JunRN
09-28 07:09 PM
Receipting people are not the ones adjudicating the cases. They are different people. So there is no used stopping the receipting.
If this news is true, then we can see "wild" approvals before the end of September. Some people with complete cases may overtake others.
If this news is true, then we can see "wild" approvals before the end of September. Some people with complete cases may overtake others.
wallpaper F-18 Super Hornet
Libra
09-10 03:32 PM
thanks raminmd and miy_maqbool for your contributions.
yoda
09-13 04:24 PM
Sent to Mass High Tech and Fareed Zakaria @ Newsweek.
2011 F-18 Super Hornet Wallpaper 2
dhesha
09-08 11:49 AM
I think, we should try to make a law that says to give the citizenship after 5 years from the day when I-1485 was filed (and not when it was approved). This will benefit majority of us who have waited forever after filing I-1485 and does not deserve to spend another 5 years if they wish to take Citizenship.
more...
skd
08-17 01:20 AM
bharol, You and I have same Priority Date and Category Mine is also PD 3rd Sept 2004 ( EB-2)
Let me know when you get your approval
Looking at the recent approvals looks like USCIS does the following:
1. Pick up x number of files using a random algorithm.
2. Arrange these files in a random order using the same random algorithm
followed in step 1.
3. Randomly pick any file arranged in step 2.
4. Toss a coin.
5. On odd dates if it is heads,approve the file. On even dates if it is tails
approve it.
6. If file is not approved in step 5 put it on the shelf to be picked up
in step 1 in next cycle.
Let me know when you get your approval
Looking at the recent approvals looks like USCIS does the following:
1. Pick up x number of files using a random algorithm.
2. Arrange these files in a random order using the same random algorithm
followed in step 1.
3. Randomly pick any file arranged in step 2.
4. Toss a coin.
5. On odd dates if it is heads,approve the file. On even dates if it is tails
approve it.
6. If file is not approved in step 5 put it on the shelf to be picked up
in step 1 in next cycle.
ind_game
05-14 08:41 PM
Here is the scoop.
from US Congresswoman's office, an immigration specialist spoke to their liaison at the Nebraska Service Center.
Liaison confirmed the following:
1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2007 as I have the hard copy)
2. I-140 revocation in Feb, 2009 ( he has not provided the day of the month, but from LUD I have it strongly pointing to 02/03/2009)
I have not told the Congresswoman's office about the I-140 revocation. Just mentioned that it might have happened as I have left the company.
3. Liaison did confirm that even after the I-140 being withdrawn I am eligible for adjustment thru AC21.
4. Liaison did agree that if the I-140 was revoked within the stipulated time given in AC21, Nebraska’s decision to deny the I-485 may have been in error. (which in my case is true)
Immigration specialist at the Congresswoman's office is going to contact the Director of NSC to review this matter with a supervisor
Unanswered questions:
1. If the Liaison can see that my I-140 is approved on 09/04/2007, why is that the adjudicating officer is responding with a denial on 09/04/2007 and subsequent denial of I-485?
2. Are they both not looking at my information with same interface?
Conclusion:
Atleast in my case it looks deliberate and intentional.
from US Congresswoman's office, an immigration specialist spoke to their liaison at the Nebraska Service Center.
Liaison confirmed the following:
1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2007 as I have the hard copy)
2. I-140 revocation in Feb, 2009 ( he has not provided the day of the month, but from LUD I have it strongly pointing to 02/03/2009)
I have not told the Congresswoman's office about the I-140 revocation. Just mentioned that it might have happened as I have left the company.
3. Liaison did confirm that even after the I-140 being withdrawn I am eligible for adjustment thru AC21.
4. Liaison did agree that if the I-140 was revoked within the stipulated time given in AC21, Nebraska’s decision to deny the I-485 may have been in error. (which in my case is true)
Immigration specialist at the Congresswoman's office is going to contact the Director of NSC to review this matter with a supervisor
Unanswered questions:
1. If the Liaison can see that my I-140 is approved on 09/04/2007, why is that the adjudicating officer is responding with a denial on 09/04/2007 and subsequent denial of I-485?
