whattodo21
04-22 11:10 AM
There is no "Prince William County" in Maryland. List of counties in Maryland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_counties_in_Maryland)
What we have is a "Prince George's County", which joined the 287 g program in December 2009. St. Mary's County Joins Controversial Federal Immigration Initiative - Southern Maryland Headline News (http://somd.com/news/headlines/2010/11667.shtml)
The article may be talking about "Prince William County" in Virginia, which is participating in 287 g program since 2/26/2008.
Partners (http://www.ice.gov/partners/287g/Section287_g.htm)
Right, Pick up the issue with immigration policy organization, and get the clarification, whether the county is in MD, VA or they mistook George to Williams.
PS: I used to be IV donor and also used to contribute my time on IV initiatives. But after seeing that IV is more of an Illegal-immigration Voice rather than Immigration voice, I have stopped my monetary contributions. Hope things will change.
Because IV works in a manner that will get the intended results - they are for illegals? Legal or Illegal - they are part of Immigration - that is how it works.......
You used to support IV through donations and time, but you stopped because IV was not working the way you wanted it to work.............However, you still check the forums, post in the forums .............. may be you are not all that disappointed with IV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What we have is a "Prince George's County", which joined the 287 g program in December 2009. St. Mary's County Joins Controversial Federal Immigration Initiative - Southern Maryland Headline News (http://somd.com/news/headlines/2010/11667.shtml)
The article may be talking about "Prince William County" in Virginia, which is participating in 287 g program since 2/26/2008.
Partners (http://www.ice.gov/partners/287g/Section287_g.htm)
Right, Pick up the issue with immigration policy organization, and get the clarification, whether the county is in MD, VA or they mistook George to Williams.
PS: I used to be IV donor and also used to contribute my time on IV initiatives. But after seeing that IV is more of an Illegal-immigration Voice rather than Immigration voice, I have stopped my monetary contributions. Hope things will change.
Because IV works in a manner that will get the intended results - they are for illegals? Legal or Illegal - they are part of Immigration - that is how it works.......
You used to support IV through donations and time, but you stopped because IV was not working the way you wanted it to work.............However, you still check the forums, post in the forums .............. may be you are not all that disappointed with IV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wallpaper BRAND NEW 2009 KAWASAKI ZX6R
iv_only_hope
06-04 05:16 PM
Ron,
"
E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year.
"
How do you see above message in the June Visa Bulletin? This means it is illegal to use all of them with in 3 quarters????
I don't wish to sound like Bill Clinton, but it depends on how you define "is." In this case, if they are using "annual limit" to mean the entire annual quota, then they are admitting that they have broken the law and issued too many visas in the first three quarters. Worse, they offer no explanation for having broken the law.[/COLOR]
Well, they could be talking about a subset of the annual quota, such as the quarterly quota. From the context, I don't think that is the case, but I'm also not used to seeing the State Department flat out admit illegality, either.
Well, if they do broke the law, can we do something about it? Like class action law suite???
Let's see if they did, first.
"
E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year.
"
How do you see above message in the June Visa Bulletin? This means it is illegal to use all of them with in 3 quarters????
I don't wish to sound like Bill Clinton, but it depends on how you define "is." In this case, if they are using "annual limit" to mean the entire annual quota, then they are admitting that they have broken the law and issued too many visas in the first three quarters. Worse, they offer no explanation for having broken the law.[/COLOR]
Well, they could be talking about a subset of the annual quota, such as the quarterly quota. From the context, I don't think that is the case, but I'm also not used to seeing the State Department flat out admit illegality, either.
Well, if they do broke the law, can we do something about it? Like class action law suite???
