camphor
07-03 02:48 PM
My 485 application for EB2 was filed with USCIS on Sunday, July 1st 2007. My lawfirm is not sure if it will be accepted by USCIS since the filing was done in the weekend. Any comments? There could be lot of us in a similar situation. For those who are in the same boat, I would appreciate any updates you have received from your lawyer.
Thanks,
Thanks,
wallpaper Valentines Day Cards
kumar35
07-27 12:41 PM
New I 140 possible in case of appeal pending on old I 140 rejection
I'VE A QUESTION REGARDING I-140 case on appeal. The original approved PERM labor certification is in that case. In order to file new I140 Whether, I need to ask USCIS to withdraw that case and use my approved labor certification for this new I-140. But I am not sure how to accomplish that. Let me know if you have any helpful info.
thanks in advance
I'VE A QUESTION REGARDING I-140 case on appeal. The original approved PERM labor certification is in that case. In order to file new I140 Whether, I need to ask USCIS to withdraw that case and use my approved labor certification for this new I-140. But I am not sure how to accomplish that. Let me know if you have any helpful info.
thanks in advance
Macaca
07-23 07:38 PM
Sheehan: I will beat Pelosi (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/sheehan-i-will-beat-pelosi-2007-07-23.html) By Jeremy Jacobs, July 23, 2007
If Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refuses to bring articles of impeachment against President Bush to the floor of the House, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan said Monday, Sheehan not only will challenge the Speaker in the next election but also will defeat her.
Discussing President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Sheehan said, �We put them there. We can fire them. If Nancy Pelosi doesn't do her constitutionally mandated job by midnight tonight, tomorrow I will announce that I'm going to run against her.
�And not only am I going to run against her, but I will beat her,� Sheehan added.
A spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said the Speaker and House Democrats are working toward their goals this Congress and would not address Sheehan�s proclamation.
�The Speaker and House Democrats are focused on ending the war in Iraq, holding the Bush administration accountable and delivering a new direction for the American people,� Elshami said.�Those are the priorities of the Speaker and the Democrats.�
Sheehan seized the anti-war spotlight during her extended protest outside the president�s ranch in Crawford, Texas in 2005, after her 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq. Speaking at a demonstration at Arlington National Cemetery, Sheehan argued that it is Pelosi�s constitutional obligation to impeach the president.
�The administration has abused our soldiers. They've abused our freedoms,� Sheehan said. �They have killed my son and countless others. And they must be held accountable.
�Impeachment is not a fringe movement. It is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table,� Sheehan said.
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072300697.html?hpid=moreheadlines) By NATASHA T. METZLER The Associated Press, July 23, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat's refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers' office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Mich., chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.
"The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable," Sheehan said outside of Conyers' office after the meeting. "And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi."
Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers' office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren't enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.
Forty-five of Sheehan's fellow protesters also were arrested. Capitol Police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said that after they are processed, the arrested activists could each pay a $50 fine to be released.
"Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table," Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn't change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.
Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq.
If Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refuses to bring articles of impeachment against President Bush to the floor of the House, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan said Monday, Sheehan not only will challenge the Speaker in the next election but also will defeat her.
Discussing President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Sheehan said, �We put them there. We can fire them. If Nancy Pelosi doesn't do her constitutionally mandated job by midnight tonight, tomorrow I will announce that I'm going to run against her.
�And not only am I going to run against her, but I will beat her,� Sheehan added.
A spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said the Speaker and House Democrats are working toward their goals this Congress and would not address Sheehan�s proclamation.
�The Speaker and House Democrats are focused on ending the war in Iraq, holding the Bush administration accountable and delivering a new direction for the American people,� Elshami said.�Those are the priorities of the Speaker and the Democrats.�
Sheehan seized the anti-war spotlight during her extended protest outside the president�s ranch in Crawford, Texas in 2005, after her 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq. Speaking at a demonstration at Arlington National Cemetery, Sheehan argued that it is Pelosi�s constitutional obligation to impeach the president.
