wandmaker
07-14 04:42 PM
I have 140 approval notice in mail like 1.5yrs back...just today i put the reciept number on USCIS website and it says still pending..i called USCIS and they say they wont be able to discuss my case since 140 is employer specific only....my employer is sayin dont worry and dont bother about online status...i just want to make sure my 140 is really approved and USCIS has the correct update while lookin at my 485 file...i dont want them to put my 485 in hold just because of they thinkin 140 is not approved...
EB2 - Sept 04
As long as you have approval copy on hand, you have nothing to worry. You should be concerned only if the status reads as 'case reopened and pending'
EB2 - Sept 04
As long as you have approval copy on hand, you have nothing to worry. You should be concerned only if the status reads as 'case reopened and pending'
wallpaper casey anthony partying while daughter missing. Mother: Cindy Anthony wipes
leonqiu
03-06 01:39 PM
sorry, i forget to add, i am on i-485 waiting list, and have passed 180 days
pappu
08-23 11:00 AM
please continue to send mails to your local lawmakers regarding Skil Bill. Use the webfax too at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_iv_webfax&task=getContactDetails&Itemid=46
There are orgnizations that are opposed to this bill and are stronger than us. Only consistant efforts to make our voices heard would produce favorable results. We need letters comming from all members to these lawmakers so that when we lobby, these lawmakers already know that there are a lot of people who want this done and there is a broad support for such reforms.
FYI Numbersusa have been sending messages against this bill--
http://www.numbersusa.com/faxcenter?action=preview&ID=5665
--
Please do write your own mail to your local senator and congressman to communicate the problems faced by us.
The useful information is available here--
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
---
Please tell all your friends too.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_iv_webfax&task=getContactDetails&Itemid=46
There are orgnizations that are opposed to this bill and are stronger than us. Only consistant efforts to make our voices heard would produce favorable results. We need letters comming from all members to these lawmakers so that when we lobby, these lawmakers already know that there are a lot of people who want this done and there is a broad support for such reforms.
FYI Numbersusa have been sending messages against this bill--
http://www.numbersusa.com/faxcenter?action=preview&ID=5665
--
Please do write your own mail to your local senator and congressman to communicate the problems faced by us.
The useful information is available here--
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
---
Please tell all your friends too.
2011 Casey Anthony. Photo: AP
gc_chahiye
11-04 01:03 AM
http://www.usvisainfo.com/pages/8207.html
Any comments?
actually if you track the threads on immigrationportal.com, a ton of old-timers have gotten their GCs. A large number of these were EB3-India [2001-2004], so that 18k number does not look odd to me.
Does it look odd to you? Why?
Any comments?
actually if you track the threads on immigrationportal.com, a ton of old-timers have gotten their GCs. A large number of these were EB3-India [2001-2004], so that 18k number does not look odd to me.
Does it look odd to you? Why?
more...
cox
February 3rd, 2005, 01:06 AM
I agree with Anders. Diagonals are always a nice draw for the eye. Also, a little more DoF would be nice because the bottom right of the leaf is just creeping out of the focal plane. Cool leaf texture, good choice of subject.
smuggymba
12-18 08:31 AM
Cap on skilled immigration unlawful: UK court - World News - IBNLive (http://ibnlive.in.com/news/cap-on-skilled-immigration-unlawful-uk-court/137822-2.html?from=tn)
London: A temporary cap on the number of skilled workers from India and other countries outside the European Union was introduced in June 'unlawfully', the High Court ruled on Friday.
Home Secretary Theresa May had introduced the cap as an interim measure before a permanent cap to be in place from April 2011. It was challenged on the ground that ministers had 'sidestepped' parliamentary scrutiny before announcing the
temporary cap.
The legal challenge to the cap of 24,100 until April 2011 was brought by the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) and English Community Care Association, and was upheld by judges on Friday.
The Home Office said this did not imperil its flagship immigration policy but the opposition Labour said the police it was in "chaos" after the court ruling.
The ruling has nullified the current temporary cap, meaning it is no longer in force.
The cap was one of the first measures of the coalition government that promised to bring down immigrations from hundreds of thousands every year to 'tens of thousands.
In today's ruling, Lord Justice Sullivan and Justice Burton concluded that the home secretary had not gone through the proper parliamentary procedures before implementing the cap, which took effect without a vote in Parliament.