Let's see if they did, first.
paskal
08-31 06:44 PM
hi
i want to come and i am from franklin tennessee which is 30 miles from nashville tn is a bus ride from some where near to this place
thanks
currently it appears that the bus will be from atlanta
please pm ramus and keep in touch with him for more info on that
i want to come and i am from franklin tennessee which is 30 miles from nashville tn is a bus ride from some where near to this place
thanks
currently it appears that the bus will be from atlanta
please pm ramus and keep in touch with him for more info on that
2011 06/kawasaki-2006-zx6r.html
pappu
09-21 02:15 PM
Recieved FP notice for concurrent filing on 07/23/07 although no reciept notice yet.
Did you get it in the rally? I overheard a rumor that they were being distributed. :D
Did you get it in the rally? I overheard a rumor that they were being distributed. :D
more...
pappu
11-25 11:32 AM
Immigrationvoice team has been working on the publicly available USCIS data since its release on USCIS website and we have been discussing this data with top USCIS officials to clear doubts.
Immigration Voice is releasing the analysis of the information for the community. You can view the report at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36
We are putting together a list of recommendations about this data for our next meeting with USCIS. If you have suggestions, do post on the thread. We would also be updating this report on regular basis as the data is updated on USCIS site and numbers change due to approvals/pre-adjudications/field office data/ CP and spillovers. The visa bulletin movement will also be compared against the report and checked with USCIS and DOS.
Team IV
Note: Please read the entire document rather than just basing your judgment on the graph and the visa bulletin charts. There are several caveats and limitations of this data.
We feel this is a one step ahead of the IV prediction tool published by IV in the past. We will continue to refine the analysis as we receive information from DOS and USCIS through our advocacy efforts.
Immigration Voice is releasing the analysis of the information for the community. You can view the report at
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36
We are putting together a list of recommendations about this data for our next meeting with USCIS. If you have suggestions, do post on the thread. We would also be updating this report on regular basis as the data is updated on USCIS site and numbers change due to approvals/pre-adjudications/field office data/ CP and spillovers. The visa bulletin movement will also be compared against the report and checked with USCIS and DOS.
Team IV
Note: Please read the entire document rather than just basing your judgment on the graph and the visa bulletin charts. There are several caveats and limitations of this data.
We feel this is a one step ahead of the IV prediction tool published by IV in the past. We will continue to refine the analysis as we receive information from DOS and USCIS through our advocacy efforts.
makemygc
08-01 12:15 PM
mine reached at 10-23 am -2 nd july,by some L.ARMSTRONG guy..no receipt yet,no check cashed
cjagtap..where did you send your application.. NSC or TSC?
cjagtap..where did you send your application.. NSC or TSC?
more...
dharmesh.pariawala
01-31 10:21 AM
If they're asking for 150% more money, is the service going to be 150% better too??? Are we going to get our forms processed 150% faster too??
Since USCIS calls itself a "customer-focussed" organization, I certainly hope so...
I agree that retrogression problem has nothing to do with this and increasing 150% fees will not process your application 150 times faster. But atleast when we are eligible to file 485, this could take a less time than it does takes right now. Even a one month earlier processing could be very helpful. Quality of service is directly dependent on the resources available and that is dependent on the funds.
I believe this will process the pending application faster than currently it takes.
Since USCIS calls itself a "customer-focussed" organization, I certainly hope so...
I agree that retrogression problem has nothing to do with this and increasing 150% fees will not process your application 150 times faster. But atleast when we are eligible to file 485, this could take a less time than it does takes right now. Even a one month earlier processing could be very helpful. Quality of service is directly dependent on the resources available and that is dependent on the funds.
I believe this will process the pending application faster than currently it takes.
2010 kawasaki zx6r 636 05 06 zx6r
jitnair
08-05 09:50 PM
But consider this: I just posted this in the approval thread:
Looking at the overall approval trend in IV, , Murthy forum etc it is clear to me that FIFO is out of the door and in most likelihood low hanging fruit is being plucked from the tree. At the next Ombudsman call I am going to raise the issue of USCIS's declared commitment to FIFO but actions that seem completely contrary to it.