�The administration has abused our soldiers. They've abused our freedoms,� Sheehan said. �They have killed my son and countless others. And they must be held accountable.
�Impeachment is not a fringe movement. It is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table,� Sheehan said.
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072300697.html?hpid=moreheadlines) By NATASHA T. METZLER The Associated Press, July 23, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat's refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers' office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Mich., chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.
"The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable," Sheehan said outside of Conyers' office after the meeting. "And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi."
Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers' office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren't enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.
Forty-five of Sheehan's fellow protesters also were arrested. Capitol Police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said that after they are processed, the arrested activists could each pay a $50 fine to be released.
"Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table," Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn't change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.
Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq.
2011 A Brief History of Quilling
Raju
07-12 08:00 AM
http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
sorry if this link has already been posted elsewhere (this is my 1st day @IV)
Yes a few times since yesterday. Please change the thread name to something specific. Welcome to IV and please contribute.
sorry if this link has already been posted elsewhere (this is my 1st day @IV)
Yes a few times since yesterday. Please change the thread name to something specific. Welcome to IV and please contribute.
more...
raja2122
09-25 11:48 PM
NO My husband has applied for I-485 and EAD card for both of us, He is on 9th year, i just got my H1 on Oct 2005.
freddyCR
February 8th, 2005, 07:09 PM
Just a regular day...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/alcorjr2/fruitedMedium.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/alcorjr2/fruitedMedium.jpg
more...
HereIComeGC
04-25 12:51 PM
I spoke with TSC Rep today. I called up to re-check what lot of other guys are saying here that TSC no longer is honoring 180 day namecheck rule mandated by court few months back.
TSC Rep said she has no idea about 180 day rule but knows about FBI/USCIS joint effort for clearing name checks pending more than year, 2 years etc.
So atleast, my call suggested that some people at USCIS have no idea about 180 days rule mandaged by court.
TSC Rep said she has no idea about 180 day rule but knows about FBI/USCIS joint effort for clearing name checks pending more than year, 2 years etc.
So atleast, my call suggested that some people at USCIS have no idea about 180 days rule mandaged by court.
2010 Valentine-Day-Gift-Quillied-
fatjoe
10-10 03:41 PM
Is there anyone whose I485 is pending for more than 90 days. My I-485 was sent on July 18th. I called USCIS twice and they are asking me to call them on Oct 17th (when 90 days is completed). They are saying that my appl.n should be in by then. Is there any one whose checks got cleared after 90 days. If not, what did you do about it.
more...
puvathoor
01-24 06:38 PM
Hello IV members..
I have 2 x 10% savings certificates from Lufthansa. This will give you 10% off a fare on Lufthansa transatlantic flights.
These are valid through March 23, 2008 (i.e you have book the tickets by March 23, 2008.. NOT Travel by that date)..
I am not planning to use these certs.
I am willing to mail these certificates to anyone who promises to donate at least portion or all of the savings to Immigration Voice.
If you need more information about these certificates, please message me your e-mail address and I can send you a scanned copy of the certs..
I have 2 x 10% savings certificates from Lufthansa. This will give you 10% off a fare on Lufthansa transatlantic flights.
These are valid through March 23, 2008 (i.e you have book the tickets by March 23, 2008.. NOT Travel by that date)..
I am not planning to use these certs.
I am willing to mail these certificates to anyone who promises to donate at least portion or all of the savings to Immigration Voice.
