immig4me
05-07 08:12 AM
Called 3 of the senators in tier one. Their responses from the first days to now is slightly different. Initially, they would say that they are against amnesty or we have not read the draft..... now the responses are like, the senator is reviewing the draft, he understands that you have followed the law.......
I hope this is because of our efforts; please IV members continue with this phone campaign, even if you have already called once. Encourage your friends to do the same. This will make a difference guys, we are making the difference :)
I hope this is because of our efforts; please IV members continue with this phone campaign, even if you have already called once. Encourage your friends to do the same. This will make a difference guys, we are making the difference :)
wallpaper Wedding Hairstyle Gallery
ajay
03-17 10:29 PM
Jayant,
But again, the thing to know about this stimulus package/rebate is that this is not FREE money; it is merely an advance on your 2008 tax return. Remember that and think twice before you spend it foolishly. Better still, send it to IV, contribute to an IRA or fund your kid's 529 plan.
What you said is not right according to the following IRS FAQ:
Q. Will the payment I receive in 2008 reduce my 2008 refund or increase the amount I owe for 2008?
A. No, the stimulus payment will not reduce your refund or increase the amount you owe when you file your 2008 return.
Courtesy by the link:
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179181,00.html
But again, the thing to know about this stimulus package/rebate is that this is not FREE money; it is merely an advance on your 2008 tax return. Remember that and think twice before you spend it foolishly. Better still, send it to IV, contribute to an IRA or fund your kid's 529 plan.
What you said is not right according to the following IRS FAQ:
Q. Will the payment I receive in 2008 reduce my 2008 refund or increase the amount I owe for 2008?
A. No, the stimulus payment will not reduce your refund or increase the amount you owe when you file your 2008 return.
Courtesy by the link:
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179181,00.html
eb3_nepa
07-16 11:59 AM
I am not seeing a lot of action today. Do we have any more members who want to take part in the action?
Common people, we NEED this campaign to be a continuous success. :)
Common people, we NEED this campaign to be a continuous success. :)
2011 wedding hairstyles for long
paisa
09-10 02:40 PM
Guys,
Its only Green card and I am not sure why people get upset big deal. Nobody asked us to move here. And if there is a system in place we cannot be saying its bad and this and that. My PD is DEC 04 do I feel bad someone in 2006 gets it. YES. Is the system crappy yes. I have a MS in US. So all this hoopla about US ms are getting it and not us is wrong. The other question is should I be getting it over others who dont have a MS from US. I believe yes we should.
but thats my thoughts on the subject if someone does not like it I respect his thoughts.
Its only Green card and I am not sure why people get upset big deal. Nobody asked us to move here. And if there is a system in place we cannot be saying its bad and this and that. My PD is DEC 04 do I feel bad someone in 2006 gets it. YES. Is the system crappy yes. I have a MS in US. So all this hoopla about US ms are getting it and not us is wrong. The other question is should I be getting it over others who dont have a MS from US. I believe yes we should.
but thats my thoughts on the subject if someone does not like it I respect his thoughts.
more...
485Mbe4001
08-14 07:54 PM
I doubt that USCIS can talk cryptic like Alan Greenspan, they probably meant that the PD will be back to what it was in june 08. There are only 3k visas per category and thousands of applicants, i dont see a logical reason why the dates will move 2-3 years. If they do, i too will buy you dinner. nothing is logical with USCIS... during the last couple of weeks of September you will see significant numbers of EB 2 approvals and then its back to square one for another year.
The main reason for the 2 year movement in june 07 was because they wanted to allocate all unallocated visas for the year, then the July VB came out and the rest is history. They have improved the coordination between DOJ and USICS since. Just want to be realistic, if we start assuming thing people get complacent and stop doing the little activities that help us.
