hemasar
06-22 09:57 AM
hemasar....dont give wrong information. Just becuse your colleague said that he got it does not make it a law. Please be prudent in providing correct legal information!
I am just sharing the information of one who got this experience. I am not claiming that is the law. None of us are attorneys. We are not giving any legal advice here. We are just sharing our knowledge and experience. What ever legal suggestions you provide here; are you taking any responsibility for that? No right? Just we are sharing our concerns, knowledge and experience. If you have any solid evidence that says USCIS will accept chest X-ray only after +/- skin test please share with us.
Thanks.
I am just sharing the information of one who got this experience. I am not claiming that is the law. None of us are attorneys. We are not giving any legal advice here. We are just sharing our knowledge and experience. What ever legal suggestions you provide here; are you taking any responsibility for that? No right? Just we are sharing our concerns, knowledge and experience. If you have any solid evidence that says USCIS will accept chest X-ray only after +/- skin test please share with us.
Thanks.
wallpaper mid-length bob hairstyle
tinoue
09-27 09:52 AM
I have approved I140 notice ... i dont see A# can you pls help me find that number in approval notice (797)
It is in "Beneficiary" section, right above my name. But I heard some people do not have numbers on thier approved I-140. I do not know why, though.
It is in "Beneficiary" section, right above my name. But I heard some people do not have numbers on thier approved I-140. I do not know why, though.
eb3_nepa
04-27 06:13 PM
Apologise for 2 threads on the same thing. Tried going back and modifying the text a little bit, only to create a new thread.
2011 Going For Emo Hairstyles
kaushik7
11-23 04:09 PM
Hello all,
I am on the same boat, and I opened the service request around the same time with same reply. Any updates for anyone? Please keep this active.
any information or directions is appreciated.
thanks
I am on the same boat, and I opened the service request around the same time with same reply. Any updates for anyone? Please keep this active.
any information or directions is appreciated.
thanks
more...
morpheus
04-02 09:44 PM
So if (for example) an H1B worked in the US for a few weeks before their visa became available, are they technically eligible for this? Or perhaps they were out of status for a week or two between jobs? I'm sure many H1's might have been in this situation. It's unclear who this applies to.
I just read the Specter amendments to 2454 and I can't see where in 218D or 602 it says the alien must have been here illegally. Can someone quote that part? All I can see is this requirement in 601.
`(1) PRESENCE; EMPLOYMENT.--The alien establishes that the alien--
``(A) was physically present in the United States before January 7, 2004; and
``(B) was employed in the United States before January 7, 2004, and has been employed in the United States since that date.
I read one summary of the bill that claims 'The alien also must acknowledge, under oath, that the alien is unlawfully present and subject to removal or deportation.' but this is at the time of application - not in the past. So technically this could still apply to many people. I haven't been able to find this clause in the actual bill though.
From what I have read, if this bill passes it may just turn out that an H1B could quit their employer tomorrow, go and join another employer without filing an H1 transfer and file under 218D in the next year. Since they are technically eligible for 218D at this point, they could move straight to a green card without the current massive backlogs. Also, the 218D status has job mobility, and no LCA is required.
Can anyone refute this?
I just read the Specter amendments to 2454 and I can't see where in 218D or 602 it says the alien must have been here illegally. Can someone quote that part? All I can see is this requirement in 601.
`(1) PRESENCE; EMPLOYMENT.--The alien establishes that the alien--
``(A) was physically present in the United States before January 7, 2004; and
``(B) was employed in the United States before January 7, 2004, and has been employed in the United States since that date.
I read one summary of the bill that claims 'The alien also must acknowledge, under oath, that the alien is unlawfully present and subject to removal or deportation.' but this is at the time of application - not in the past. So technically this could still apply to many people. I haven't been able to find this clause in the actual bill though.
From what I have read, if this bill passes it may just turn out that an H1B could quit their employer tomorrow, go and join another employer without filing an H1 transfer and file under 218D in the next year. Since they are technically eligible for 218D at this point, they could move straight to a green card without the current massive backlogs. Also, the 218D status has job mobility, and no LCA is required.
Can anyone refute this?
wellwishergc
04-03 09:50 AM
I think, it makes more sense for us to strive for 'I-485 filing without PD being current' and 'removal of hard country quota' issues rather than striving for the 'self GC application'..