If you need more information about these certificates, please message me your e-mail address and I can send you a scanned copy of the certs..
hair Moad#39;s beautiful quilling
gccovet
11-05 11:15 AM
Hi guys ,
can any one let me know what is the NAICS code for health care service provider company where we do transcription coding ,radiology service please
thanks
check this out
SIC Code Directory (http://listsareus.com/business-sic-codes-m.htm)
can any one let me know what is the NAICS code for health care service provider company where we do transcription coding ,radiology service please
thanks
check this out
SIC Code Directory (http://listsareus.com/business-sic-codes-m.htm)
more...
willIWill
03-08 10:42 AM
For EB2 I - CY 06, in march it was 10150 and now it is 9900. It has gone down by only 250, in line with ~3000 visas/12 monthly allotment. No spillover or anything for the month of march atleast as per the numbers.
hot Quilling, Valentines Day
Saurabh_tulika
06-01 02:23 PM
Yes there is away to track your 140.
Goto https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp and create your profile and you will be able to track the process. THere is option to receive email from USCIS whenever there is a change in your file (you have to select that option)
Saurabh
Goto https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp and create your profile and you will be able to track the process. THere is option to receive email from USCIS whenever there is a change in your file (you have to select that option)
Saurabh
more...
house Quilled Valentine card with
Blog Feeds
06-12 07:00 PM
It seems that everytime you breathe in and breathe out, there is a new immigration story or event which may affect you. A new law is introduced in Congress, another Visa Bulletin is published, the USCIS has yet again updated its processing times, the Courts have decided an important immigration case, the H-1B cap has been reached, etc., etc. How do you keep up with all of this without driving yourself totally crazy? Yes, there is the Internet. But there are thousands of attorneys and multiple government agencies all posting immigration news at the same time. You could subscribe to...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/06/immigration-info-made-easy.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/06/immigration-info-made-easy.html)
tattoo Valentines Day Cards
Blog Feeds
12-18 10:40 PM
Just when U.S. employers thought the bad vibes emanating from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) could get no worse, the agency tasked with deciding whether to approve or reject requests for immigration benefits has come up with VIBE -- its new Verification Initiative for Business Enterprises which costs a whopping $35,506,760.43. Just imagine . . . . . . a program in which USCIS, by using VIBE, "will acquire information from an [Independent Information Provider (IIP)] . . ., which can be used to verify the eligibility of a company while detecting multiple types of misrepresentations." . . ....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/12/bad-bad-bad-immigration-vibrations-from-uscis.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/12/bad-bad-bad-immigration-vibrations-from-uscis.html)
more...
pictures from Mirage Bookmark and
chanduv23
08-03 10:57 PM
What about Tuxedo :D
Please help with this action item
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11962
Please help with this action item
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11962
dresses Day#39;s Quilling Patterns
Macaca
09-27 11:40 AM
Following Bush Over a Cliff (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/26/AR2007092602067.html) By David S. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com) | Washington Post, September 27, 2007
The spectacle Tuesday of 151 House Republicans voting in lock step with the White House against expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was one of the more remarkable sights of the year. Rarely do you see so many politicians putting their careers in jeopardy.
The bill they opposed, at the urging of President Bush, commands healthy majorities in both the House and Senate but is headed for a veto because Bush objects to expanding this form of safety net for the children of the working poor. He has staked out that ground on his own, ignoring or rejecting the pleas of conservative senators such as Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch, who helped shape the compromise that the House approved and that the Senate endorsed.
SCHIP has been one of the most successful health-care measures created in the past decade. It was started in 1997 with support from both parties, in order to insure children in families with incomes too high to receive Medicaid but who could not afford private insurance.
The $40 billion spent on SCHIP in the past 10 years financed insurance for roughly 6.6 million youngsters a year. The money was distributed through the states, which were given considerable flexibility in designing their programs. The insurance came from private companies, at rates negotiated by the states.
Governors of both parties -- 43 of them, again including conservatives such as Sonny Perdue of Georgia -- have praised the program. And they endorsed the congressional decision to expand the coverage to an additional 4 million youngsters, at the cost of an additional $35 billion over the next five years. The bill would be financed by a 61-cents-a-pack increase in cigarette taxes. If ever there was a crowd-pleaser of a bill, this is it. Hundreds of organizations -- grass-roots groups ranging from AARP to United Way of America and the national YMCA -- have called on Bush to sign the bill. America's Health Insurance Plans, the largest insurance lobbying group, endorsed the bill on Monday.