I don't agree with it and hope not ! As latest Visa bulleting states - DOS people had predicted and planned - They will move EB3 dates forward to cover all June applicants - that means moving cut-off dates for EB3 - India to Jun 2003 as per Jun 2007 bulletin. For some reason - they see heavey demand now and it may not be the case in next bulletin. Still they beleive its diffcult to predict any dates for EB3 before mid Sept. They are working and intention are there to help EB3 applicants. That leads to make me believe that dates for EB3 - India would move to somewhere Nov-Dec 2002 to Jan-Feb 2003 in next bulletin.
The main reason for the 2 year movement in june 07 was because they wanted to allocate all unallocated visas for the year, then the July VB came out and the rest is history. They have improved the coordination between DOJ and USICS since. Just want to be realistic, if we start assuming thing people get complacent and stop doing the little activities that help us.
I don't agree with it and hope not ! As latest Visa bulleting states - DOS people had predicted and planned - They will move EB3 dates forward to cover all June applicants - that means moving cut-off dates for EB3 - India to Jun 2003 as per Jun 2007 bulletin. For some reason - they see heavey demand now and it may not be the case in next bulletin. Still they beleive its diffcult to predict any dates for EB3 before mid Sept. They are working and intention are there to help EB3 applicants. That leads to make me believe that dates for EB3 - India would move to somewhere Nov-Dec 2002 to Jan-Feb 2003 in next bulletin.
greyhair
04-30 09:25 PM
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Senator Jon Kyl Press Office (http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=324534)
Kyl and Graham have released the press statement together -
Kyl, Graham Response to Partisan Democrat Immigration Proposal
WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senators Jon Kyl and Lindsey Graham today made the following statement in response to the immigration reform proposal announced by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic Senators:
�A conceptual paper that promises everything to everyone is not the same as responsible legislation that compiles the best ideas from both sides of the aisle. The Senate Democrats� proposal is nothing more than an attempt to score political points. It poisons the well for those of us who are working toward a more secure border and responsible, bipartisan reform of our immigration laws.
�What is being billed as a comprehensive immigration and enforcement package, is actually far more permissive than the 2007 bill. It doesn�t provide the funding to ensure that the border is actually secured, it doesn�t end chain migration, and there is no real temporary worker program. Both of us have been involved in serious efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and believe, given the increase in violence along the border, that additional border security measures must be funded immediately.
�Since 2007, threats have increased, some border technology has failed, and the American people have lost confidence in the federal government�s ability to secure our borders. So it is our belief that Congress should focus on border security first and that will eventually allow Congress to seriously consider bipartisan immigration reform, instead of politically-motivated �conceptual papers.�
�Most of the border enforcement measures that have been proven effective can be achieved by appropriating necessary funding. We need to work on a bipartisan basis to get this done.�
Senator Jon Kyl Press Office (http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=324534)
Kyl and Graham have released the press statement together -
Kyl, Graham Response to Partisan Democrat Immigration Proposal
WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senators Jon Kyl and Lindsey Graham today made the following statement in response to the immigration reform proposal announced by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic Senators:
�A conceptual paper that promises everything to everyone is not the same as responsible legislation that compiles the best ideas from both sides of the aisle. The Senate Democrats� proposal is nothing more than an attempt to score political points. It poisons the well for those of us who are working toward a more secure border and responsible, bipartisan reform of our immigration laws.
�What is being billed as a comprehensive immigration and enforcement package, is actually far more permissive than the 2007 bill. It doesn�t provide the funding to ensure that the border is actually secured, it doesn�t end chain migration, and there is no real temporary worker program. Both of us have been involved in serious efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and believe, given the increase in violence along the border, that additional border security measures must be funded immediately.
�Since 2007, threats have increased, some border technology has failed, and the American people have lost confidence in the federal government�s ability to secure our borders. So it is our belief that Congress should focus on border security first and that will eventually allow Congress to seriously consider bipartisan immigration reform, instead of politically-motivated �conceptual papers.�
�Most of the border enforcement measures that have been proven effective can be achieved by appropriating necessary funding. We need to work on a bipartisan basis to get this done.�
more...
newbee7
07-06 06:45 AM
Please digg
http://digg.com/politics/Suit_Planned_Over_Visas_for_the_Highly_Skilled
Also, please digg and add comments.
http://digg.com/politics/Suit_Planned_Over_Visas_for_the_Highly_Skilled
Also, please digg and add comments.