Let us focus on issues which is an extension of the current framework for legal immigration. I do not think it will be in our interest to compare our provisions with the ones of undocumented workers.
Just my opinion!!!; IV core team can best decide on the approach. Is there any updates on our attempts to ammend for the 'I-485 filing clause' and the 'removal of hard country quota' clause?
Yes if you are able to prove your illegal stay here and willing to wait for 6 years before applying for your GC, then you can do go this route. Also remember, it is possible that as of now there is no specific category under which these undocumented people can file their GCs. It is possible that you might have to wait another god know how many years before you actually get it.
Let us focus on issues which is an extension of the current framework for legal immigration. I do not think it will be in our interest to compare our provisions with the ones of undocumented workers.
Just my opinion!!!; IV core team can best decide on the approach. Is there any updates on our attempts to ammend for the 'I-485 filing clause' and the 'removal of hard country quota' clause?
Yes if you are able to prove your illegal stay here and willing to wait for 6 years before applying for your GC, then you can do go this route. Also remember, it is possible that as of now there is no specific category under which these undocumented people can file their GCs. It is possible that you might have to wait another god know how many years before you actually get it.
more...
smileyslimey
11-30 01:42 PM
Thanks to everyone who responded.
Appreciate your advice.
regards.
Appreciate your advice.
regards.
2010 How to Grow Emo Hair
richasamuel@yahoo.com
08-29 10:51 PM
Hi frnds,
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
Keep one thing in mind every decision in life has its own pro's and con's.First of all with all self respect for yourself change your job.H1b itself is legalised slavery or human trafficking whatever you call it.unfortunately whether your employer tortures you or not every employer irrespective of whether you are a H1b or a Green card or a citizen will exploit you to the fullest, no matter what, that's the irony.
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
Keep one thing in mind every decision in life has its own pro's and con's.First of all with all self respect for yourself change your job.H1b itself is legalised slavery or human trafficking whatever you call it.unfortunately whether your employer tortures you or not every employer irrespective of whether you are a H1b or a Green card or a citizen will exploit you to the fullest, no matter what, that's the irony.
more...
walking_dude
09-07 01:08 PM
IV Core,
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
hair japanese emo hairstyles
ujjvalkoul
01-18 12:49 PM
try entering that number here
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do
BUT, I am assuming she gave u the Receipt number for online tracking, which you may already have from ur receipt notice...DOES it start with SRC or LIN?
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do
BUT, I am assuming she gave u the Receipt number for online tracking, which you may already have from ur receipt notice...DOES it start with SRC or LIN?
more...
john2255
07-21 08:31 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
hot Cute emo hairstyle for girls
leoindiano
07-09 01:38 PM
I submitted for PP on June 19th, status never got updated ; lawyer received approval copy on july 5th
even now?
Thats strange.....
even now?
Thats strange.....
more...
house emo hairstyles for girls with
snhn
04-21 12:10 PM
Hello all,
it used to be that I would look forwared to the dat DOS cam out with their bulletin, hoping that one day i will be current. that day came last month when i became current. Happiness lasted for a few days, only to realize that those dates means nothing unless your processing center is current as well.
I am from Texas, so the dreadfull TSC is the center processing my application. Last date is march 15, and i am assuming they dont follow the same pattern as DOS, that is to say updating their bulletins every month on a specific date. I am also assumin that their date usually move in increments of days rather then monts, like DOS is doing now days. My PD is August 2005. That leave me 4 months or so before anyone starts to work on my case. I have seen a couple of have been called for interveiws with PD around same time as mine. I dont see any changes on my RD message either. It still sayd, we recevied blaha blah... Generic message letting me know they have gotten my case.
What do you all think when the date usually change. Since I am current, my day to look foward is not on DOS websiter, but USCIS website, hoping that they get to processing Auguts dates soon. I am afraid that DOS might retrogress again, and my current PD will beceome thing of the past.
it used to be that I would look forwared to the dat DOS cam out with their bulletin, hoping that one day i will be current. that day came last month when i became current. Happiness lasted for a few days, only to realize that those dates means nothing unless your processing center is current as well.
