TomTancredo
03-04 02:38 PM
Did you get to know what the RFE is about?
Its about late registered birth certificate... They want some secondary evidence...
Its about late registered birth certificate... They want some secondary evidence...
wallpaper Natalie Portman wallpaper
ngodisha
09-09 11:41 AM
Paypal contribution of $300. I cannot make it to the rally because of prior commitments. Thanks to all who are going to be at the rally in person.
I feel good after making the contribution. Hopefully, several others will join this contribution drive and experience this good feeling first hand.
Good luck to all.
I feel good after making the contribution. Hopefully, several others will join this contribution drive and experience this good feeling first hand.
Good luck to all.
Libra
09-11 09:14 PM
zinchak thank you for your contribution.
2011 Has Natalie Portman—now
gk_2000
08-24 01:38 PM
I dont have any opinions on the main topic here - just wanted to chime in on this one...
Many CEOs work for $1 a year - thats just the salary component and only one side of the story. There is another side to it - stocks and options. No one gives up the stocks that they keep getting every year..infact, for many of these guys, the salary is just a drop in the bucket. Their real cash cow is the hundreds of thousands in stocks that they receive each year. Nobody gives those up. The $1 per year is mostly a publicity thing...
So this actually supports my point. There is no "loophole" to close.
I recommend my friends snathan and swissgear to avoid actions based on jealousy over people just like yourself. But hurting them you hurt yourself
Giving reds - is that the only thing you can do? Do you want more "helpful" posts from me? I wish to avoid the specifics of your arguments or rebukes, as they are not important here, so if my replies are not "helpful" then perhaps your arguments are irrelevant to begin with
Many CEOs work for $1 a year - thats just the salary component and only one side of the story. There is another side to it - stocks and options. No one gives up the stocks that they keep getting every year..infact, for many of these guys, the salary is just a drop in the bucket. Their real cash cow is the hundreds of thousands in stocks that they receive each year. Nobody gives those up. The $1 per year is mostly a publicity thing...
So this actually supports my point. There is no "loophole" to close.
I recommend my friends snathan and swissgear to avoid actions based on jealousy over people just like yourself. But hurting them you hurt yourself
Giving reds - is that the only thing you can do? Do you want more "helpful" posts from me? I wish to avoid the specifics of your arguments or rebukes, as they are not important here, so if my replies are not "helpful" then perhaps your arguments are irrelevant to begin with
more...
r_mistry
01-12 02:27 PM
Can somebody please provide their experience with SR?
1- When do you get a feedback from USCIS on the SR?
2 - Anybody still waiting for their AP filed at NSC last week of July???
thanks!!!
1- When do you get a feedback from USCIS on the SR?
2 - Anybody still waiting for their AP filed at NSC last week of July???
thanks!!!
meridiani.planum
04-02 03:43 AM
Well if u r a paying customer, u didn't like the product that u bought. Forget it and move on and u knew b4 buying that its non-refundable and cannot be taken back whether u like it or not. Before buying the product u very well knew what u were buying dint u? So live with it. :D
that might be your attitude. some people have a different opinion and dont like to bend over when circumstances try to screw them. If you pay for something and get a lemon you might be ok with living with it and moving on, saying its non-refundable. Many others dont share that view. They'll fight for a replacement, a fix, some solution to the problem.
If all you can do is bend over, then move on, you are wasting your time on IV.
that might be your attitude. some people have a different opinion and dont like to bend over when circumstances try to screw them. If you pay for something and get a lemon you might be ok with living with it and moving on, saying its non-refundable. Many others dont share that view. They'll fight for a replacement, a fix, some solution to the problem.
If all you can do is bend over, then move on, you are wasting your time on IV.
more...
baburob2
03-15 06:25 PM
Overall no big progress w.r.t our title's though Brownback's comment on immigration numbers is good.
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
2010 natalie portman
abhisam
07-27 10:00 PM
can you please publish the agenda of the meeting on the yahoo group? Thanks!
more...
Pallavi79
09-14 10:20 AM
my PD is March 2003. I filed in EB3 because all EB categories are current at that time.
hair pictures of natalie portman
shilpianand
08-10 03:20 PM
All 6 of our checks got cleared today below are the details
I-485/131/765 recd date: 2nd july 07
I-485/131/765 notice date: 06th Aug 07
Service Center send : NSC
I-140 approved : on 31-May-06, TSC
Got Recipts : NO
I-485/131/765 recd date: 2nd july 07
I-485/131/765 notice date: 06th Aug 07
Service Center send : NSC
I-140 approved : on 31-May-06, TSC
Got Recipts : NO
more...
snthampi
09-02 01:09 PM
Landed here in November 2000. Started the GC process in 2004. Could've filed on EB2, but didn't care much when the employer insisted on filing under EB3 for whatever stupid reason. My PD is May 2004 (EB3). It wasn't making much difference then. But, now things are different and EB3 is totally screwed up.