But Bush insists that SCHIP is "an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American" -- an eventuality he is determined to prevent.
Bush's adamant stand may be peculiar to him, but the willingness of Republican legislators to line up with him is more significant. Bush does not have to face the voters again, but these men and women will be on the ballot in just over a year -- and their Democratic opponents will undoubtedly remind them of their votes.
Two of their smartest colleagues -- Heather Wilson of New Mexico and Ray LaHood of Illinois -- tried to steer House Republicans away from this political self-immolation, but they had minimal success. The combined influence of White House and congressional leadership -- and what I would have to call herd instinct -- prevailed.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) argued that "rather than taking the opportunity to cover the children that cannot obtain coverage through Medicaid or the private marketplace, this bill uses these children as pawns in their cynical attempt to make millions of Americans completely reliant upon the government for their health-care needs."
In his new book, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan wrote that his fellow Republicans deserved to lose their congressional majority in 2006 because they let spending run out of control and turned a blind eye toward misbehavior by their own members. Now, those Republicans have given voters a fresh reason to question their priorities -- or their common sense.
Saying no to immigration reform and measures to shorten the war in Iraq may be politically defensible, because there are substantial constituencies who question the wisdom of those bills -- and who favor alternative policies. But the Bush administration's arguments against SCHIP -- the cost of the program and the financing -- sound hollow at a time when billions more are being spent in Iraq with no end in sight. Bush's alternative -- a change in the tax treatment of employer-financed health insurance -- has some real appeal, but it is an idea he let languish for months after offering it last winter. And, in the judgment of his fellow Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, Bush's plan is too complex and controversial to be tied to the renewal of SCHIP.
This promised veto is a real poison pill for the GOP.
The spectacle Tuesday of 151 House Republicans voting in lock step with the White House against expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was one of the more remarkable sights of the year. Rarely do you see so many politicians putting their careers in jeopardy.
The bill they opposed, at the urging of President Bush, commands healthy majorities in both the House and Senate but is headed for a veto because Bush objects to expanding this form of safety net for the children of the working poor. He has staked out that ground on his own, ignoring or rejecting the pleas of conservative senators such as Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch, who helped shape the compromise that the House approved and that the Senate endorsed.
SCHIP has been one of the most successful health-care measures created in the past decade. It was started in 1997 with support from both parties, in order to insure children in families with incomes too high to receive Medicaid but who could not afford private insurance.
The $40 billion spent on SCHIP in the past 10 years financed insurance for roughly 6.6 million youngsters a year. The money was distributed through the states, which were given considerable flexibility in designing their programs. The insurance came from private companies, at rates negotiated by the states.
Governors of both parties -- 43 of them, again including conservatives such as Sonny Perdue of Georgia -- have praised the program. And they endorsed the congressional decision to expand the coverage to an additional 4 million youngsters, at the cost of an additional $35 billion over the next five years. The bill would be financed by a 61-cents-a-pack increase in cigarette taxes. If ever there was a crowd-pleaser of a bill, this is it. Hundreds of organizations -- grass-roots groups ranging from AARP to United Way of America and the national YMCA -- have called on Bush to sign the bill. America's Health Insurance Plans, the largest insurance lobbying group, endorsed the bill on Monday.
But Bush insists that SCHIP is "an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American" -- an eventuality he is determined to prevent.
Bush's adamant stand may be peculiar to him, but the willingness of Republican legislators to line up with him is more significant. Bush does not have to face the voters again, but these men and women will be on the ballot in just over a year -- and their Democratic opponents will undoubtedly remind them of their votes.