I am from Texas, so the dreadfull TSC is the center processing my application. Last date is march 15, and i am assuming they dont follow the same pattern as DOS, that is to say updating their bulletins every month on a specific date. I am also assumin that their date usually move in increments of days rather then monts, like DOS is doing now days. My PD is August 2005. That leave me 4 months or so before anyone starts to work on my case. I have seen a couple of have been called for interveiws with PD around same time as mine. I dont see any changes on my RD message either. It still sayd, we recevied blaha blah... Generic message letting me know they have gotten my case.
What do you all think when the date usually change. Since I am current, my day to look foward is not on DOS websiter, but USCIS website, hoping that they get to processing Auguts dates soon. I am afraid that DOS might retrogress again, and my current PD will beceome thing of the past.
tattoo Emo Haircuts Hairstyles
nixstor
02-23 02:14 PM
my case was recieved Dec 07. (H1B extension)
The website says they're processing Dec 21
However checking my case status, it still says received and pending
How come?
The processing times are just a rough estimate. Most of the times H4 extensions are approved along with H1 extensions. There is a 1 month difference between these two. I think it might got to do some thing it as well. Call USCIS and ask them. There might not be a better response but sometimes you get lucky and talk to a Immigration officer.
The website says they're processing Dec 21
However checking my case status, it still says received and pending
How come?
The processing times are just a rough estimate. Most of the times H4 extensions are approved along with H1 extensions. There is a 1 month difference between these two. I think it might got to do some thing it as well. Call USCIS and ask them. There might not be a better response but sometimes you get lucky and talk to a Immigration officer.
more...
pictures Emo Hairstyle With Emo Red
amitjoey
01-11 11:46 AM
Just so everybody understands:
This bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary on Jan 5th 2011.
This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills and resolutions never make it out of committee.
There have been a lot of bills in the previous years that have not made it to the floor.
IV can make it an action item if the bill comes out of the committee and is going to go on the floor for debate.
Members need to constantly educate lawmakers, approach the judiciary committe and tell them about the issues we face. Unless we educate and build pressure, these kind of bills will never come to the floor.
Venting or wishing for some bill to come on floor will not help. Talking to lawmakers in person, educating lawmaker's staff and building pressure to keep our issues alive is the only way forward.
This bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary on Jan 5th 2011.
This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills and resolutions never make it out of committee.
There have been a lot of bills in the previous years that have not made it to the floor.
IV can make it an action item if the bill comes out of the committee and is going to go on the floor for debate.
Members need to constantly educate lawmakers, approach the judiciary committe and tell them about the issues we face. Unless we educate and build pressure, these kind of bills will never come to the floor.
Venting or wishing for some bill to come on floor will not help. Talking to lawmakers in person, educating lawmaker's staff and building pressure to keep our issues alive is the only way forward.
dresses Scene Hairstyles: The New Emo
jediknight
07-26 09:59 AM
Good advice with different viewpoints.
My advice is "Look for a good mentors" with who you can discuss your situation in detail.
My preference is
Family
GC
Career
This works better in the long term :-)
- JK
My advice is "Look for a good mentors" with who you can discuss your situation in detail.
My preference is
Family
GC
Career
This works better in the long term :-)
- JK
more...
makeup Short Hairstyles: Short Emo
anandrajesh
12-19 08:31 PM
core member- Ashish Sharma (eager2i) will be attending this call on behalf of the core team.
I'LL BE THERE
I'LL BE THERE
girlfriend Wonderful Emo Hairstyles
saimrathi
08-10 03:10 PM
Not a big fan of recurring contribution.. would like to contribute when I feel comfortable...
from your signature it says you contributed and you voted 'no', am i missing something here?
from your signature it says you contributed and you voted 'no', am i missing something here?
hairstyles as short hairstyles are also
immi_seeker
09-13 12:46 PM
EB2 and EB3 at one point were in the same boat. Now that EB2 is advancing and is way ahead of EB3, the EB3 applicants are upset and angry. Their anger is very much justified. However, their anger should not be directed towards EB2 applicants.
As I pointed out in another post, we are all players here and we are all playing by the rules. The system is not fair. Anger should be directed towards the system and not towards EB2s.
"hate the game, don't hate the playa....Chris Rock" is appropriate here.
Most of the EB2s, if not all, are supportive of reform and are supportive towards EB3 friends. The anger may lead to the disruption of this support.
We are all in this together. We all need to stay together.