Actually, I am not worried about the GC much, because I am not sure about my future plans. If I make a firm decision to stay, I might reapply in EB2. Life is worth a billion billion times more than the GC. So, let it take its own sweet time. Concentrate on your life and career, and SURELY HAVE A LOT OF FUN BECAUSE LIFE IS SHORT AND YOU LIVE ONLY ONCE.
Actually, I am not worried about the GC much, because I am not sure about my future plans. If I make a firm decision to stay, I might reapply in EB2. Life is worth a billion billion times more than the GC. So, let it take its own sweet time. Concentrate on your life and career, and SURELY HAVE A LOT OF FUN BECAUSE LIFE IS SHORT AND YOU LIVE ONLY ONCE.
hot Natalie Portman Naked Pictures
gctoget
07-30 07:29 PM
gctoget, we are actually 39 members now. 24 is the new members that have joined since a week back. If you look at the members section on our yahoo groups we have more. Keep joining folks, we have become very active.
Sorry about that Drona. "39 members" .....that sounds great!!!:)
Sorry about that Drona. "39 members" .....that sounds great!!!:)
more...
house Actress Natalie Portman at
vparam
09-30 11:14 AM
This is an excellent thread. It's something I've been looking for for a long time. I am still not clear about using AC21. Here's my situation.
July 2nd filer. Received EAD for me (primary) and my spouse. Waiting for I140 approval. I understand it's risky to invoke AC21 before I140 approval. After I get it approved, here's what I intend to do.
1. Inc a business in my spouse's name.
2. Invoke AC21 and join my spouse's company as a "Software Engineer" (my position in LCA)
If I do this, during I485 adjudication, all I need is an offer letter from my spouse company saying that I am working as a Software Engineer right?
Also, does USCIS care during I485 adjudication whether I got paid continously while employed with my spouse's company?
If for any reason, I decide to quit my spouse's company before I485 adjudication and move to a different company, Will I be able to do this?
yes, you should be able to jump as many organization as you like...
July 2nd filer. Received EAD for me (primary) and my spouse. Waiting for I140 approval. I understand it's risky to invoke AC21 before I140 approval. After I get it approved, here's what I intend to do.
1. Inc a business in my spouse's name.
2. Invoke AC21 and join my spouse's company as a "Software Engineer" (my position in LCA)
If I do this, during I485 adjudication, all I need is an offer letter from my spouse company saying that I am working as a Software Engineer right?
Also, does USCIS care during I485 adjudication whether I got paid continously while employed with my spouse's company?
If for any reason, I decide to quit my spouse's company before I485 adjudication and move to a different company, Will I be able to do this?
yes, you should be able to jump as many organization as you like...
tattoo Natalie Portman Smokey Eye
gctest
09-15 11:30 AM
keep supporting EB3 porting .. you wil then get your GC in 7 years
If somebody is eligible to jump from Eb3 -> EB2, then he should be allowed to jump.
I am EB2. I had to change my job as my previous employer didnot allow me to file in EB2 as I didnot have prior experience even though i have MS from USA.
I changed my job and now I am in EB2. My PD is Feb 2008. Sucks that I missed the bus in July 2007.
Nobody should go through what I went through. If somebody is eligible to jump, then he should jump from EB3->EB2.
Considering the current delays in labour and I140 approvals, I think the entire process of filing for new labor, then I140 and the PD porting will take around 2yrs if there are no Queries. :p
Unless somebody's PD is mid 2006 or 2007 above in EB3, I dont think this EB3->EB2 jump will be helpful. :rolleyes:
YOu never know what rules will change in future. :confused:
If somebody is eligible to jump from Eb3 -> EB2, then he should be allowed to jump.
I am EB2. I had to change my job as my previous employer didnot allow me to file in EB2 as I didnot have prior experience even though i have MS from USA.
I changed my job and now I am in EB2. My PD is Feb 2008. Sucks that I missed the bus in July 2007.
Nobody should go through what I went through. If somebody is eligible to jump, then he should jump from EB3->EB2.
Considering the current delays in labour and I140 approvals, I think the entire process of filing for new labor, then I140 and the PD porting will take around 2yrs if there are no Queries. :p
Unless somebody's PD is mid 2006 or 2007 above in EB3, I dont think this EB3->EB2 jump will be helpful. :rolleyes:
YOu never know what rules will change in future. :confused:
more...
pictures Natalie Portman Jewelry
Green.Tech
06-04 11:51 PM
Folks, the bills are going to be taken to the next level soon...We don't have much time....Please contribute financially for this cause so we can all get GC's sooner than later...
Who knows when our next opportunity will come!
Who knows when our next opportunity will come!
dresses I think of Natalie Portman as
JunRN
05-28 06:46 PM
Actually, they asked for it because I only have 1.5 years of US experience. I arrived here in the US on June 2007 and applied for I-140/I-485 on July 2007 under Schedule A (LC exempt).