2010 wedding hair hairdos flowers
susie
07-15 11:19 AM
APPENDIX: REFORM SOLUTIONS
The Need for a Compassionate Visa
Solutions
Subsection (3) should be reworded to clarify its application to derivative beneficiaries as follows
�(3) RETENTION OF PRIORITY DATE- If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older,
(A) for the purposes of subsections (a)(4), the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition, and
(B) for the purposes of subsections (d), the petition on which the alien was a derivative beneficiary shall automatically be converted to a new petition with the appropriate category once their Parent has permanent resident status and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the alien parent�s original petition. This is without prejudice to a Parent�s right to object to such converted petition. �
This new division into (A) and (B) makes a more appropriate distinction between principal beneficiaries and derivative beneficiaries. (B) also clarifies a Parent who does not want to petition their over 21 unmarried son or daughter, is permitted to oppose the automatic conversion of the application.
In addition, after four and half years since its enactment, the USCIS has still failed to issue implementing rules and a private bill should be introduced requiring the USCIS to perform its statutory duty to provide rules.
If the new points system is implemented, INA, section 203(h), becomes redundant in relation to future applicants. In this case a new provision should be added permitting all derivative beneficiaries to be considered as a child regardless of when they age out and when the petition becomes current. This would be a temporary relief measure for any derivative beneficiary currently subject to the family-based petitions so they do not age out while the remaining petitions are being cleared.
Removal of Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA), section 8
Section 8 of the CSPA provides provisions preventing the retroactive application of the legislation. As a result many beneficiaries have to wait in excess of 30 years for an immigrant visa. Derivative beneficiaries that were subject to wait times and aged out cannot apply the benefits of the CSPA if their parent�s petition was processed before August 2002. This means they are forced to back of the line; after already having waited up to 20 years, they are forced to wait for another lengthy period up to 20 years in the F2B category.
Therefore, section 8 has to be repealed to enable retroactive applicability. It cannot be right that if these same people had not abided with US immigration laws and entered illegally, they would be able to get status to remain and work in the USA under the proposed Z visa. However, by abiding by the law, they are instead forced to wait outside the USA for over 30 years in total since the start of the original immigrant visa application because they were ejected out of one line due to aging out as a result of the prolonged wait times, only to be forced to the back of a new immigrant visa line.
Dream Act
This is currently incorporated within the STRIVE Act (sections 621 et seq.) and presumably will be brought forward in the upcoming Bill subject to final agreement by the Senators. However, there is ambiguity as to whether children in the USA who enter legally benefit from its provisions. This has to be clarified to ensure it applies not only to children who entered the USA illegally, but also to those who entered legally, such as in derivative status on an E2 visa of their Parent. The ambiguity is made worse because the STRIVE Bill includes the Dream Act in subtitle B of Title VI Legalization of Undocumented Individuals. It is an absurd situation if legal nonimmigrant children are not given at least the same equal treatment as illegal children. The future Bill should incorporate the DREAM Act into a separate Title so does not give the appearance it applies to illegal migrant children only.
E2 Investors and Rep. Heather Wilson�s Proposed E2 Nonimmigrant Investor Adjustment Act of 2007
We strongly reiterate our support for this proposed legislation and urge you to do same. However, we urge you to go further by removing the proposed 3,000 cap or, at the very least, increase the proposed 3,000 annual cap to a more reasonable number such as 20,000 and/or provide annual increases to meet market demand to avoid backlogs and to avoid having to revisit the issue in future. Aside from our own members, E2 investors provide billions of dollars of investment in the US economy and much needed employment. They should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship for their dedication and commitment to this country. It is undoubtedly very odd that illegal immigrants are receiving a pathway to permanent residency whereas E2 investors are not. It sends a clear message that entering the USA illegally is preferable because it provides a path to citizenship, whereas entering legally and working hard, investing substantial amounts of capital and employing US citizens for the benefit of the US economy does not (unless you are the extremely rare exception that qualifies under the EB5 investment visa).