The judges said: "The secretary of state made no secret of her intentions. There can be no doubt that she was attempting to side-step provisions for Parliamentary scrutiny set up under provisions of the 1971 Immigration Act and her attempt was for that reason unlawful." As a result, it said no lawful limits were now in place for Tier One and Tier Two applicants from abroad. The Home Office said it was still "firmly committed" to reducing levels of net migration. "I am disappointed with today's verdict," Immigration minister Damian Green said, adding: "We will do all in our power to continue to prevent a rush of applications before our more permanent measures are in place".
London: A temporary cap on the number of skilled workers from India and other countries outside the European Union was introduced in June 'unlawfully', the High Court ruled on Friday.
Home Secretary Theresa May had introduced the cap as an interim measure before a permanent cap to be in place from April 2011. It was challenged on the ground that ministers had 'sidestepped' parliamentary scrutiny before announcing the
temporary cap.
The legal challenge to the cap of 24,100 until April 2011 was brought by the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) and English Community Care Association, and was upheld by judges on Friday.
The Home Office said this did not imperil its flagship immigration policy but the opposition Labour said the police it was in "chaos" after the court ruling.
The ruling has nullified the current temporary cap, meaning it is no longer in force.
The cap was one of the first measures of the coalition government that promised to bring down immigrations from hundreds of thousands every year to 'tens of thousands.
In today's ruling, Lord Justice Sullivan and Justice Burton concluded that the home secretary had not gone through the proper parliamentary procedures before implementing the cap, which took effect without a vote in Parliament.
The judges said: "The secretary of state made no secret of her intentions. There can be no doubt that she was attempting to side-step provisions for Parliamentary scrutiny set up under provisions of the 1971 Immigration Act and her attempt was for that reason unlawful." As a result, it said no lawful limits were now in place for Tier One and Tier Two applicants from abroad. The Home Office said it was still "firmly committed" to reducing levels of net migration. "I am disappointed with today's verdict," Immigration minister Damian Green said, adding: "We will do all in our power to continue to prevent a rush of applications before our more permanent measures are in place".
more...
sprash
06-03 02:57 PM
I agree Sailesh. However it would be interesting to know if anyone has got multiple EVLs or other RFEs. I am also wondering if once you reply to an RFE, do they pre-adjudicate the application.
2010 Casey Anthony cries during her
kaushik07
11-07 03:07 PM
My application was received on July 3 at NSC. Till now, I haven't received any notices. I got the RNs by calling USCIS.
Now, I placed an expedite order on my EAD on Friday. They sent me a mail saying my app was received on Oct 10 and not July 3 (yeah right! if it was oct 10, why would you even accept it?). So I faxed them the fedex delivery signature confirmation. Today I see a LUD on my EAD app but nothing else has changed.
Can anyone shed some light on what might possibly going on here? I can probably wait for some more time to find out for sure but I am curious. Guys with approved EAD - did you see a LUD on your app before it was approved?
Thanks
Iam a july 2nd filer at NSC and haven't received my receipt numbers yet. can I ask you when you got your receipt numbers? Thanks a lot!
Now, I placed an expedite order on my EAD on Friday. They sent me a mail saying my app was received on Oct 10 and not July 3 (yeah right! if it was oct 10, why would you even accept it?). So I faxed them the fedex delivery signature confirmation. Today I see a LUD on my EAD app but nothing else has changed.
Can anyone shed some light on what might possibly going on here? I can probably wait for some more time to find out for sure but I am curious. Guys with approved EAD - did you see a LUD on your app before it was approved?
Thanks
Iam a july 2nd filer at NSC and haven't received my receipt numbers yet. can I ask you when you got your receipt numbers? Thanks a lot!
more...
hindu_king
06-03 04:53 PM
I got an RFE in Oct 2008 and responded to it. I a, hoping that I'm not going to get another RFE and also hoping that my application is pre-adjudicated and once the visa numbers are available (within one to ten years?!), i'll get the GC.
hair of casey anthony partying,
Blog Feeds
09-18 10:20 AM
Attorney Eugenia Ponce recently wrote a blog post here (http://www.immigration-law-answers-blog.com/2009/07/immigration-law/immigration-rights/lawful-permanent-residents-keep-trips-abroad-relatively-short/) cautioning Lawful Permanent Residents to keep their trips abroad relatively short. Here is the text of that post:
Lawful permanent residents (LPR) of the United States (green card holders) need to keep their trips abroad to a relatively short period of time. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could determine that an LPR has abandoned their residence if the LPR’s intent was not to return to the U.S. within a relatively short period of time.
Factors DHS could consider in evaluating the LPR’s intent include:
Whether the trip abroad is lengthy or for a short period of time;
LPR’s family ties in the U.S.;
property holding in the U.S.;
business affiliations within the U.S.;
LPR’s family, property, and business ties in the foreign country.