2. Are they both not looking at my information with same interface?
Conclusion:
Atleast in my case it looks deliberate and intentional.
more...
buddyinus
08-12 04:24 AM
Agree with you 100% - But Once you start a thread with assertive words peoples start relying on you.... I also posted lots of conversations between myself and USCIS but i was never assertive.
Anyway - this argument will go on forever.
Can we request SriKondoJi/likes not to post anything with strong Affirmative words unless they have some kind of confirmations beyond the general Public's assumption ??
Thanks
Now, the fool is trying to change the subject by asking ppl to join the rally. Why in the world wud ppl trust him? The thread is barely 10 pages and after realizing that therez no point in discussing about what this thread is all about, he has shifted subject loyalites. How lame and insane is this guy? Pappu, LogicLife where r u guyz? Why dont u ban him?
Anyway - this argument will go on forever.
Can we request SriKondoJi/likes not to post anything with strong Affirmative words unless they have some kind of confirmations beyond the general Public's assumption ??
Thanks
Now, the fool is trying to change the subject by asking ppl to join the rally. Why in the world wud ppl trust him? The thread is barely 10 pages and after realizing that therez no point in discussing about what this thread is all about, he has shifted subject loyalites. How lame and insane is this guy? Pappu, LogicLife where r u guyz? Why dont u ban him?
2010 F-18F Super Hornet High G Turn
gctest
09-15 04:19 PM
That memo/document you pointed out is an interpretation. We have already said that USCIS's interpretation is incorrect. We intend to correct this interpretation with this lawsuit.
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
Incorrect.
Please read this pdf document
AFM Update: Chapter 22: Employment-based Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf)
Please pay attention to section (3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition on page 28 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions.
For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suggest, you talk to an attorney before using words like illegal. It may be unfair, but still be legal.
_____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
Incorrect.
Please read this pdf document
AFM Update: Chapter 22: Employment-based Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf)
Please pay attention to section (3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition on page 28 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions.
For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suggest, you talk to an attorney before using words like illegal. It may be unfair, but still be legal.
_____________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
more...
eb3_nepa
07-14 03:14 PM
Just dropped a check for $5. I hope all of the remaining members do the same.
Mailing a check is just as good as a bill pay.
For those who are unaware as to what the "Bill Pay" option is, basically the Bill pay option is a great way to take advantage of your bank cutting a cheque as opposed to you cutting a cheque. That way you can write cheques without having to:
1) Actually write out a cheque
2) Spend money to post it (and take the extra effort to mail the cheque out).
Keep the contributions flowing.
Mailing a check is just as good as a bill pay.
For those who are unaware as to what the "Bill Pay" option is, basically the Bill pay option is a great way to take advantage of your bank cutting a cheque as opposed to you cutting a cheque. That way you can write cheques without having to:
1) Actually write out a cheque
2) Spend money to post it (and take the extra effort to mail the cheque out).
Keep the contributions flowing.
hair 1.1 Evolution of the Hornet
gctest
09-13 09:59 PM
july 07 filer yes.. but I have a PD of mid 2004... How in the name of almighty is that out of turn?
but you are too stupid anyway
so go home now..... and please don'y forget to pickup meds for your gonorrhea form csv pharmacy :D:D:D
Are you July 07 filer who got the EAD out of turn? I bet you are.
And if you are, keep your loud mouth shut! Before you pontificate, look at people and others like you who got in and created a mess!
but you are too stupid anyway
so go home now..... and please don'y forget to pickup meds for your gonorrhea form csv pharmacy :D:D:D
Are you July 07 filer who got the EAD out of turn? I bet you are.
