sledge_hammer
11-25 11:51 AM
Your option? Stay put! Keep paying your montly obligations! Or sell now if you want, and take the 20G hit.
Foreclosing when you are not in a financial stress in NOT an option. Get it?
Now that you have your option, go learn how to be a grown up!
And now that you also know returning used merchandise is fraud, what are you going to do about it? Are you going to change your ways?
Dude..
your name speaks for itself.. Slegde_Hammer..meaning bahut bara Hathoda..
you know whom we call a Hathoda.. yup.. u got it..
what part of my message you did not understand.. i am here to explore my options..not to learn what is ethical and unethical..
i see uho have so many posts in ur name.. may be u have spent time on this forum just to let people know if they are ethical or unethical..
i dont know u.. u dont know me.. whats the point of calling someone unethical.. dishonest..
grow up man.. not everyone is happy listening to ur philosphy..i think it is time for you to realize that..
dont send any more messages and personlize them.. you have not given a single valid option.. it is an open forum, i cannot ask you to stop.. but i created this thread to explore my options and not to read all the silly stuff you are writing..
Foreclosing when you are not in a financial stress in NOT an option. Get it?
Now that you have your option, go learn how to be a grown up!
And now that you also know returning used merchandise is fraud, what are you going to do about it? Are you going to change your ways?
Dude..
your name speaks for itself.. Slegde_Hammer..meaning bahut bara Hathoda..
you know whom we call a Hathoda.. yup.. u got it..
what part of my message you did not understand.. i am here to explore my options..not to learn what is ethical and unethical..
i see uho have so many posts in ur name.. may be u have spent time on this forum just to let people know if they are ethical or unethical..
i dont know u.. u dont know me.. whats the point of calling someone unethical.. dishonest..
grow up man.. not everyone is happy listening to ur philosphy..i think it is time for you to realize that..
dont send any more messages and personlize them.. you have not given a single valid option.. it is an open forum, i cannot ask you to stop.. but i created this thread to explore my options and not to read all the silly stuff you are writing..
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
gc28262
06-14 05:49 PM
I am not saying that we are reporting fraud just for the sake of not tolerating it. This is effecting our GC. Earlier the effect was related to the job being taken away now it is effecting our GC too.
Initially L1s were sponsored only by large offshore companies like TCS, WIPRO etc.. The effect was that the jobs were taken away. But it did not have much effect on the GC side as most of these large offshore companies do not process GC for their employees.
But nowadays lots of small Offshore companies started doing L1As. These companies do not have lots of clients like TCS or WIPRo but they have a handfull of clients. So to make sure they have their clients they started bringing people in L1As and processing GC under EB1 for them. Although many of these people are developers and should be in EB3 and should be behind in the line. But as they are in L1A and are appling in Eb1 they are getting GC in no time and also taking the visa#s away. There are hunderes of these small offshore companies started getting people in L1As. Thus these EB1 Visa #s are not overflowing to EB2. This is effecting our GC.
Now we have :
1. Large offshore companies sponsored L1s taking the jobs
2. The small offshore companies sponsored L1s taking the GC visa #s.
If the L1As are indeed senior Manager then no problem, but the Developers/Business Analyst/ Project Manager without hire-fire authority are getting GC under EB1.
Thus these frauds should be reported so that at least the # of EB1 visas are not taken by fraud.
So you too can see how this fraud is effecting us all.
Do you know why we are having GC delays ?
1. Country cap for visa numbers
2. Visa numbers wasted by USCIS by their inefficiency
EB1 visa never belonged to EB2 or EB3 category. What if there were enough genuine EB1 people to claim all the EB1 visas. There won't be any spillovers. Spillovers are bonuses. It is never our right to claim those.
If you want your GC faster, work with IV for country cap removal and recapture.
Have you donated a single dime for IV's cause ?
We always find it easy to go against fellow immigrants than fighting the injustice at root.
Look at the following thread to see how easy it is to resolve GC issues if country caps are removed.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=26465
Initially L1s were sponsored only by large offshore companies like TCS, WIPRO etc.. The effect was that the jobs were taken away. But it did not have much effect on the GC side as most of these large offshore companies do not process GC for their employees.
But nowadays lots of small Offshore companies started doing L1As. These companies do not have lots of clients like TCS or WIPRo but they have a handfull of clients. So to make sure they have their clients they started bringing people in L1As and processing GC under EB1 for them. Although many of these people are developers and should be in EB3 and should be behind in the line. But as they are in L1A and are appling in Eb1 they are getting GC in no time and also taking the visa#s away. There are hunderes of these small offshore companies started getting people in L1As. Thus these EB1 Visa #s are not overflowing to EB2. This is effecting our GC.
