vnsriv
10-08 04:09 PM
We gave for fingerprints 5 days back but our LUD on I-485 is not yet updated. Is this common?
I-485 receipts from NSC.
Most of my friends LUD is updated within 2 days of giving finger prints.
Please post your experiences.
Be patient. That's OK. One more thing, do you have a login on USCIS site and a portofolio of your cases. If you login and see your portofilio, you may see a LUD on I-485. But when you expand the message, there won't be any update.
I-485 receipts from NSC.
Most of my friends LUD is updated within 2 days of giving finger prints.
Please post your experiences.
Be patient. That's OK. One more thing, do you have a login on USCIS site and a portofolio of your cases. If you login and see your portofilio, you may see a LUD on I-485. But when you expand the message, there won't be any update.
wallpaper wallpaper hair Amore e Odio
gc_on_demand
12-02 09:51 AM
What are chances of Dream Act? --> No one can predict. Depends on how Bush era tax cut bill goes through. Dems has added few provision to please Republicans so they are improving chances.
What are the chances of including our provisions in the bill? --> At this point Republicans want enforcement. They may not bargain for legal immigration in this bill. Rather they may prefer to add some tough rule for dreamers.
What happens if the bill passes without our provisions? ---> We will still have a chance to have our bill as piecemeal or just sit and watch
What happens if the bill fails? --> I hope they get it done, Dreamers are more enthusiastic than us and unless they get it these lawmakers will not think about us. Also they can set example that piecemeal is possible.
WHAT ARE OUR CHANCES IN 2011? --> As I said if dreamer can get their bill done, and CHC doesn't hold any piecemeal in future chances are there. but I doubt CHC will allow any legal immigration bill until Dems are in power of either of house.
See reply in red
What are the chances of including our provisions in the bill? --> At this point Republicans want enforcement. They may not bargain for legal immigration in this bill. Rather they may prefer to add some tough rule for dreamers.
What happens if the bill passes without our provisions? ---> We will still have a chance to have our bill as piecemeal or just sit and watch
What happens if the bill fails? --> I hope they get it done, Dreamers are more enthusiastic than us and unless they get it these lawmakers will not think about us. Also they can set example that piecemeal is possible.
WHAT ARE OUR CHANCES IN 2011? --> As I said if dreamer can get their bill done, and CHC doesn't hold any piecemeal in future chances are there. but I doubt CHC will allow any legal immigration bill until Dems are in power of either of house.
See reply in red
abracadabra
05-30 01:43 PM
I filed I-131 and I-765 and could not regenerate the confirmation receipt notice in PDF, system crashed and closed the window, but I have the receipt numbers did anyone went through this situation
2011 Anthony Amore and Charlie
small2006
06-09 01:43 PM
Guys,
Chill out...Everybody is unnecessarily getting worked up just because our frustrations are not reflected in the article.
It doesn't say "that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules". That is totally taken out of context. Re-read the article.
Keep in mind where the article has appeared - BBC. Keep in mind the audience of the article - people who don't know anything about this issue. From that perspective it does a decent job of providing someone with some idea as to what the H1B/GC issues are about. It is in no way meant to be (or attempts to do) a thorough in depth report on what is going on. Think of it as just a "big picture" overview of the PATHETIC state of US immigration system as it applies to H1Bs and GCs.
On the point of painting "H1B issue as Indian issue" - Although the article doesn't claim to do that, don't you think that when 65% of H1Bs are taken up by Indian nationals (at least in 2000, probably more later, http://www.murthy.com/news/UDtechi.html)
, it is at least a "65% Indian issue."
In any case, my intent was not to be rude but just to point out that there is no need to get so riled up on an article that neither hurts or helps our cause.
Take it easy.
The reporter does not seem to know the issue at all and coming from an Indian/Pakistani background painted the whole issue as if it were a Desi issue.
Dude writes that visas dry up and he quotes USCIS spokes person saying we are sitting at 45,000 from week 1 and haven't still moved an inch. Damn it! Gimme a break! Get real
The attorney featured sings to his tune and talks about all things Indian, Indian companies, Indian nationals, India. Wow! Does any one need more ammunition to take charge and paint H1B issue as Indian issue? Sorry to be harsh but this is more of a bad press than any thing helpful.
