or the grandchild of immigrants).
. . .
http://www.grasstopsusa.com/011706.html
3.
Threat to Immigration Reform
San Antonio Express-News, January 23, 2006
. . .
Illegal immigration is a hot-button issue these days, and calls for a border fence spark fierce support among some segments of society.
That support is misplaced; undocumented workers who risk death to cross the border will not be deterred by a wall.
. . .
http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/editorials/stories/MYSA012306.1O.tancredo3ed.210fd555.html
4.
What's FAIR Got to Do With It?
By Tom Barry
International Relations Center, January 19, 2006
The House's approval of the Sensenbrenner immigration reform bill in mid-December was a clear signal that the most virulent restrictionists were in control of the immigration policy debate.
Sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, the Border Protection, Anti-Terrorism, and Illegal Control Act calls for the extension of a fence along a third of the 2,000 mile U.S.-Mexico border, involves local law enforcement and other government officials in immigration enforcement, and denies due-process of law for immigrants. The bill sparked a spate of international criticism of rising anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States , and raised alarm among immigrant communities and their advocates.
. . .
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/3053
RNC Bows to Bush, Kills Immigration Resolution
By John Gizzi
Human Events Online, January 22, 2006
. . .
Given the growing chasm between the Administration and GOP grass-roots activists on the issue of illegal immigration, the Pullen measure could well have paved the way for the most incendiary debate at an RNC meeting since the party�s ruling members eight years ago voted down a measure to deny funding to candidates opposed to a ban on partial birth abortion.
. . .
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/blog-detail.php?id=11790
2.
The Illegal Immigration Lobby
By Don Feder
GrasstopsUSA.com, January 17, 2006
. . .
Similarly, every call for immigration reform is answered with lusty shouts of racism by the self-styled champions of �immigrant rights.�
You want to start protecting our borders? You�re a racist. You think illegal aliens are responsible for a disproportionate share of crime, disease, poverty and social disintegration? You�re a racist. You believe America has a national language, and it isn�t Spanish? You�re a xenophobic, hate-monger (even if you�re an immigrant or the grandchild of immigrants).
. . .
http://www.grasstopsusa.com/011706.html
3.
Threat to Immigration Reform
San Antonio Express-News, January 23, 2006
. . .
Illegal immigration is a hot-button issue these days, and calls for a border fence spark fierce support among some segments of society.
That support is misplaced; undocumented workers who risk death to cross the border will not be deterred by a wall.
. . .
http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/editorials/stories/MYSA012306.1O.tancredo3ed.210fd555.html
4.
What's FAIR Got to Do With It?
By Tom Barry
International Relations Center, January 19, 2006
The House's approval of the Sensenbrenner immigration reform bill in mid-December was a clear signal that the most virulent restrictionists were in control of the immigration policy debate.
Sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, the Border Protection, Anti-Terrorism, and Illegal Control Act calls for the extension of a fence along a third of the 2,000 mile U.S.-Mexico border, involves local law enforcement and other government officials in immigration enforcement, and denies due-process of law for immigrants. The bill sparked a spate of international criticism of rising anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States , and raised alarm among immigrant communities and their advocates.
. . .
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/3053
hot Shia LaBeouf GQ Magazine April
needhelp!
01-22 12:15 PM
Saralayar, if you create a new thread with main topic as action to Vote on Change.gov, it may get more attention, and IV members can also send that link to their GC holder friends.
more...
house shia the shias cover Historic site, shia size kb x Shia+labeouf+gq+cover
bayarea07
09-15 03:57 PM
How about signing for efax,its free for first 30 days and using that send Faxes to senators.
Its easy you just send a email to the Fax Number with document as a attachement
http://home.efax.com/s/r/efax-brand9?VID=33675&gclid=CIL40rnJ3pUCFQykagodvDFGXw
Why we cannot have a EFax facility on this site so that people can send fax to senators.
Sometimes People find Efaxing easier than calling
(especially passive viewers of this site)
Its easy you just send a email to the Fax Number with document as a attachement
http://home.efax.com/s/r/efax-brand9?VID=33675&gclid=CIL40rnJ3pUCFQykagodvDFGXw
Why we cannot have a EFax facility on this site so that people can send fax to senators.
Sometimes People find Efaxing easier than calling
(especially passive viewers of this site)
tattoo labeouf gq. revenge Shia
Green.Tech
09-21 10:03 AM
Finally, we got the approval emails for self & wife.
I had got an email from TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov last friday (09/17/2010) with the update below-
1: The review was complete
2: Visa numbers were requested 2 months ago and all security/prints are current
3: Files have been forwarded to officers for completion.
In my case the email to SCOPSSCATA@dhs.gov helped a lot. They in turn sent an email to TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov to step up the processing.
As others have mentioned IV has played a big part throughout this journey. Thank you again.