And if you are, keep your loud mouth shut! Before you pontificate, look at people and others like you who got in and created a mess!
more...
susie
07-15 12:12 PM
I thought about posting my case details and now the complaint has been filed feel it is only fair to share with others as my case could set a presidence for others
I will keep story as points for ease
1. Husband moved to the USA in 1998 on L 1 inter company transfer
2. In 2000 company applied for I 140 for husband and approved May 2001
3. Within one year of I 140 approval, husband submitted I 485 for himself and youngest son. At the same time filed I 824 for son who was living abroad and was to follow to join once degree was finished. per I 485 instructions which still state to follow this procedure if minor child abroad.
4. Son abroad became 21 years in April 2002 and also subject to patriot act.
His I 824 was pending at enactment of CSPA.
5. In Oct 2002 we received a denial letter for 1st I 824, this letter did not say "aged out" just said re submit new I 824 once husband received his green card (so no final determination )
6. May 2004 submitted new I 824 for son abroad, this was approved Aug 2004
7. As no news from consulate by Jan 2005, sought assistance from Congressman Weldon. Eventually in Oct 2005 (via e-mail) The American embassy in London advised congressman my son aged out
8. After many consultations with different attorneys, who all said son was protected under cspa, started to get file together to file complaint.
9. Had difficulty finding attorney who understood the cspa well enough or willing to challenge.
10, In early 2006 husband became unwell and passed within a matter of a few weeks
As husband (the petitioner ) passed away I thought all hope was lost. Thanks to reporters printing my story an attorney came forward and offered assistance. All assets were frozen but the attorney kindly took case on a pro- bono
The complaint was filed March 2007, on the basis the first I 824 was denied in error.
The cspa is not retroactive as a rule and son is covered under limited exception as I 824 was filed before he was 21 years and pending at enactment of cspa.
There has recently been a new cspa court case that has approved a retroactive case, so there is hope for us all
I will keep story as points for ease
1. Husband moved to the USA in 1998 on L 1 inter company transfer
2. In 2000 company applied for I 140 for husband and approved May 2001
3. Within one year of I 140 approval, husband submitted I 485 for himself and youngest son. At the same time filed I 824 for son who was living abroad and was to follow to join once degree was finished. per I 485 instructions which still state to follow this procedure if minor child abroad.
4. Son abroad became 21 years in April 2002 and also subject to patriot act.
His I 824 was pending at enactment of CSPA.
5. In Oct 2002 we received a denial letter for 1st I 824, this letter did not say "aged out" just said re submit new I 824 once husband received his green card (so no final determination )
6. May 2004 submitted new I 824 for son abroad, this was approved Aug 2004
7. As no news from consulate by Jan 2005, sought assistance from Congressman Weldon. Eventually in Oct 2005 (via e-mail) The American embassy in London advised congressman my son aged out
8. After many consultations with different attorneys, who all said son was protected under cspa, started to get file together to file complaint.
9. Had difficulty finding attorney who understood the cspa well enough or willing to challenge.
10, In early 2006 husband became unwell and passed within a matter of a few weeks
As husband (the petitioner ) passed away I thought all hope was lost. Thanks to reporters printing my story an attorney came forward and offered assistance. All assets were frozen but the attorney kindly took case on a pro- bono
The complaint was filed March 2007, on the basis the first I 824 was denied in error.
The cspa is not retroactive as a rule and son is covered under limited exception as I 824 was filed before he was 21 years and pending at enactment of cspa.
There has recently been a new cspa court case that has approved a retroactive case, so there is hope for us all
hot F18 Super Hornet
eb3_nepa
07-14 05:20 PM
Done!
$11.00
BoA C# 7YBHX-VPQKG
Don't ask me the reason why $11 ? Let me clarify; the amount of $11, $21, $51 ..etc...are called lucky amounts...
I agree :)
$11.00
BoA C# 7YBHX-VPQKG
Don't ask me the reason why $11 ? Let me clarify; the amount of $11, $21, $51 ..etc...are called lucky amounts...
I agree :)
more...
house F/A-18 Super Hornet | Ask.com
pappu
08-01 01:15 PM
I will be more than happy if I can help. Please note I do not have any journalism background.
Thank you for your offer and also other people who are sending me PM for this. We will try to get as many as possible so that we can submit to multiple newspapers and websites.