After that was posted, we were asked what exactly we meant by the term "relatively short." Of course the answer, as always, depends on several factors. But here is a further explanation from Ms. Ponce:
What a "relatively short period of time" is can't be defined in terms of elapsed time alone. Generally, lawful permanent residents (LPR) can use their green cards to return to the United States after a temporary absence not exceeding one year. The most important factor in concluding whether an LPR abandoned his or her U.S. residence is to look at the LPR's actual intent to return to the United States after a short trip, along with the other factors such as property, business, and family ties inside the U.S. and in the foreign country. An LPR returning to the U.S. once a year for a few days doesn't "automatically revalidate" a green card in a situation in which the lawful permanent resident has actually been residing abroad.
More... (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Immigration-law-answers-blog/~3/lWE-18mYGGw/)
Lawful permanent residents (LPR) of the United States (green card holders) need to keep their trips abroad to a relatively short period of time. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could determine that an LPR has abandoned their residence if the LPR’s intent was not to return to the U.S. within a relatively short period of time.
Factors DHS could consider in evaluating the LPR’s intent include:
Whether the trip abroad is lengthy or for a short period of time;
LPR’s family ties in the U.S.;
property holding in the U.S.;
business affiliations within the U.S.;
LPR’s family, property, and business ties in the foreign country.
After that was posted, we were asked what exactly we meant by the term "relatively short." Of course the answer, as always, depends on several factors. But here is a further explanation from Ms. Ponce:
What a "relatively short period of time" is can't be defined in terms of elapsed time alone. Generally, lawful permanent residents (LPR) can use their green cards to return to the United States after a temporary absence not exceeding one year. The most important factor in concluding whether an LPR abandoned his or her U.S. residence is to look at the LPR's actual intent to return to the United States after a short trip, along with the other factors such as property, business, and family ties inside the U.S. and in the foreign country. An LPR returning to the U.S. once a year for a few days doesn't "automatically revalidate" a green card in a situation in which the lawful permanent resident has actually been residing abroad.
More... (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Immigration-law-answers-blog/~3/lWE-18mYGGw/)
more...
arsh007
06-18 05:41 PM
Hi
I am going to apply for i-485,
i have birth certificate which is taken in 2005 but I was born in 1974
some of my friends are saying...as you are born in 1974 and as your
birth certificate was taken in yr 2005, it might cause problems (ins poseses query)
to get the green card.
Is it right?
They are saying me to get Affidivits + non availability certificate now.
will it be a problem if I put my birth certificate....while applying for 485
thanks
Elephant
Your friends are correct. U can avoid RFE in I-485 by using affidavits.
I am going to apply for i-485,
i have birth certificate which is taken in 2005 but I was born in 1974
some of my friends are saying...as you are born in 1974 and as your
birth certificate was taken in yr 2005, it might cause problems (ins poseses query)
to get the green card.
Is it right?
They are saying me to get Affidivits + non availability certificate now.
will it be a problem if I put my birth certificate....while applying for 485
thanks
Elephant
Your friends are correct. U can avoid RFE in I-485 by using affidavits.
hot Casey Anthony: The Never
ameryki
05-28 03:32 PM
will the lawyer get the renewed ead cards or since you applied for renewal you will receive the cards?
more...
house Casey Anthony cries during her
vinnysuru
03-18 03:32 PM
Hello,
Assuming a 40 hr/week position, a person works 2080 hours per year. The Annual Salary for a $46/hr position is $95680/year.
Also, if you only have annual salary for the new position, you could convert to hourly by dividing by 2080.
But I wouldn't even worry about all this. Just send in the annual salary figure (just for your own satisfaction make sure it is more than $46 per hour) and USCIS will figure out the rest.
Hope that helps.
Assuming a 40 hr/week position, a person works 2080 hours per year. The Annual Salary for a $46/hr position is $95680/year.
Also, if you only have annual salary for the new position, you could convert to hourly by dividing by 2080.
But I wouldn't even worry about all this. Just send in the annual salary figure (just for your own satisfaction make sure it is more than $46 per hour) and USCIS will figure out the rest.
Hope that helps.
tattoo Casey Anthony. Photo: AP
ctu
03-29 07:21 PM
i have my stubs till feb 09
more...
pictures Casey Anthony partied, entered
jliechty
December 26th, 2004, 06:37 PM
I don't have very many interesting subjects from my D70 test. Here's the only other one that has the slightest worth showing, with a bit of post processing to improve the color balance (flash on the foreground made the white table behind look very yellow, and it's still not fixed to my satisfaction)...