Then he goes on to say that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules?? Excuse me! until Jul 2007 rules were not implemented. This guy says strict rules.
Chill out...Everybody is unnecessarily getting worked up just because our frustrations are not reflected in the article.
It doesn't say "that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules". That is totally taken out of context. Re-read the article.
Keep in mind where the article has appeared - BBC. Keep in mind the audience of the article - people who don't know anything about this issue. From that perspective it does a decent job of providing someone with some idea as to what the H1B/GC issues are about. It is in no way meant to be (or attempts to do) a thorough in depth report on what is going on. Think of it as just a "big picture" overview of the PATHETIC state of US immigration system as it applies to H1Bs and GCs.
On the point of painting "H1B issue as Indian issue" - Although the article doesn't claim to do that, don't you think that when 65% of H1Bs are taken up by Indian nationals (at least in 2000, probably more later, http://www.murthy.com/news/UDtechi.html)
, it is at least a "65% Indian issue."
In any case, my intent was not to be rude but just to point out that there is no need to get so riled up on an article that neither hurts or helps our cause.
Take it easy.
The reporter does not seem to know the issue at all and coming from an Indian/Pakistani background painted the whole issue as if it were a Desi issue.
Dude writes that visas dry up and he quotes USCIS spokes person saying we are sitting at 45,000 from week 1 and haven't still moved an inch. Damn it! Gimme a break! Get real
The attorney featured sings to his tune and talks about all things Indian, Indian companies, Indian nationals, India. Wow! Does any one need more ammunition to take charge and paint H1B issue as Indian issue? Sorry to be harsh but this is more of a bad press than any thing helpful.
Then he goes on to say that people are waiting for GC because of strict rules?? Excuse me! until Jul 2007 rules were not implemented. This guy says strict rules.
more...
senocular
08-19 11:55 AM
I think it needs bigger eyes... ?
gemini23
11-19 08:50 AM
Do we have to send copies of H1 visa stamp in passport in order to apply for ead renewal. if yes, what would be the case if the H1 visa stamp is expired. Can I send the copy of expired H1 visa stamp and I-797 approval , for ead renewal?
Can you please answer this question as I am about to file for a ead renewal.
Can you please answer this question as I am about to file for a ead renewal.
more...
sandy_anand
10-04 10:17 AM
Here is a file for Chinese EB3 visa usage and WW EB3 visa usage from the same source. Again, same disclosure as my previous post :-). Thanks.
2010 Amore Mio Coração GG - Vermelho - Buba Toys - - Americanas.
shortchanged
08-17 08:38 AM
In addition to checking the appropriate response in your I-485 form, you (wife)have to confirm that you are filing as a derivative of the husbands primary petition (Part 2, response should be "b" please make sure again! you may even use highlighter pen) you may include your husbands I-140 as well as Labor certification copies and highlight the Priority dates in these forms with brilliant colors.
Marriage Certificate is a must.
Also I would include the last years tax returns for your husband and the sealed medical clearance from your doctor, to make it rejection proof!
A cover letter as well as a "DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM" addressing the Service center director, and placing it over a double bagged packaging of the whole thing may also help.Somehow you have to convince the morons in the mail room that it is "RESUBMISSION DUE TO USCIS ERROR"
Wish you all the best!
Marriage Certificate is a must.
Also I would include the last years tax returns for your husband and the sealed medical clearance from your doctor, to make it rejection proof!
A cover letter as well as a "DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM" addressing the Service center director, and placing it over a double bagged packaging of the whole thing may also help.Somehow you have to convince the morons in the mail room that it is "RESUBMISSION DUE TO USCIS ERROR"
Wish you all the best!
more...
bskrishna
04-09 12:45 PM
you have had one heck of a journey.
Enjoy !
Enjoy !
hair Metal Amore Custom Tile Design
fittan
07-13 12:17 PM
Just joined this board 30 minutes ago. I've signed and sent this petition.
more...
pcs
09-22 02:07 PM
If you do not have all experience letters.... Give a notarized letter from someone you worked with with dates & brief job description. It is acceptable
hot -25 gg amoresempre di più vicini.
lostinbeta
10-21 03:48 AM
Seems like I am making you regurgitate some old memories. I don't know if that is good or bad.
