Pooja
07-05 10:15 AM
Is it true that they really approved 60000 cases in June. I have a couple of friends that filed I-485 in 2005 and there background is clear too but still have not been approved. I don't understand what is going inside the blackbox. I read in forum that only 40,000 application were ready for approval but then why didn't these people application was not approved all thou there file was complete.
wallpaper hot and kids holding hands children holding hands vector. and kids holding
thomachan72
11-12 01:28 PM
Good morphing technique!!! Almost believed it at first:D:D
kirupa
07-14 08:28 PM
Ah, clever :) I was about to suggest a hideously complex solution!
2011 Holding Hands. Vector
kirupa
07-06 11:22 PM
Added :P
more...
kayghee
09-19 03:47 AM
Toronto, Ontario based freelance Graphic / Web Designer with 5 years experience. Proficient on both Mac and PC platforms. To view work samples please visit http://www.fluidcreative.ca/kevin
--------
Kevin Gaynor
Graphic Designer
kevin@fluidcreative.ca
--------
Kevin Gaynor
Graphic Designer
kevin@fluidcreative.ca
babugc40
03-19 07:34 PM
I was working with company A and got approved I140(1 year back) after that I moved to company B using approved I140 and got 3 yrs H1B extension.After that during July,07 period I requested company A to apply EAD and i485(Company A mentioned as future employment).Now I am still with company B.
But now Company A asking me to come back.Since I have everything approved (i140) except i485(pending) do I need to go back to company A?
If I do not go to company A,can he cancel approved I140 ?
Need help/suggestion .
Thanks
But now Company A asking me to come back.Since I have everything approved (i140) except i485(pending) do I need to go back to company A?
If I do not go to company A,can he cancel approved I140 ?
Need help/suggestion .
Thanks
more...
Hydra
09-02 02:41 PM
Hi people :angel: , i'm new of this site so i would like you see my new and first stamp for kirupa!
Please tell me what do you think about !!!
...Lot of Thanks ! :thumb:
Please tell me what do you think about !!!
...Lot of Thanks ! :thumb:
2010 hair Kids Holding Hands 4
jyo999
07-25 10:18 PM
Thanks
more...
Asian
01-16 01:28 PM
Considering many limitations to move a job from non-profit to for-profit, I am considering moving my job to another non profit. With my current employer, my 6 year H-1 B will expire by the end of next year April. So if my change my employer, I will have a very short time to start the process again till I reach I -140 approval again with the new employer.
I heard that from non-profit to for-profit, you are subject to the quota and you have to apply for H-1B quota. But in this case, your previous 6 year with non profit doesn't count.
But if I move from non-profit to non-profit, do I have to reach I-140 approval before my current H-1 B with my current employer expires? Or do I just get another 3 year with new non-profit employer?
If I have to get I-140 approval with new non-profit employer before my current 6 year H-1 B expires, is it doable?
Thank you for your advice!
I heard that from non-profit to for-profit, you are subject to the quota and you have to apply for H-1B quota. But in this case, your previous 6 year with non profit doesn't count.
But if I move from non-profit to non-profit, do I have to reach I-140 approval before my current H-1 B with my current employer expires? Or do I just get another 3 year with new non-profit employer?
If I have to get I-140 approval with new non-profit employer before my current 6 year H-1 B expires, is it doable?
Thank you for your advice!
hair children holding hands vector. children holding hands
sertasheep
10-22 04:19 PM
- Recording of the 20 Oct 2006 conference call with Sonal Mehta Verma is now available on ImmigrationVoice blog (http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com). The transcript will also be uploaded once it's ready.
- Transcripts of previous conference calls are now hosted on ImmigrationVoice blog via an external website due to file upload problems on IV website. Please report broken links to sertasheep-removethis@immigrationvoice.org (email addresss is without the "removethis")
- The following transcripts are now available:
Conf. Call Transcript Sept 01 2006
Conf. Call Transcript Aug 11, 2006
Conf. Call Transcript July 28, 2006
- Transcripts of previous conference calls are now hosted on ImmigrationVoice blog via an external website due to file upload problems on IV website. Please report broken links to sertasheep-removethis@immigrationvoice.org (email addresss is without the "removethis")
- The following transcripts are now available:
Conf. Call Transcript Sept 01 2006
Conf. Call Transcript Aug 11, 2006
Conf. Call Transcript July 28, 2006
more...
wtlloyd
March 7th, 2004, 11:18 PM
B53,000
300D B 44,000
so the D70's a bit more expensive.