Obviously anonymous postings in open forums cannot be presented as evidence but one can certainly request the Ombudsman's office to ask for monthly 485 approval statistics and the cat will be out of the bag. By the time the wheels of Goverment bureaucracy move it might be a month or two before this data is made available to the Ombudsman's Office; forget the applicants - that will be like asking for the moon.
Regardless of whether I get approved or not in the next month or two; from a process perspective a monthly approval report going from the USCIS to the Ombudsman's Office each month should hopefully force them to stop this stonewalling and walk the talk.
This will not only help EB2s down the line but spare a thought for next year when EB2 is current, EB3 has a cut off of June 1, 2006 and we start seeing May 2006 EB3 approvals when 2001/02 EB3s are still pending. Again I welcome suggestions but the focus of my effort is going to be the approval process rather than a personal case or two.
Agree - Only solution is to process by PD, rather than anyother dates - Also the PD porting mechanism needs some review. Once the position in line is set it should be set for ever - It is simply unfair for deserving folks waiting in line from 01 (if they are truly 'waiting' that is) if an 04 guy gets approved just becoz. he got his app at NSC/TSC's door a few days earlier. I dont think anyone will complain with that kind of a rule - other than may be USCIS as their processing statistics/metrics may become complicated.
May be writing to Ombudsman will help in this regard.
Looking at the overall approval trend in IV, , Murthy forum etc it is clear to me that FIFO is out of the door and in most likelihood low hanging fruit is being plucked from the tree. At the next Ombudsman call I am going to raise the issue of USCIS's declared commitment to FIFO but actions that seem completely contrary to it.
Obviously anonymous postings in open forums cannot be presented as evidence but one can certainly request the Ombudsman's office to ask for monthly 485 approval statistics and the cat will be out of the bag. By the time the wheels of Goverment bureaucracy move it might be a month or two before this data is made available to the Ombudsman's Office; forget the applicants - that will be like asking for the moon.
Regardless of whether I get approved or not in the next month or two; from a process perspective a monthly approval report going from the USCIS to the Ombudsman's Office each month should hopefully force them to stop this stonewalling and walk the talk.
This will not only help EB2s down the line but spare a thought for next year when EB2 is current, EB3 has a cut off of June 1, 2006 and we start seeing May 2006 EB3 approvals when 2001/02 EB3s are still pending. Again I welcome suggestions but the focus of my effort is going to be the approval process rather than a personal case or two.
Agree - Only solution is to process by PD, rather than anyother dates - Also the PD porting mechanism needs some review. Once the position in line is set it should be set for ever - It is simply unfair for deserving folks waiting in line from 01 (if they are truly 'waiting' that is) if an 04 guy gets approved just becoz. he got his app at NSC/TSC's door a few days earlier. I dont think anyone will complain with that kind of a rule - other than may be USCIS as their processing statistics/metrics may become complicated.
May be writing to Ombudsman will help in this regard.
more...
kothari_rupesh
02-21 02:05 AM
I got LUD 2/17 and 2/18, same for my wife, 2/17 was RFE message, got my wife's RFE in mail today it was for a serological HIV test which was supposedly required but was not done.
Have yet to receive my RFE yet, hopefully tomorrow.
Have yet to receive my RFE yet, hopefully tomorrow.
hair KAWASAKI JORDAN - 05-06 ZX6R
Suva
07-14 11:33 AM
Your spouse applied for H4/H1? Which one?
Thank you very much Dinesh for this. Currently my spouse's passport is stuck in the same place for god-only-knows-what reason. The embassy staff said they are auditing every 2nd-3rd application. We have the AP but we were thinking that if we withdraw the H1B application, the embassy people might stamp the passport saying "Application Received" which sometimes can be a euphemism for "Visa Denied". I once got such a stamp when visa was denied to me.
Since we would then always have to keep explaining at every stage why we have that stamp, that's why we are sticking on with H1B delay. We have been given the same time-frames as you were.