Two of their smartest colleagues -- Heather Wilson of New Mexico and Ray LaHood of Illinois -- tried to steer House Republicans away from this political self-immolation, but they had minimal success. The combined influence of White House and congressional leadership -- and what I would have to call herd instinct -- prevailed.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) argued that "rather than taking the opportunity to cover the children that cannot obtain coverage through Medicaid or the private marketplace, this bill uses these children as pawns in their cynical attempt to make millions of Americans completely reliant upon the government for their health-care needs."
In his new book, former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan wrote that his fellow Republicans deserved to lose their congressional majority in 2006 because they let spending run out of control and turned a blind eye toward misbehavior by their own members. Now, those Republicans have given voters a fresh reason to question their priorities -- or their common sense.
Saying no to immigration reform and measures to shorten the war in Iraq may be politically defensible, because there are substantial constituencies who question the wisdom of those bills -- and who favor alternative policies. But the Bush administration's arguments against SCHIP -- the cost of the program and the financing -- sound hollow at a time when billions more are being spent in Iraq with no end in sight. Bush's alternative -- a change in the tax treatment of employer-financed health insurance -- has some real appeal, but it is an idea he let languish for months after offering it last winter. And, in the judgment of his fellow Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, Bush's plan is too complex and controversial to be tied to the renewal of SCHIP.
This promised veto is a real poison pill for the GOP.
more...
makeup Simple Valentine#39;s Day
akash_chopda
09-28 03:06 PM
Thank you!
My husband will go to india, so he will no longer on status, right ? if my H4 to F1 transfer is in progress, then can i stay in USA ?
My husband will go to india, so he will no longer on status, right ? if my H4 to F1 transfer is in progress, then can i stay in USA ?
girlfriend Quilling - The Art of Turning
chanduv23
11-07 11:52 AM
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/backlog_faqs_10-31-07.pdf
if DOL == funeral house
then
USCIS == Frying Pan :)
if DOL == funeral house
then
USCIS == Frying Pan :)
hairstyles Father#39;s Day, birthday
Blog Feeds
09-28 12:40 PM
The Cap seem to be moving slowly in the past few months, but something is different with the release of the new count this week.
As of September 18, 2009, approximately 46,000 H-1B (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html) cap-subject petitions and approximately 20,000 petitions qualifying for the advanced degree cap exemption had been filed. It seems that some employers are hiring again and willing to file for H1B visas for specialty workers. This is a good sign, but this also means that visas may run out sooner than expected.
USCIS will continue to accept both cap-subject petitions and advanced degree petitions until a sufficient number of H-1B petitions have been received to reach the statutory limits, taking into account the fact that some of these petitions may be denied, revoked, or withdrawn.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/09/h1b_visa_cap_september_24_2009.html)
As of September 18, 2009, approximately 46,000 H-1B (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html) cap-subject petitions and approximately 20,000 petitions qualifying for the advanced degree cap exemption had been filed. It seems that some employers are hiring again and willing to file for H1B visas for specialty workers. This is a good sign, but this also means that visas may run out sooner than expected.
USCIS will continue to accept both cap-subject petitions and advanced degree petitions until a sufficient number of H-1B petitions have been received to reach the statutory limits, taking into account the fact that some of these petitions may be denied, revoked, or withdrawn.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/09/h1b_visa_cap_september_24_2009.html)
martinvisalaw
02-23 06:01 PM
I assume that your girlfriend is a US citizen. See here for the permanent residence (PR) procedure: Family-based Marriage Immigration categories - Elaine Martin Attorney (http://martinvisalaw.com/family_lpr.html). Getting married or starting the PR process should not affect your company's L-1 extension petition.
srini1976
09-23 05:12 PM
EB 485 Numbers in Excel for easy reading and calculations
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Agsah2P-Kr24dFM1dk9zOUVaVzR6RTFHMzlMSHpLLUE&hl=en
Thanks tempgc
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Agsah2P-Kr24dFM1dk9zOUVaVzR6RTFHMzlMSHpLLUE&hl=en
Thanks tempgc
No comments:
Post a Comment