1USD = 39B
39 baht to the dollar! when did that happen?!!!
(JK, I was in Thailand back in '76 and it was I think 23 to $1)
It was an interesting place to celebrate turning 21 with your best friend.....
300D B 44,000
so the D70's a bit more expensive.
1USD = 39B
39 baht to the dollar! when did that happen?!!!
(JK, I was in Thailand back in '76 and it was I think 23 to $1)
It was an interesting place to celebrate turning 21 with your best friend.....
hot People Holding Hands Vector.
malibuguy007
09-11 02:57 PM
Also I have read conflicting responses e.g. some users have suggested not working and other have said you can work 180 days after EAD expires.
more...
house children holding hands vector.
blao
07-08 05:15 PM
we are on last stage approved i-130 USA citizen for married daughter.
because we overstayed in USA since 1996 here do we have to leave country since we applied only in 2003?
this would be a disaster since we have nobody in Italy that con support us until get a waiver from USA counsolate....they said about 9 months if everything is ok...
my only hope is that a read something about cancellation of deportation and adjustment of status here in USA no needed to leave country...how dangerous can be to start this process, wile waiting for last stage of i-130?
i have good business, house, cars, furniture here and always paid taxes. 2 USA kids. thanks gimme hope
because we overstayed in USA since 1996 here do we have to leave country since we applied only in 2003?
this would be a disaster since we have nobody in Italy that con support us until get a waiver from USA counsolate....they said about 9 months if everything is ok...
my only hope is that a read something about cancellation of deportation and adjustment of status here in USA no needed to leave country...how dangerous can be to start this process, wile waiting for last stage of i-130?
i have good business, house, cars, furniture here and always paid taxes. 2 USA kids. thanks gimme hope
tattoo Children holding hands around
ufo2002
09-07 01:18 PM
I love my playstation and anime but that doesn't mean I am gonna live in Japan. Last I checked, they still kinda look down on gaijins. And I also like my name the way it is... don't want to change it to Akira Fubuki or some sh*t. :D
more...
pictures Family Holding Hands Symbols
horus
09-07 10:16 AM
Supposed my I-485 was approved, am I legally required to go to USCIS, surrender my I-94 card and get a I-551 stamp? Could I just wait for GC to come in the mail?
dresses tattoo happy children holding hands, children holding hands vector.
iptel
01-27 01:11 PM
Anyone interested in volunteering in meeting the lawmaker from Colorado please update this thread.
more...
makeup Holding Hands Love Quotes.
Macaca
08-01 08:03 PM
The Speaker In Charge (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/31/AR2007073101628.html?hpid=opinionsbox1) By Harold Meyerson (meyersonh@washpost.com), August 1, 2007
This is one of those odd weeks when Congress may actually work. Both houses are likely to pass Democratic bills to expand SCHIP, the children's health coverage program. Yesterday, the House enacted lobbying reform, and the Senate may follow suit tomorrow. Also yesterday, the House passed a bill restoring the right of victims of pay discrimination to sue their employers.
In short, it's one of those weeks when Nancy Pelosi has no doubts about the wisdom of her decision to become speaker of the House.
"What's it like?" she asked herself, beaming, at the conclusion of a breakfast meeting with roughly 20 liberal journalists yesterday morning.
"It's fabulous! Absolutely fabulous!"
It can't always be thus. Her biggest frustration, of course, is Congress's inability to end the war in Iraq, which she terms "a huge moral catastrophe for the country." It is the public's biggest frustration as well, she says, and the main reason that popular support for Congress has plummeted.
In September, Iraq will once again be Congress's chief item of business, when Gen. David Petraeus delivers his state-of-the-war report.
Pelosi (understandably, given the administration's mountain of misrepresentation on all war-related matters) is wary. "The plural of anecdote is not data," she said. "I'm very concerned they'll pass off anecdotal successes as progress in Iraq."