Congratulations ski_dude. Your long wait is finally over!
Is it ok to attach documents to these e-mails to TSC?
I had got an email from TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov last friday (09/17/2010) with the update below-
1: The review was complete
2: Visa numbers were requested 2 months ago and all security/prints are current
3: Files have been forwarded to officers for completion.
In my case the email to SCOPSSCATA@dhs.gov helped a lot. They in turn sent an email to TSC.Ncscfollowup@dhs.gov to step up the processing.
As others have mentioned IV has played a big part throughout this journey. Thank you again.
Congratulations ski_dude. Your long wait is finally over!
Is it ok to attach documents to these e-mails to TSC?
more...
pictures shia labeouf gq photo shoot.
vdlrao
04-05 03:50 PM
I am posting this from Ron Gotcher's forum-
"Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11040563 (posted Apr. 5, 2011)"
Following-up ----------------------------------------are used. However, a rapid advance could spur a surge in demand that could impact the cut-off dates later in the year. The May Visa Bulletin, --------------of the year.
Is that mean they are going to move the PDs much further and again move back during the end of the year!!
So isn't this implying that the PDs will advance very very further than the available visa numbers!!!!!!!!!!
.
"Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11040563 (posted Apr. 5, 2011)"
Following-up ----------------------------------------are used. However, a rapid advance could spur a surge in demand that could impact the cut-off dates later in the year. The May Visa Bulletin, --------------of the year.
Is that mean they are going to move the PDs much further and again move back during the end of the year!!
So isn't this implying that the PDs will advance very very further than the available visa numbers!!!!!!!!!!
.
dresses shia labeouf nakeed shia
drona
07-11 12:19 AM
You are missing the "Support from Bollywood" article from your website! We will keep reporting here. Thanks for doing a great job.
more...
makeup 2011 2011 shia labeouf gq 2010
asanghi
05-16 04:22 PM
I talked to my immigration about this today. My wife is on h4 and her h1-b is not selected in this year lottery process. I wanted her to go a school which issues CPT in less than one year so that she can start work. But my lawyer strongly recommended not to change her status from H4 to F1. My PD is 24 March 2005 EB2. Lawyer told me that it might cause a problem for my wife to get the GC on her I-485 application. Lawyer said some of her clients got through without a problem and some of her clients have problem regarding status change from h4 to f1. Fianlly i decided not to take that risk. I'm still waiting to file I-485.
My lawyer also strongly advised me against converting her H4 to F1. However since there was no visibility so I asked him what to do to get my wife working status. It was then he advised me that if she wants to start working badly then go ahead and apply for F1 but don't travel out of country while on F1.
My lawyer also strongly advised me against converting her H4 to F1. However since there was no visibility so I asked him what to do to get my wife working status. It was then he advised me that if she wants to start working badly then go ahead and apply for F1 but don't travel out of country while on F1.
girlfriend house pictures labeouf gq shia
Macaca
12-05 03:59 PM
JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, Lou, you�ve been well known for years now, especially dealing with the issue of American corporations exporting jobs and criticizing that whole process of exporting American jobs overseas.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
hairstyles shia labeouf hand pictures
485Mbe4001
08-20 06:18 PM
if a change in interpretation is done intentionally, then USCIS admits they were allotting visas incorrectly during the previous years...if it were a public company, lawyers would be climbing over one another to file a class action suit...unfortunately all we can do is write letters, make phone calls and pray :rolleyes:
Ron says at this site
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
that the change in interpretation is done intentionally. I am not sure if we can call it a mistake any more. For some agency to go all out and claim that they have "reviewed" and are therefore going to do things in a new way is kind of casting things in stone.
Thoughts.
Ron says at this site
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
that the change in interpretation is done intentionally. I am not sure if we can call it a mistake any more. For some agency to go all out and claim that they have "reviewed" and are therefore going to do things in a new way is kind of casting things in stone.
Thoughts.
smaram1
08-17 12:57 PM
So you still think that 2 weeks logic still works :)...
Your prediction for urself and gbof went on fine :)..
I have no clue where my file is..
Wait continues for me
Your prediction for urself and gbof went on fine :)..
I have no clue where my file is..
Wait continues for me
asanghi
05-16 04:20 PM
Do you know how much time it will take to get that status change? What if your PD is no longer current?
Yes it is a concern that I have to address. However I see 2 ways to work around it.
1. Travel out of country get H4 stamping done based on my current H1B status
or
2. I apply for I-485 and add my wife later to the application when we have received her H4. In this case, once I have applied, I can add my wife to the application even if the dates are not current at that time.
Yes it is a concern that I have to address. However I see 2 ways to work around it.
1. Travel out of country get H4 stamping done based on my current H1B status
or
2. I apply for I-485 and add my wife later to the application when we have received her H4. In this case, once I have applied, I can add my wife to the application even if the dates are not current at that time.