The Need for a Compassionate Visa
Solutions
Subsection (3) should be reworded to clarify its application to derivative beneficiaries as follows
�(3) RETENTION OF PRIORITY DATE- If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older,
(A) for the purposes of subsections (a)(4), the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition, and
(B) for the purposes of subsections (d), the petition on which the alien was a derivative beneficiary shall automatically be converted to a new petition with the appropriate category once their Parent has permanent resident status and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the alien parent�s original petition. This is without prejudice to a Parent�s right to object to such converted petition. �
This new division into (A) and (B) makes a more appropriate distinction between principal beneficiaries and derivative beneficiaries. (B) also clarifies a Parent who does not want to petition their over 21 unmarried son or daughter, is permitted to oppose the automatic conversion of the application.
In addition, after four and half years since its enactment, the USCIS has still failed to issue implementing rules and a private bill should be introduced requiring the USCIS to perform its statutory duty to provide rules.
If the new points system is implemented, INA, section 203(h), becomes redundant in relation to future applicants. In this case a new provision should be added permitting all derivative beneficiaries to be considered as a child regardless of when they age out and when the petition becomes current. This would be a temporary relief measure for any derivative beneficiary currently subject to the family-based petitions so they do not age out while the remaining petitions are being cleared.
Removal of Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA), section 8
Section 8 of the CSPA provides provisions preventing the retroactive application of the legislation. As a result many beneficiaries have to wait in excess of 30 years for an immigrant visa. Derivative beneficiaries that were subject to wait times and aged out cannot apply the benefits of the CSPA if their parent�s petition was processed before August 2002. This means they are forced to back of the line; after already having waited up to 20 years, they are forced to wait for another lengthy period up to 20 years in the F2B category.
Therefore, section 8 has to be repealed to enable retroactive applicability. It cannot be right that if these same people had not abided with US immigration laws and entered illegally, they would be able to get status to remain and work in the USA under the proposed Z visa. However, by abiding by the law, they are instead forced to wait outside the USA for over 30 years in total since the start of the original immigrant visa application because they were ejected out of one line due to aging out as a result of the prolonged wait times, only to be forced to the back of a new immigrant visa line.
Dream Act
This is currently incorporated within the STRIVE Act (sections 621 et seq.) and presumably will be brought forward in the upcoming Bill subject to final agreement by the Senators. However, there is ambiguity as to whether children in the USA who enter legally benefit from its provisions. This has to be clarified to ensure it applies not only to children who entered the USA illegally, but also to those who entered legally, such as in derivative status on an E2 visa of their Parent. The ambiguity is made worse because the STRIVE Bill includes the Dream Act in subtitle B of Title VI Legalization of Undocumented Individuals. It is an absurd situation if legal nonimmigrant children are not given at least the same equal treatment as illegal children. The future Bill should incorporate the DREAM Act into a separate Title so does not give the appearance it applies to illegal migrant children only.
E2 Investors and Rep. Heather Wilson�s Proposed E2 Nonimmigrant Investor Adjustment Act of 2007
We strongly reiterate our support for this proposed legislation and urge you to do same. However, we urge you to go further by removing the proposed 3,000 cap or, at the very least, increase the proposed 3,000 annual cap to a more reasonable number such as 20,000 and/or provide annual increases to meet market demand to avoid backlogs and to avoid having to revisit the issue in future. Aside from our own members, E2 investors provide billions of dollars of investment in the US economy and much needed employment. They should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship for their dedication and commitment to this country. It is undoubtedly very odd that illegal immigrants are receiving a pathway to permanent residency whereas E2 investors are not. It sends a clear message that entering the USA illegally is preferable because it provides a path to citizenship, whereas entering legally and working hard, investing substantial amounts of capital and employing US citizens for the benefit of the US economy does not (unless you are the extremely rare exception that qualifies under the EB5 investment visa).
more...
red200
12-11 03:37 PM
Hi Pappu and IV seniors,
I will contribute to IV generously(monetory and otherwise) if you help us with the prefiling of EAD for approved 140's, atleast USCIS will get money from us every year and it helps us too ...................