Thank you for your offer and also other people who are sending me PM for this. We will try to get as many as possible so that we can submit to multiple newspapers and websites.
tattoo 1.2 The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
mallu
10-01 01:54 PM
Instead of wasting visa numbers , they should allocate to those who cleared namecheck and all other processing. Agreed, this might allow a person who started PERM in 2007 to get gc in hand in 2007 itself compared to a person with PD 2001 EB2 , applied I-485 in 2003 and stuck in name check. But it is better than wasting the visa numbers.
more...
pictures F-18 Super Hornet Wallpaper 1
rex
09-24 12:59 PM
Ok. Now lets say I have EAD cards for me (primary applicant) and my wife. I can now have my wife start a company and have a job position similar to where I work. Now after 180 days, can I work for my wife's company invoking AC21 with my EAD??:D
and so when an RFE comes from USCIS , can this be shown as the similar job offer?
Really speaking, The USCIS only wants a promise of employment when they are adjudicating form 485 saying that I will be given a job after I get my green card:). So can I literally work anywhere for any job using my EAD until green card gets fully approved as long as I have a promise of employment (by my wife's company)? :p
Ofcourse i am risking the chance of being out of status if my 485 gets denied. i just want to make sure it wont get denied because the "similar job" offer is from my relatives (wife's) company.
any thoughts??:confused:
Rex
and so when an RFE comes from USCIS , can this be shown as the similar job offer?
Really speaking, The USCIS only wants a promise of employment when they are adjudicating form 485 saying that I will be given a job after I get my green card:). So can I literally work anywhere for any job using my EAD until green card gets fully approved as long as I have a promise of employment (by my wife's company)? :p
Ofcourse i am risking the chance of being out of status if my 485 gets denied. i just want to make sure it wont get denied because the "similar job" offer is from my relatives (wife's) company.
any thoughts??:confused:
Rex
dresses F-18 Super Hornet Wallpaper 3
jimytomy
04-11 08:15 PM
@AllVNeedGCPC : Did you get any updates on your I-485 ?
@gene77 : Any update on your REF ?
Thanks!
jimytomy
@gene77 : Any update on your REF ?
Thanks!
jimytomy
more...
makeup F-18 Super Hornet Fuel tanks
cbadari99
06-24 11:44 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/us/25engineer.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp
"The dean of the College of Engineering at Georgia Tech, Don P. Giddens, noted an additional factor limiting the recruitment of highly trained engineers into military jobs: more than half the engineering doctoral candidates at American universities are from abroad and so are ineligible for most jobs requiring security clearances."
"The dean of the College of Engineering at Georgia Tech, Don P. Giddens, noted an additional factor limiting the recruitment of highly trained engineers into military jobs: more than half the engineering doctoral candidates at American universities are from abroad and so are ineligible for most jobs requiring security clearances."
girlfriend F-18 Super Hornet
pappu
12-11 12:16 AM
It looks like they have heard from IV members about the spillover rules and their clarification about the QUARTERLY spillover is useful. Also them categorically stating that any spillover visas would be used in strict order of PD is reassuring. Whether they actually practice or not, it is good that they have gone on record as saying that is the way it should be.
In the past spillover was not applied in the way they are saying and EB2I suffered greatly for it.
This spillover rules if enforced will accelerate EE2I movement initially and then EB3. I suspect that by this summer EB2I folks from 2007 should be seeing some action.
I agree. It was interesting to see them use our style of predicting with and without spillover. It seems they have paid attention to the recent report we had published. We should continue to ask questions and provide suggestions to the administration officials.
In the past spillover was not applied in the way they are saying and EB2I suffered greatly for it.
This spillover rules if enforced will accelerate EE2I movement initially and then EB3. I suspect that by this summer EB2I folks from 2007 should be seeing some action.