The question in September will be whether congressional Republicans continue to support President Bush's open-ended commitment to keeping U.S. forces in Iraq while a civil war rages around them. To date, the Republicans' strategy, and not just on the war, has been to thwart the Democrats at every turn and to use the Senate's 60-vote supermajority requirement both to create a "do-nothing" Congress against which they can run and to spare their president from having to veto popular legislation. (Why they care about sparing Bush -- he will never face voters again; they will -- plunges us into the murk of abnormal psychology.)
The GOP strategy is not without its pitfalls. Republicans have succeeded in tanking Congress's approval ratings, but polls consistently show the public, most importantly in swing districts, preferring Democrats to Republicans. With this week's vote on expanding SCHIP, though, Democrats are convinced that the price of blocking health care for uninsured children is more than many Republicans are willing to pay. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation; Pelosi, noting with an almost incredulous glee that the administration will stand athwart children's health care on the grounds of opposing a higher tobacco tax, says, simply, "Welcome to this discussion."
Not all discussions, even in a good week, are so pleasurable to anticipate. Asked about the resolution that her congressional colleague Jay Inslee of Washington has introduced to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Pelosi put her hands to her temples as if to ward off a headache. For the past year, Pelosi has made clear to her colleagues and the public alike that she has no interest in pursuing the impeachment option, though Gonzales is certainly doing his damnedest to change her mind. She remains unpersuaded, believing that impeachment would fail and in the process would make weeks such as this one -- a week in which the public's business is at last getting done -- far more uncommon than they already are.
Pelosi understands the gravity of the damage that the administration has done to the Constitution and why that has impelled some of her colleagues to advocate impeachment. "If I were not the speaker and I were not in Congress," she said, very quietly, as she concluded her answer, "I would probably be advocating for impeachment." But the consequences she foresees from stopping the nation's business for an unwinnable fight outweighs those considerations.
Pelosi deserves considerable credit for holding her party together on a range of divisive issues, but she plainly views the coming fight among House Democrats on fuel efficiency standards as irrepressible.
The energy bill the House will pass this week contains no provisions that would raise those standards; such provisions, if any, await the outcome of a battle between Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, the Democrat who has represented Detroit and the auto industry in Congress since 1955 (that is, before tailfins).
"I respect all our chairmen," Pelosi said. But the legislation, she continued, isn't about them. "It's about our children's ability to breathe clean air. Nothing less than the planet is at stake. I love him [Dingell] dearly, but we have to prevail. . . . The forces at work here [against stricter standards] are rich and entrenched," she concluded, "and it takes just a few [votes] to prevent us from unleashing the future."
Thus, the most elegant of happy warriors, in a week when it's fun to be speaker.
This is one of those odd weeks when Congress may actually work. Both houses are likely to pass Democratic bills to expand SCHIP, the children's health coverage program. Yesterday, the House enacted lobbying reform, and the Senate may follow suit tomorrow. Also yesterday, the House passed a bill restoring the right of victims of pay discrimination to sue their employers.
In short, it's one of those weeks when Nancy Pelosi has no doubts about the wisdom of her decision to become speaker of the House.
"What's it like?" she asked herself, beaming, at the conclusion of a breakfast meeting with roughly 20 liberal journalists yesterday morning.
"It's fabulous! Absolutely fabulous!"
It can't always be thus. Her biggest frustration, of course, is Congress's inability to end the war in Iraq, which she terms "a huge moral catastrophe for the country." It is the public's biggest frustration as well, she says, and the main reason that popular support for Congress has plummeted.
In September, Iraq will once again be Congress's chief item of business, when Gen. David Petraeus delivers his state-of-the-war report.
Pelosi (understandably, given the administration's mountain of misrepresentation on all war-related matters) is wary. "The plural of anecdote is not data," she said. "I'm very concerned they'll pass off anecdotal successes as progress in Iraq."
The question in September will be whether congressional Republicans continue to support President Bush's open-ended commitment to keeping U.S. forces in Iraq while a civil war rages around them. To date, the Republicans' strategy, and not just on the war, has been to thwart the Democrats at every turn and to use the Senate's 60-vote supermajority requirement both to create a "do-nothing" Congress against which they can run and to spare their president from having to veto popular legislation. (Why they care about sparing Bush -- he will never face voters again; they will -- plunges us into the murk of abnormal psychology.)