Yes if this is one of IV's agenda . I will contribute as generously as possible
I will contribute to IV generously(monetory and otherwise) if you help us with the prefiling of EAD for approved 140's, atleast USCIS will get money from us every year and it helps us too ...................
Yes if this is one of IV's agenda . I will contribute as generously as possible
hair hairstyles-for-long-hair
ItIsNotFunny
03-09 07:52 AM
This is becoming like a person who buys lottery regularly. Then every time before the results are going to come out, starts dreaming and then gets disappointed as his number is not drawn.
Stop dreaming! This is not a lottery. Please contribute to FOIA and lets find the real numbers.
Stop dreaming! This is not a lottery. Please contribute to FOIA and lets find the real numbers.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
03-12 02:30 PM
I do not support this donor ONLY idea.
Also, Day 1, the FOIA initiative had a goal of $5K.
And without reason, the goal was increased to $10K.
So, pappu should not complain of not reaching the goal when he keeps increasing the goal.
stay consistent.
OK. I take the blame for this. Pappu didn't increase the goal, I did.
USCIS asked for $5K for information. As per Pappu's investigation, USCIS is currently resolving FOIA filed a year back. In that case even after paying 5K, we may get information after a year. We needed little more money keep our options open as we are determined to get this information from USCIS. This is why we needed more money and I raised the goal. If it can be done by 5K, rest of the money will go to IV lobbying efforts. There is nothing wrong in that.
Core team may not like this but I can understand your point. There is a communication gap between IV Core team and members. Core team wants to hide everything they are doing assuming that anti are reading the forum and they will know what we are doing. On other side members feel uncomfortable as nothing comes out as solid / strong plan of action. There were couple of instances were I personally felt that core talks too much among themselves and release almost zero information to members, it may be good for community overall but not good for an organization where everyone is participating directly or indirectly. By recent posts by Pappu, I think they are improving.
We need to give them a chance as anyways their act is selfless. They may be lagging in personal management but they are not bad by heart or doing anything for personal benefit.
Also, Day 1, the FOIA initiative had a goal of $5K.
And without reason, the goal was increased to $10K.
So, pappu should not complain of not reaching the goal when he keeps increasing the goal.
stay consistent.
OK. I take the blame for this. Pappu didn't increase the goal, I did.
USCIS asked for $5K for information. As per Pappu's investigation, USCIS is currently resolving FOIA filed a year back. In that case even after paying 5K, we may get information after a year. We needed little more money keep our options open as we are determined to get this information from USCIS. This is why we needed more money and I raised the goal. If it can be done by 5K, rest of the money will go to IV lobbying efforts. There is nothing wrong in that.
Core team may not like this but I can understand your point. There is a communication gap between IV Core team and members. Core team wants to hide everything they are doing assuming that anti are reading the forum and they will know what we are doing. On other side members feel uncomfortable as nothing comes out as solid / strong plan of action. There were couple of instances were I personally felt that core talks too much among themselves and release almost zero information to members, it may be good for community overall but not good for an organization where everyone is participating directly or indirectly. By recent posts by Pappu, I think they are improving.
We need to give them a chance as anyways their act is selfless. They may be lagging in personal management but they are not bad by heart or doing anything for personal benefit.
hot curly wedding hairstyles
bala50
04-30 04:07 PM
Whatever question you ask -- they will blame it on the summer 2007 surge.