I agree. It was interesting to see them use our style of predicting with and without spillover. It seems they have paid attention to the recent report we had published. We should continue to ask questions and provide suggestions to the administration officials.
hairstyles BOEING F18 SUPER HORNET
ags123
02-19 10:10 PM
a) The obvious, in April spill over happens. India Jumped from U to 1dec 03 in April08
b) in 2008 April India Eb2 tied with China Eb2 as India Eb2 was unavailable in March 2008
given the regulation of giving spillover by earliest date India Eb2 held China Eb2 at the 1Dec03 date for the month of April 2008
c) This year has not needed any pd backward movement for India. This is unlike 2008 where it went to Jan02 and Jan00 to U. This means India Quota itself is still being used and yet we are at 15 Feb 04.
Please let me know if you see any more interesting things in this.
I Ch
Oct 2007 1-Apr-04 1-Jan-06
Nov 2007 1-Apr-04 1-Jan-06
Dec 2007 1-Jan-02 1-Jan-03
Jan 2008 1-Jan-00 1-Jan-03
Feb 2008 U 1-Jan-03
Mar 2008 U 1-Dec-03
Apr 2008 1-Dec-03 1-Dec-03
May 2008 1-Jan-04 1-Jan-04
Jun 2008 1-Apr-04 1-Apr-04
Jul 2008 1-Apr-04 1-Apr-04
Aug 2008 1-Jun-06 1-Jun-06
Sep 2008 1-Aug-06 1-Aug-06
Oct 2008 1-Apr-03 1-Apr-04
Nov 2008 1-Jun-03 1-Jun-04
Dec 2008 1-Jun-03 1-Jun-04
Jan 2009 1-Jul-03 8-Jul-04
Feb 2009 1-Jan-04 1-Jan-05
Mar 2009 15-Feb-04 15-Feb-05
Apr 2009
May 2009
Jun 2009
Jul 2009
Aug 2009
Sep 2009
b) in 2008 April India Eb2 tied with China Eb2 as India Eb2 was unavailable in March 2008
given the regulation of giving spillover by earliest date India Eb2 held China Eb2 at the 1Dec03 date for the month of April 2008
c) This year has not needed any pd backward movement for India. This is unlike 2008 where it went to Jan02 and Jan00 to U. This means India Quota itself is still being used and yet we are at 15 Feb 04.
Please let me know if you see any more interesting things in this.
I Ch
Oct 2007 1-Apr-04 1-Jan-06
Nov 2007 1-Apr-04 1-Jan-06
Dec 2007 1-Jan-02 1-Jan-03
Jan 2008 1-Jan-00 1-Jan-03
Feb 2008 U 1-Jan-03
Mar 2008 U 1-Dec-03
Apr 2008 1-Dec-03 1-Dec-03
May 2008 1-Jan-04 1-Jan-04
Jun 2008 1-Apr-04 1-Apr-04
Jul 2008 1-Apr-04 1-Apr-04
Aug 2008 1-Jun-06 1-Jun-06
Sep 2008 1-Aug-06 1-Aug-06
Oct 2008 1-Apr-03 1-Apr-04
Nov 2008 1-Jun-03 1-Jun-04
Dec 2008 1-Jun-03 1-Jun-04
Jan 2009 1-Jul-03 8-Jul-04
Feb 2009 1-Jan-04 1-Jan-05
Mar 2009 15-Feb-04 15-Feb-05
Apr 2009
May 2009
Jun 2009
Jul 2009
Aug 2009
Sep 2009
pbojja
09-11 04:38 PM
Lets set the delivery date for Ocotober 2nd - Gandhi Jayanthi . I think thats the great day to express our opinion.
greyhair
04-29 04:06 PM
Just called Scott Brown and Senator Greg. The person who picked up the phone in Scott Brown offcie noted my name and address. He said he will give my message to the Senator. The lady in Judd Gregg office said that Senator has not yet decided on the immigration proposal but she said the Senator appreciates the call. She did not ask my details but said that the Senator has supported immigration bills in the past. They both sounded very positive.
Printed out the post and I will continue to call all Senators.
Printed out the post and I will continue to call all Senators.
No comments:
Post a Comment