When you withdrew your passport to travel on AP, did they stamp your passport with any text? Also could you please tell us the procedure you followed to withdraw your passport and whether you could collect it in person? We have been asked to email the US Embassy for withdrawing from our H1B application.
Thanks buddy.
Thank you very much Dinesh for this. Currently my spouse's passport is stuck in the same place for god-only-knows-what reason. The embassy staff said they are auditing every 2nd-3rd application. We have the AP but we were thinking that if we withdraw the H1B application, the embassy people might stamp the passport saying "Application Received" which sometimes can be a euphemism for "Visa Denied". I once got such a stamp when visa was denied to me.
Since we would then always have to keep explaining at every stage why we have that stamp, that's why we are sticking on with H1B delay. We have been given the same time-frames as you were.
When you withdrew your passport to travel on AP, did they stamp your passport with any text? Also could you please tell us the procedure you followed to withdraw your passport and whether you could collect it in person? We have been asked to email the US Embassy for withdrawing from our H1B application.
Thanks buddy.
more...
Guig0
02-07 01:36 PM
:-\
hot NINJA 600 ZX6R kawasaki
champu
03-11 11:45 PM
I guess these companies are also registered in USA and have moral responsibilty to respond. It is a huge mistake to ignore a national level politician's query.
Gotta love this system...
Two years ago; Grassley sent a questionnaire to the top 10 Indian outsourcing companies of how they use non immigrant visas.
They did not have any legal obligation to answer his query. They answered his questions by non answering it.
Grassley then starts to increase the rhetoric and starts pressuring uscis/dol to start investigations.
uscis/dol start investigatin and denying cases and study it and find fraud.
now; Grassley is getting his way and starting to change policy.
Nascom senses game is over and come begging which is exactly what grassley wanted in the first place.
At the end; he will get these guys to agree to tough measures (ie., lca requirements for L-1; tougher measures on h-1b, etc.
See how Microsoft answered differently when they got the query and compare to these guys.
This system created in USA has a way of making you conform to their behaviour willingly or through long and painful way. Looks like they had to learn through long and painful way.
Gotta love this system...
Two years ago; Grassley sent a questionnaire to the top 10 Indian outsourcing companies of how they use non immigrant visas.
They did not have any legal obligation to answer his query. They answered his questions by non answering it.
Grassley then starts to increase the rhetoric and starts pressuring uscis/dol to start investigations.
uscis/dol start investigatin and denying cases and study it and find fraud.
now; Grassley is getting his way and starting to change policy.
Nascom senses game is over and come begging which is exactly what grassley wanted in the first place.
At the end; he will get these guys to agree to tough measures (ie., lca requirements for L-1; tougher measures on h-1b, etc.
See how Microsoft answered differently when they got the query and compare to these guys.
This system created in USA has a way of making you conform to their behaviour willingly or through long and painful way. Looks like they had to learn through long and painful way.
more...
house 2006 zx6r 636 | kawasaki
ashkam
03-27 11:51 AM
"I am not replying anymore to your arguments"
That's the most sensible thing you've said today.
Also, read qasleuth's post.
That's the most sensible thing you've said today.
Also, read qasleuth's post.
tattoo Kawasaki ZX6R NINJA 636 2006
Legal
07-19 08:52 PM
OK guys, here is what I think. Being in US on a visitor visa, and then applying for an I-485 does seem like a violation of visa terms, but the other way round seem to be fine.
since B-1 visa is issued clearly on the assumption she does not have immigrant intent.
I mean she can apply for an I-485 first in India, and then apply for a visitor visa later while her I-485 application is pending.
read above
since B-1 visa is issued clearly on the assumption she does not have immigrant intent.
I mean she can apply for an I-485 first in India, and then apply for a visitor visa later while her I-485 application is pending.
read above
more...
pictures 2006 Kawasaki Ninja
cal97
02-10 07:33 PM
I got the same message in the last week of September in 2008. I honestly do not know where my case is. Called NSC, checked with an InfoPass appointment, made an inquiry through the COngress rep's office. All say the case is in NSC.