Summary - "Dont expect any improvemnt in USCIS processing for atleast the next two years " -- Mr. Aytes
hmmmm.. they ran out of questions. We should have supplied them with the questions and they would have had to stay up all night just to get through the question we can come up in 1 hr!!!!!
Summary - "Dont expect any improvemnt in USCIS processing for atleast the next two years " -- Mr. Aytes
hmmmm.. they ran out of questions. We should have supplied them with the questions and they would have had to stay up all night just to get through the question we can come up in 1 hr!!!!!
more...
house eautiful Wedding Hairstyles
villamonte6100
04-02 04:52 PM
No you or D.E.D. do not deserve an apology for being numbskulls as you both have an agenda of fear mongering so that folks do not raise voices for legitimate reasons.
You can do whatever you want to do, and nobody is preventing you. But nobody has the right to call anybody numbskull. That is really inappropriate.
My comments are just comments and you can agree or disagree. But you cant just abuse somebody because you disagree with his opinion.
But you, I guess you came from a very poor background or education. This is a forum for educated people only and I haven't insulted anyone here except you.
You can do whatever you want to do, and nobody is preventing you. But nobody has the right to call anybody numbskull. That is really inappropriate.
My comments are just comments and you can agree or disagree. But you cant just abuse somebody because you disagree with his opinion.
But you, I guess you came from a very poor background or education. This is a forum for educated people only and I haven't insulted anyone here except you.
tattoo hair with braids overnight
pappu
08-24 07:59 AM
If there is abuse of the system, then people should go ahead and complain to USCIS WITH PROOF. Writing hearsay stories on the forum without proof will not help solve anything.
more...
pictures Bridesmaid Hairstyles
kalyan
04-12 09:10 AM
There will be lot of LC's that will be coming up for sale or to lure employees since majority of the employees might have left Desi Consulting Cos becoz of the sheer amount of Dirt Practice, they do.
INS at some point of time should ban LC substitution. this is another mess that is a slow poison for retrogression.
INS at some point of time should ban LC substitution. this is another mess that is a slow poison for retrogression.
dresses wedding hair styles
chisinau
10-05 01:42 AM
Thanx for the reply! In your opinion, do we still have a chanse to see relief for schedule"A" this year? From my point of view, the chanses are slim. Maybe I am too pesimistic....:confused:
more...
makeup Wedding Hairstyles
amits
07-18 10:20 PM
Good to see more and more people contributing.
Come on people, now we are in the same boat.
For many of us, GC journey is just started. All of us have seen how difficult it was to cross the first tide that shattered our lives for 15 full days - can we forget the 15 days of darkness (2nd-17th July)?... We've heard the agonizing stories of those who're on this boat for years now. With the backlogs and all, this journey is far from over from them too..
This journey will have many more painful and frustrating tides...
We have many adversaries who are united and resolved not to let us succeed.
IV rescued us this time, it helped us in overcoming the first tide.
Now we need to strengthen it for the future. Your small contributions made today will go long way.
Just imagine, if we are successful in making a change that allows using 200000 wasted visa numbers, then it can shorten the wait time by, probably, an year or two. And this is just one example. Legal immigration system requires many more improvements. It will not happen unless we've some representation and unity. IV provided that platform to us.
If we're not united and potent, then many bills are waiting to harm us. There are big-shot politicians, media people and groups who are doing whatever they can to harm us. We've witnessed and they've not stopped it. They are relentless..
We cannot be a sitting duck for them.
Lets contribute to strengthen IV - our group, our support and our united front in this tidy and turbulent GC journey.
GUYS, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE GENEROUSLY!!
Now, we have a VOICE - ie ImmigrationVoice ...
Strengthen it, so that those making decisions can hear our problems - LOUD and CLEAR.
FRIENDS, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE.... !!!
You guys are awesome.. !!
THANKS!!!
Come on people, now we are in the same boat.