The GOP strategy is not without its pitfalls. Republicans have succeeded in tanking Congress's approval ratings, but polls consistently show the public, most importantly in swing districts, preferring Democrats to Republicans. With this week's vote on expanding SCHIP, though, Democrats are convinced that the price of blocking health care for uninsured children is more than many Republicans are willing to pay. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation; Pelosi, noting with an almost incredulous glee that the administration will stand athwart children's health care on the grounds of opposing a higher tobacco tax, says, simply, "Welcome to this discussion."
Not all discussions, even in a good week, are so pleasurable to anticipate. Asked about the resolution that her congressional colleague Jay Inslee of Washington has introduced to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Pelosi put her hands to her temples as if to ward off a headache. For the past year, Pelosi has made clear to her colleagues and the public alike that she has no interest in pursuing the impeachment option, though Gonzales is certainly doing his damnedest to change her mind. She remains unpersuaded, believing that impeachment would fail and in the process would make weeks such as this one -- a week in which the public's business is at last getting done -- far more uncommon than they already are.
Pelosi understands the gravity of the damage that the administration has done to the Constitution and why that has impelled some of her colleagues to advocate impeachment. "If I were not the speaker and I were not in Congress," she said, very quietly, as she concluded her answer, "I would probably be advocating for impeachment." But the consequences she foresees from stopping the nation's business for an unwinnable fight outweighs those considerations.
Pelosi deserves considerable credit for holding her party together on a range of divisive issues, but she plainly views the coming fight among House Democrats on fuel efficiency standards as irrepressible.
The energy bill the House will pass this week contains no provisions that would raise those standards; such provisions, if any, await the outcome of a battle between Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, the Democrat who has represented Detroit and the auto industry in Congress since 1955 (that is, before tailfins).
"I respect all our chairmen," Pelosi said. But the legislation, she continued, isn't about them. "It's about our children's ability to breathe clean air. Nothing less than the planet is at stake. I love him [Dingell] dearly, but we have to prevail. . . . The forces at work here [against stricter standards] are rich and entrenched," she concluded, "and it takes just a few [votes] to prevent us from unleashing the future."
Thus, the most elegant of happy warriors, in a week when it's fun to be speaker.
girlfriend Hands Holding The Heart Vector
raghu112
12-27 06:04 PM
No.
hairstyles Children Holding Hands Vector. Children+holding+hands+
rahul2699
04-27 01:04 PM
I am listening to the USCIS conference call now.
let us know what you find out
let us know what you find out
Cathy_P
February 9th, 2005, 05:56 PM
I like this, Freddy. There's always a warm feeling of life in an open air market. Where is this located?
venuk85
09-16 06:54 AM
hi,
My name is mistakenly typed in the form I-129 submitted to USCIS. In that form only, in all other forms(including i-129 supplements) it has typed correctly. So, it's reflecting in I-797 as venuKalangi(last/family Name), Venu((first Name). "venu" is repeated. My actual Name is Venu(first name),Kalangi(last/family name).
My petition is filed on apr27th'2010 and is in initial review now. Can you pls guide me what need to be done now. I'm a new applicant and my travel date is in last week of october. I heard that I need to apply for amendment, if so, by which form it need to be done and how much time it may take for correction or Can I go for stamping without amendment, is it causes any problem?
My name is mistakenly typed in the form I-129 submitted to USCIS. In that form only, in all other forms(including i-129 supplements) it has typed correctly. So, it's reflecting in I-797 as venuKalangi(last/family Name), Venu((first Name). "venu" is repeated. My actual Name is Venu(first name),Kalangi(last/family name).
My petition is filed on apr27th'2010 and is in initial review now. Can you pls guide me what need to be done now. I'm a new applicant and my travel date is in last week of october. I heard that I need to apply for amendment, if so, by which form it need to be done and how much time it may take for correction or Can I go for stamping without amendment, is it causes any problem?
No comments:
Post a Comment