Not sure what the Hard LUD, followed by a soft LUD and the message was all about.
Not sure what the Hard LUD, followed by a soft LUD and the message was all about.
dresses 2006 ZX-6R Kawi Green amp; a Few
Gravitation
04-16 08:39 AM
I was at one of my congresswoman's office yesterday. She gave us lots of advice on how to promote our message.
Post that advice here.
Post that advice here.
more...
makeup 2006 Kawasaki zx6r 636 - MINT!
anai
04-01 03:18 PM
sent
girlfriend 2006 Kawasaki Zx6r Black
drirshad
02-20 05:02 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
02/20/2008: USCIS Releases FBI Namecheck Policy Q&A Today
* The Q&A indicates that there are about 47,000 cases that fall under this changed policy and most of these cases are expected to be processed by mid-March 2008.
02/20/2008: USCIS Releases FBI Namecheck Policy Q&A Today
* The Q&A indicates that there are about 47,000 cases that fall under this changed policy and most of these cases are expected to be processed by mid-March 2008.
hairstyles 2005 2006 kawasaki ninja zx636
sanbaj
05-05 03:26 PM
Hi,
Here is my situation:
Company A:
EB2 PD Aug 2006
140 Approved
485 Applied July '07 (Got EAD and AP for myself and wife. I am still on H1B but wife used EAD)
Still working with Company A and intend to work with them for another couple of years.
Company B:
EB2 PD Nov 2005 (Substitution labor)
140 Approved.
Can I interfile or do the PD porting so that I can get the older PD? If so, do I have to work for Company B?
I dont have a copy of the LCA and I may not have the original of the approved 140. Can I use a copy of 140 approval notice to apply for the interfile?
Do I need any kind of document from Company B like employment letter in future ?
Does the PD need to be current to interfile?
Do I need to work for Company B?
Does this process in anyway create problems for my current 485 status? My wife used EAD but I have been on H1B with the company that filed for my 485.
I already completed 180 days after filing 485. So, I can use AC21. Will this interfiling process have any impact on that?
How would I know that interfiling process completed successfully?
If USCIS denys the interfile I submitted, does that have any impact on my current 485 process?
If I want to use AC21, does that new job need be similar to Company A or Company B job requirement?
Thank you everyone..
My case is similar to yours except for me the company was the same for both I140s. The only thing my lawyer sent with the request was the Original I140 Approval Notice on the Second (Older PD) I140 (In your case that is Company A's I140). When the AOS application was filed, the Original I140 of Company A was used. The basic content of the letter is already explained in previous posts on this thread. Read them carefully. Also, consult a prudent and capabale lawyer who has some experience in successful Interfiling cases.
If both the I140s are approved on your name, there should be no issue as they have already done all the work related to Proferred Wage, DOL work categories (SOC codes), etc. AOS is just for adjustment into PR status on the basis of approved I140, of which you have two.
I am no lawyer, therefore, please consult a good lawyer to make sure all your questions are answered.
Hope this helps.
Here is my situation:
Company A:
EB2 PD Aug 2006
140 Approved
485 Applied July '07 (Got EAD and AP for myself and wife. I am still on H1B but wife used EAD)
Still working with Company A and intend to work with them for another couple of years.
Company B:
EB2 PD Nov 2005 (Substitution labor)
140 Approved.
Can I interfile or do the PD porting so that I can get the older PD? If so, do I have to work for Company B?
I dont have a copy of the LCA and I may not have the original of the approved 140. Can I use a copy of 140 approval notice to apply for the interfile?
Do I need any kind of document from Company B like employment letter in future ?
Does the PD need to be current to interfile?
Do I need to work for Company B?
Does this process in anyway create problems for my current 485 status? My wife used EAD but I have been on H1B with the company that filed for my 485.
I already completed 180 days after filing 485. So, I can use AC21. Will this interfiling process have any impact on that?