For many of us, GC journey is just started. All of us have seen how difficult it was to cross the first tide that shattered our lives for 15 full days - can we forget the 15 days of darkness (2nd-17th July)?... We've heard the agonizing stories of those who're on this boat for years now. With the backlogs and all, this journey is far from over from them too..
This journey will have many more painful and frustrating tides...
We have many adversaries who are united and resolved not to let us succeed.
IV rescued us this time, it helped us in overcoming the first tide.
Now we need to strengthen it for the future. Your small contributions made today will go long way.
Just imagine, if we are successful in making a change that allows using 200000 wasted visa numbers, then it can shorten the wait time by, probably, an year or two. And this is just one example. Legal immigration system requires many more improvements. It will not happen unless we've some representation and unity. IV provided that platform to us.
If we're not united and potent, then many bills are waiting to harm us. There are big-shot politicians, media people and groups who are doing whatever they can to harm us. We've witnessed and they've not stopped it. They are relentless..
We cannot be a sitting duck for them.
Lets contribute to strengthen IV - our group, our support and our united front in this tidy and turbulent GC journey.
GUYS, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE GENEROUSLY!!
Now, we have a VOICE - ie ImmigrationVoice ...
Strengthen it, so that those making decisions can hear our problems - LOUD and CLEAR.
FRIENDS, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE.... !!!
You guys are awesome.. !!
THANKS!!!
girlfriend short hair updos for
gene77
03-20 12:43 PM
Folks,
I'm on H1 and my wife is on H4. We have both got our EADs and have visa stamps till Jun 2010.
Can my wife switch to the EAD status and start working even though I remain on H1 status till my visa expiry? Is this allowed?
If yes, then can she travel on AP while I'm still on H1 visa?
If we're both re-entering the US, can the IO ask why is the spouse on EAD/AP and not the primary applicant?
Thank you very much!
I'm on H1 and my wife is on H4. We have both got our EADs and have visa stamps till Jun 2010.
Can my wife switch to the EAD status and start working even though I remain on H1 status till my visa expiry? Is this allowed?
If yes, then can she travel on AP while I'm still on H1 visa?
If we're both re-entering the US, can the IO ask why is the spouse on EAD/AP and not the primary applicant?
Thank you very much!
hairstyles Braid Bridesmaid Hairstyles
kuhelica2000
09-15 05:13 PM
I wasn't planning on porting my PD until I read this nonsense "Injunction" threat. I will now port my PD; GCTest - go and file your injunction. If you don't have enough balls to do that I can lend you one.
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.
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.
xyzgc
02-08 11:02 PM
Wow, there you go! How come it becomes 'stupid' when a girl spends husband's money to support her parents?
Did I even say this? What are you saying? Go see a shrink :D
Read first what I said.
Stop sending money to parents and in-laws, if its possible. Otherwise, maintain parity by sending money in small amounts to both parents. Its stupid to say my wife is not working so she has no business to send money to her parents. Its so wrong and I'm surprised folks can think like this. Marriage is about sharing and even a child will tell you that. If the in-laws are any sensible they won't accept gifts from the son-in-law but its for them to decide.And stop receiving any gifts from either sides.
Did I even say this? What are you saying? Go see a shrink :D
Read first what I said.
Stop sending money to parents and in-laws, if its possible. Otherwise, maintain parity by sending money in small amounts to both parents. Its stupid to say my wife is not working so she has no business to send money to her parents. Its so wrong and I'm surprised folks can think like this. Marriage is about sharing and even a child will tell you that. If the in-laws are any sensible they won't accept gifts from the son-in-law but its for them to decide.And stop receiving any gifts from either sides.
ragz4u
03-08 02:18 PM
This will go on until 1.00 pm and there will not be any session in the afternoon tomorrow.
Senator Specter is going to talk to Sen. Bill Frist so that all Judiciary Committee members turn up tomorrow
Senator Specter is going to talk to Sen. Bill Frist so that all Judiciary Committee members turn up tomorrow
No comments:
Post a Comment