Agree. Problem has been with some folks saying the spill over distribution should be changed. But nobody is sure whether it will help EB3I because on a vertical roll over scenario, the spill over will only help EB3 ROW as they have huge backlog too. So attitude seems to be, we are in this boat, so why not we make sure you guys will also be in same boat eventhough the change doesnt help us. And thats where the problem lies
As I pointed out in another post, we are all players here and we are all playing by the rules. The system is not fair. Anger should be directed towards the system and not towards EB2s.
"hate the game, don't hate the playa....Chris Rock" is appropriate here.
Most of the EB2s, if not all, are supportive of reform and are supportive towards EB3 friends. The anger may lead to the disruption of this support.
We are all in this together. We all need to stay together.
Agree. Problem has been with some folks saying the spill over distribution should be changed. But nobody is sure whether it will help EB3I because on a vertical roll over scenario, the spill over will only help EB3 ROW as they have huge backlog too. So attitude seems to be, we are in this boat, so why not we make sure you guys will also be in same boat eventhough the change doesnt help us. And thats where the problem lies
willigetgc?
01-21 12:08 PM
Has it anything to do with immigration??
It will only start a fight between members on parenting style.. and a bitter fight at that.
If u like the article you are free to raise your children like that.
Read this to know what your children will think of you when they grow up ...
'Tiger Mothers' leave lifelong scars - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/20/lac.su.tiger.mother.scars/index.html?iref=allsearch)
1. It has nothing to do with immigration (unless you factor that "chinese mother" is an immigrant), which is why this thread is on interesting topics.
2 and 3. I had not even heard of the article until today and told the same to my doc. She brought up the topic because I am Indian.
4. Personally, after having read it, there are a few things I agree with the author and there are many I don't.
BTW, I had not read the CNN story either. Many of the things that I did not like in Amy's article are addressed in the CNN story!
It will only start a fight between members on parenting style.. and a bitter fight at that.
If u like the article you are free to raise your children like that.
Read this to know what your children will think of you when they grow up ...
'Tiger Mothers' leave lifelong scars - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/20/lac.su.tiger.mother.scars/index.html?iref=allsearch)
1. It has nothing to do with immigration (unless you factor that "chinese mother" is an immigrant), which is why this thread is on interesting topics.
2 and 3. I had not even heard of the article until today and told the same to my doc. She brought up the topic because I am Indian.
4. Personally, after having read it, there are a few things I agree with the author and there are many I don't.
BTW, I had not read the CNN story either. Many of the things that I did not like in Amy's article are addressed in the CNN story!
ksircar
10-13 11:20 AM
:confused:
Dear gurus,
I have one fundamental question.
why EAD renewal can take up to 3 months? (90 days). It just does not make sense. I can understand if it is fresh application OR it has been expired for quite sometime before applying for renewal. If it is fresh app, there might be some security checks, application verificaiton checks etc. But EAD Renewal is very simple. You were approved once, your application does not boast any address changes. All you are requesting is renewal based on pending I-485. No common sense!:eek:
This is very very unacceptable and shows the lazyness of USCIS in adjucating timely. But they are VERY TIMELY in increasing fees....:eek:
I know I am very furious but dont we think we should raise some momentum in allowing special processing for EAD renewal or allowing local offices to issue Renewals for EAD which has been eliminated now????
Sincerely...
There are so many things in life that doesn't make sense, but still we accept all those unacceptable things. Friend, consider yourself lucky if you get your EAD card (with all correct info. on the card) in 90 days.
Dear gurus,
I have one fundamental question.
why EAD renewal can take up to 3 months? (90 days). It just does not make sense. I can understand if it is fresh application OR it has been expired for quite sometime before applying for renewal. If it is fresh app, there might be some security checks, application verificaiton checks etc. But EAD Renewal is very simple. You were approved once, your application does not boast any address changes. All you are requesting is renewal based on pending I-485. No common sense!:eek:
This is very very unacceptable and shows the lazyness of USCIS in adjucating timely. But they are VERY TIMELY in increasing fees....:eek:
I know I am very furious but dont we think we should raise some momentum in allowing special processing for EAD renewal or allowing local offices to issue Renewals for EAD which has been eliminated now????
Sincerely...
There are so many things in life that doesn't make sense, but still we accept all those unacceptable things. Friend, consider yourself lucky if you get your EAD card (with all correct info. on the card) in 90 days.
No comments:
Post a Comment