What did you mean by "that was right before the end" if you don't mind me asking.
What did you mean by "that was right before the end" if you don't mind me asking.
more...
house L#39;amore ai tempi del
sdrblr
10-08 11:03 PM
It is all about number game and you(IV or other lobby groups) may not have the # to make lot of noise for that to happen.
I know EAD is not for CP filers today. I also believe EAD is one of the things that USCIS can issue with an admin fix.
I know EAD is not for CP filers today. I also believe EAD is one of the things that USCIS can issue with an admin fix.
tattoo g g amore
bp333
09-25 01:12 PM
"july 12 2007" will be the important date. It will be there as an USCIS stamp in the App. You can re-submit this app in Oct 2007 even if there is no visa available for your PD in Oct, 2007. It will be treated as if it was received on "july 12 2007".
Thanks a lot.
Thanks a lot.
more...
pictures mi amore vole fe tattoo
chanduv23
06-12 04:30 PM
This is my first post, so bear with me.
I also got a Status Update message via email from USCIS. I think the lawyer will be getting the papers in mail next week.
Seems like USCIS has started sending RFE for a lot of us, who have been waiting for a long time. What might be the reason for this. I heard from some of my friends that they are pre-adjucating the cases so that when the visa dates are available, they can process faster, but I also wonder if they are doing it so that they can drop some cases who do NOT reply to their RFE (similar to what happenned with Backlog Elimination Center and 45 day letters).
It is called "two birds in one shot". Pre-adjudication and pre-rejection.
And yes, the reason why most people get RFEs is because the records may not be available properly due to clerical issues.
Preadjudication follows these guidlines
(1) If it is deniable - can some reason be found to deny this case? Deny it - can be resolved thropugh MTR
or
(2) Is it RFEable - can we issue a standardRFE for this case? - Issue RFE
or
Preadjudicate it and keep it ready for visa allocation.
I also got a Status Update message via email from USCIS. I think the lawyer will be getting the papers in mail next week.
Seems like USCIS has started sending RFE for a lot of us, who have been waiting for a long time. What might be the reason for this. I heard from some of my friends that they are pre-adjucating the cases so that when the visa dates are available, they can process faster, but I also wonder if they are doing it so that they can drop some cases who do NOT reply to their RFE (similar to what happenned with Backlog Elimination Center and 45 day letters).
It is called "two birds in one shot". Pre-adjudication and pre-rejection.
And yes, the reason why most people get RFEs is because the records may not be available properly due to clerical issues.
Preadjudication follows these guidlines
(1) If it is deniable - can some reason be found to deny this case? Deny it - can be resolved thropugh MTR
or
(2) Is it RFEable - can we issue a standardRFE for this case? - Issue RFE
or
Preadjudicate it and keep it ready for visa allocation.
dresses D#39;amore,. GG
H1BLegal95
01-22 11:48 PM
Im hearing that most of Indian filers filed for EB2 which has lead to EB2 demand outstripping EB3.
So of the two tortoises EB3 might move faster than EB2.
Any comments ?
So of the two tortoises EB3 might move faster than EB2.
Any comments ?
more...
makeup ma BuOn gG AmOrE mio 1/28/09. sn le 8 e 25.