How would I know that interfiling process completed successfully?
If USCIS denys the interfile I submitted, does that have any impact on my current 485 process?
If I want to use AC21, does that new job need be similar to Company A or Company B job requirement?
Thank you everyone..
My case is similar to yours except for me the company was the same for both I140s. The only thing my lawyer sent with the request was the Original I140 Approval Notice on the Second (Older PD) I140 (In your case that is Company A's I140). When the AOS application was filed, the Original I140 of Company A was used. The basic content of the letter is already explained in previous posts on this thread. Read them carefully. Also, consult a prudent and capabale lawyer who has some experience in successful Interfiling cases.
If both the I140s are approved on your name, there should be no issue as they have already done all the work related to Proferred Wage, DOL work categories (SOC codes), etc. AOS is just for adjustment into PR status on the basis of approved I140, of which you have two.
I am no lawyer, therefore, please consult a good lawyer to make sure all your questions are answered.
Hope this helps.
24fps
02-27 05:52 PM
Kid? Pot calling the kettle black?
I have seen idiots like you who don't have an answer to questions and end up simply diluting the discussion with unrelated topics!
If you consider yourself tough and someone with credibility, then provide an answer to my previous post. Punk!
Again, you're the one whose hijacked the thread with your verbal mastur*tion.
LMAO@ "if you consider yourself tough" hahaha
so fighting anonymously over the internet in a forum is your test of being "tough" ?
haha.
Go back and do your IT coding or whatever you do.
I shall reiterate what i stated in my previous post and leave the childish internet bickering to you Mr internet "Sledgehammer" LOL
I have seen idiots like you who don't have an answer to questions and end up simply diluting the discussion with unrelated topics!
If you consider yourself tough and someone with credibility, then provide an answer to my previous post. Punk!
Again, you're the one whose hijacked the thread with your verbal mastur*tion.
LMAO@ "if you consider yourself tough" hahaha
so fighting anonymously over the internet in a forum is your test of being "tough" ?
haha.
Go back and do your IT coding or whatever you do.
I shall reiterate what i stated in my previous post and leave the childish internet bickering to you Mr internet "Sledgehammer" LOL
akgind
07-13 08:24 PM
I completely empathize with you, salcom3. My daughter is in similar boat.
Apart from what IV might do, each of us should write immediately to as many Senators and House Members as possible with our own story, pointing out the unfair treatment of those who are trying to play by the rules.
I totally agree with you akgind.
Here is my daughter's case:
1994 she was 8 years old when we brought her to USA
2002 asylum case was denied, we had to go back to our country (we didn't stay illegaly)
2002 after one month we came back, with H-1 visa, daughter with H-4
2003 I applied for LC
2006 My daughter turned 21 - She had to change status to F-1 (of course college fees were triple). She is out of LC process because of her age.
2007 LC approved, she is still F-1 and paying a lot of money in tuition.
I mean, these kids like my daughter (and I am sure there are thousands like her), deserve a break too. If the DREAM ACT is going to benefit illegal persons, it should also benefit children that have waited for their parents' LC process for long years only to see their hopes destroyed.
Apart from what IV might do, each of us should write immediately to as many Senators and House Members as possible with our own story, pointing out the unfair treatment of those who are trying to play by the rules.
I totally agree with you akgind.
Here is my daughter's case:
1994 she was 8 years old when we brought her to USA
2002 asylum case was denied, we had to go back to our country (we didn't stay illegaly)
2002 after one month we came back, with H-1 visa, daughter with H-4
2003 I applied for LC
2006 My daughter turned 21 - She had to change status to F-1 (of course college fees were triple). She is out of LC process because of her age.
2007 LC approved, she is still F-1 and paying a lot of money in tuition.
I mean, these kids like my daughter (and I am sure there are thousands like her), deserve a break too. If the DREAM ACT is going to benefit illegal persons, it should also benefit children that have waited for their parents' LC process for long years only to see their hopes destroyed.