I showed my EAD valid until 2010 and USCIS FAQ showing I can renew it until I get my GC. I also showed I-485 receipt notice.
Anyway, I also got FHA loan at 4.5% fixed for 30 years.
I showed my EAD valid until 2010 and USCIS FAQ showing I can renew it until I get my GC. I also showed I-485 receipt notice.
Anyway, I also got FHA loan at 4.5% fixed for 30 years.
more...
makeup Natalie Portman#39;s long messy
qualified_trash
01-02 07:20 PM
Folks,
I know this has been discussed in the past on this and other message boards but I wanted to hear some more opinions about it. What is the value of green card to you?
I know different ppl have different reasons like ability to switch jobs, ability to travel freely, ability to have a job for spouse etc. All said and done how many of you would like to go back to your home countries in the next 5-6 years? I know a lot of people have issues such as aging parents back home or they simply don't see themselves living in a foreign land forever. I guess my question is what percentage of ppl aspiring for a GC view it as a convenience vs percentage of ppl who actually see it as a path to settling down in US for good.
Thanks
you should maybe set it up as a poll. as for me, I am here for good unless asked to leave :-)
I know this has been discussed in the past on this and other message boards but I wanted to hear some more opinions about it. What is the value of green card to you?
I know different ppl have different reasons like ability to switch jobs, ability to travel freely, ability to have a job for spouse etc. All said and done how many of you would like to go back to your home countries in the next 5-6 years? I know a lot of people have issues such as aging parents back home or they simply don't see themselves living in a foreign land forever. I guess my question is what percentage of ppl aspiring for a GC view it as a convenience vs percentage of ppl who actually see it as a path to settling down in US for good.
Thanks
you should maybe set it up as a poll. as for me, I am here for good unless asked to leave :-)
girlfriend Natalie Portman
syendu1
01-10 02:53 PM
Did you have unexpired H1B / I-94? In my case I am on EAD / pending I-485 / AOS (expired H1 / I-94) & BOA didn't approve.
Do you know any one who didn't have H1B / I-94 but got loan from BOA based on AOS?
yes, i had an unexpired h1b/i-94. yes, i do have friends who were not on h1b/i-94 and still got approved from boa. for some reason, i believe, its pretty much the agent who handles your case decides on these issues. i remem' for one or two things which are supposed to be important, my agent asked me not to worry about and i dont think i gave him a copy of my h1b visa either.
sy
Do you know any one who didn't have H1B / I-94 but got loan from BOA based on AOS?
yes, i had an unexpired h1b/i-94. yes, i do have friends who were not on h1b/i-94 and still got approved from boa. for some reason, i believe, its pretty much the agent who handles your case decides on these issues. i remem' for one or two things which are supposed to be important, my agent asked me not to worry about and i dont think i gave him a copy of my h1b visa either.
sy
hairstyles Natalie Portman#39;s Fabric
qplearn
12-18 05:46 PM
what will be will be
let's not lack in our efforts though
there are two campaigns underway:
add a member and
contribute at least $20
by Dec 31
funds and members...are the key to our success
please join us in both campaigns
Thanks!
It will help if we know exactly how much more money is demanded by our lobbyst. Obviously, the money goes primarily to them.
let's not lack in our efforts though
there are two campaigns underway:
add a member and
contribute at least $20
by Dec 31
funds and members...are the key to our success
please join us in both campaigns
Thanks!
It will help if we know exactly how much more money is demanded by our lobbyst. Obviously, the money goes primarily to them.
return_to_india
02-24 11:06 PM
I don't know if anyone of you has ever gotten on a rush hour train in mumbai. But before leaving for the US, a wise man told me that going to the US is like getting on a train in Mumbai, it's a struggle to get in. You'll have to push, shove, maybe stand on the footboard for a while. But once you get in, hold on tight until you get to your station.....
Phew.. I have traveled all three lines(searching for jobs/attending interviews - Early 90s it was not that bright for tech jobs). Still some people standing and reading news papers in that crowd.
Phew.. I have traveled all three lines(searching for jobs/attending interviews - Early 90s it was not that bright for tech jobs). Still some people standing and reading news papers in that crowd.
texanguy
09-10 05:25 PM
i think they will have to wait till the end of the quarter to assign that quota, how would they know about the number of the prospective applicant ahead of time? They first have to make sure that "current" status people should get a visa number. Not a fact i like, but thats the way it is...
But at the same time EB2 will get spillover from EB1 and EB2 ROW, so its expected that EB2 I will move forward. But how much that spillover is gonna be? Any data?
But at the same time EB2 will get spillover from EB1 and EB2 ROW, so its expected that EB2 I will move forward. But how much that spillover is gonna be? Any data?
No comments:
Post a Comment