psychman
11-12 01:33 AM
Scratch that last post. I found what I needed. I removed the line of code:
doc.DocumentElement.FirstChild.NextSibling.AppendC hild(docFrag);
and replaced it with:
foreach (XmlNode node in doc.DocumentElement.ChildNodes)
{
node.AppendChild(docFrag.Clone());
}
doc.DocumentElement.FirstChild.NextSibling.AppendC hild(docFrag);
and replaced it with:
foreach (XmlNode node in doc.DocumentElement.ChildNodes)
{
node.AppendChild(docFrag.Clone());
}
girlfriend GG200217-H METAL AMORE
vinzak
06-16 12:10 PM
I have often heard about visa recapture in these forums, and always that there were lost visa numbers. I came across a DHS site yesterday with statstics on GCs issued, and must admit I am a bit confused about what visa recapture means. The site is DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2009 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR09.shtm) . Looking at table 6 (Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 2000 to 2009), we get the following data on EB and FB issuances.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 235,092 231,699 186,880 158,796 214,355 212,970 222,229 194,900 227,761 211,859 2,096,541
EB 106,642 178,702 173,814 81,727 155,330 246,877 159,081 162,176 166,511 144,034 1,574,894
Total 341,734 410,401 360,694 240,523 369,685 459,847 381,310 357,076 394,272 355,893 3,671,435
if we we were to take deltas from the fb cap of 226k and eb cap of 140k, the scenario looks as follows, where a -ive number indicates over allocation.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB -9,092 -5,699 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 -1,761 14,141 163,459
EB 33,358 -38,702 -33,814 58,273 -15,330 -106,877 -19,081 -22,176 -26,511 -4,034 -174,894
Total 24,266 -44,401 5,306 125,477 -3,685 -93,847 -15,310 8,924 -28,272 10,107 -11,435
As we can see, cumulatively from 2000-09, 11,435 more visas have been given than actually permitted. Particularly in EB 174k excess visas were given.
I'm curious to know, what recapture means, when it seems visas have not been lost.
The only case for recapture is if we only count the years visas were under allocated, and ignore the years it was overallocated. The scenario would look as follows
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 0 0 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 180,011
EB 33,358 0 0 58,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,631
Total 33,358 0 39,120 125,477 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 271,642
So are we trying to recapture 271k visas from this calculation?
If the experts could shed some light on this, that would be great.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 235,092 231,699 186,880 158,796 214,355 212,970 222,229 194,900 227,761 211,859 2,096,541
EB 106,642 178,702 173,814 81,727 155,330 246,877 159,081 162,176 166,511 144,034 1,574,894
Total 341,734 410,401 360,694 240,523 369,685 459,847 381,310 357,076 394,272 355,893 3,671,435
if we we were to take deltas from the fb cap of 226k and eb cap of 140k, the scenario looks as follows, where a -ive number indicates over allocation.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB -9,092 -5,699 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 -1,761 14,141 163,459
EB 33,358 -38,702 -33,814 58,273 -15,330 -106,877 -19,081 -22,176 -26,511 -4,034 -174,894
Total 24,266 -44,401 5,306 125,477 -3,685 -93,847 -15,310 8,924 -28,272 10,107 -11,435
As we can see, cumulatively from 2000-09, 11,435 more visas have been given than actually permitted. Particularly in EB 174k excess visas were given.
I'm curious to know, what recapture means, when it seems visas have not been lost.
The only case for recapture is if we only count the years visas were under allocated, and ignore the years it was overallocated. The scenario would look as follows
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 0 0 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 180,011
EB 33,358 0 0 58,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,631
Total 33,358 0 39,120 125,477 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 271,642
So are we trying to recapture 271k visas from this calculation?
If the experts could shed some light on this, that would be great.
hairstyles D#39;amore,. GG
humdesi
05-31 08:53 PM
A friend of mine just came from India. Works for a bodyshopper. He is transferring to L-1A so that he can file in EB-1 multinational manager. Is this possible? What are the minimum requirements for EB-1?
If it is possible this guy will be laughing a year from now, gc in hand, while we all fume and fret over retrogression, labor, i-140 etc..
If it is possible this guy will be laughing a year from now, gc in hand, while we all fume and fret over retrogression, labor, i-140 etc..
thesparky007
04-17 07:48 PM
there you go! I really like that one! :A+:finally!!
thanks
thanks
PD_Dec2002
05-22 08:21 AM
Please correct me if I am wrong, but the Hammond Law Group (HLG) was hired by IV for its lobbying efforts, correct? What does HLG have to say about the fact that none of the provisions for legal immigrants went into the CIR? What's their take on the chances that favorable amendments for legal immigrants will make it?
Would be interesting to get their point of view...
Thanks,
Jayant
Would be interesting to get their point of view...
Thanks,
Jayant
No comments:
Post a Comment