Now we have :
1. Large offshore companies sponsored L1s taking the jobs
2. The small offshore companies sponsored L1s taking the GC visa #s.
If the L1As are indeed senior Manager then no problem, but the Developers/Business Analyst/ Project Manager without hire-fire authority are getting GC under EB1.
Thus these frauds should be reported so that at least the # of EB1 visas are not taken by fraud.
So you too can see how this fraud is effecting us all.
Do you know why we are having GC delays ?
1. Country cap for visa numbers
2. Visa numbers wasted by USCIS by their inefficiency
EB1 visa never belonged to EB2 or EB3 category. What if there were enough genuine EB1 people to claim all the EB1 visas. There won't be any spillovers. Spillovers are bonuses. It is never our right to claim those.
If you want your GC faster, work with IV for country cap removal and recapture.
Have you donated a single dime for IV's cause ?
We always find it easy to go against fellow immigrants than fighting the injustice at root.
Look at the following thread to see how easy it is to resolve GC issues if country caps are removed.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=26465
ilikekilo
07-31 07:43 PM
thanks for putting this up...
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
pappu
06-22 03:16 PM
My lawyer said u cannot have 2 485 petitions with USCIS.
My Lawyer's response - You should be aware that you cannot file two I-485 applications. If you file individually, there is no option to file as a dependent UNLESS the pending I-485 is withdrawn.
Awaiting reponse from my wifes lawyer.
ask the lawyer about specific issues that can happen if multiple filing is done.
My Lawyer's response - You should be aware that you cannot file two I-485 applications. If you file individually, there is no option to file as a dependent UNLESS the pending I-485 is withdrawn.
Awaiting reponse from my wifes lawyer.
ask the lawyer about specific issues that can happen if multiple filing is done.
more...
smitha
07-09 08:42 PM
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
drona
07-10 10:27 PM
Well done Dilip Tekkedil! Your quote in the Washington Post article was too good!
Dilip Tekkedil, 32, a software engineer from North Andover, Mass., is one of the frustrated applicants who came up with the flower idea. "It was more peaceful," he said. "We don't trouble anyone else. A rally or something, you have to call law enforcement. It's too much trouble for other people." They do not hold hard feelings against Gonzalez. "I'd like to thank him for the job that he does. I know it's a thankless job," Tekkedil said. "I just hope that he could understand our plight as well."
Dilip Tekkedil, 32, a software engineer from North Andover, Mass., is one of the frustrated applicants who came up with the flower idea. "It was more peaceful," he said. "We don't trouble anyone else. A rally or something, you have to call law enforcement. It's too much trouble for other people." They do not hold hard feelings against Gonzalez. "I'd like to thank him for the job that he does. I know it's a thankless job," Tekkedil said. "I just hope that he could understand our plight as well."
more...
nish
06-16 10:09 AM
Thanks for your reply.
what is the meaning of staff augmentation case? He work at client place and client is administered project.The s/w tool is copyright by client.The reason for asking him to come back is that prior to this company he worked for another company for two years. He left his old company before 5 year. when he joined his current company he has provided all the document mentioned in checklist such as offer letter, exp and releiving letter and last two month pay stub and they did BG for same document.During 5 years career he worked for diff client and everytime they did BG for him before putting him in project and there was no problem happen in his BG. recently his current employer find something wrong about his prior company and they asked him to provide more evidance for prior company.now he don't have any contact of his prior employer and he does not have any more evidnace for showing their company.
Because of this reason they are asking him to come back home country from last two week.He told his company that he tryed to connect his prior employer but he can not make out and he don't have anything more to show the company.
Please suggest what he can do in this situation.
If anyone come across in this situation then please reply to my question.
Appericiate your help in advacne
what is the meaning of staff augmentation case? He work at client place and client is administered project.The s/w tool is copyright by client.The reason for asking him to come back is that prior to this company he worked for another company for two years. He left his old company before 5 year. when he joined his current company he has provided all the document mentioned in checklist such as offer letter, exp and releiving letter and last two month pay stub and they did BG for same document.During 5 years career he worked for diff client and everytime they did BG for him before putting him in project and there was no problem happen in his BG. recently his current employer find something wrong about his prior company and they asked him to provide more evidance for prior company.now he don't have any contact of his prior employer and he does not have any more evidnace for showing their company.
Because of this reason they are asking him to come back home country from last two week.He told his company that he tryed to connect his prior employer but he can not make out and he don't have anything more to show the company.
Please suggest what he can do in this situation.
If anyone come across in this situation then please reply to my question.
Appericiate your help in advacne
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
BharatPremi
09-24 05:17 PM
Number 2) and hence number 3) are definitely wrong.
As I mentioned in my other post, the categorisation for I,P,C,M and ROW is based on the fact that I,P,C,M are the only countries with demand exceeding the annual limit.
ROW = All countries not hitting the 7%(or 9%) country limit. That doesn't mean they are capped at X/5. What would be the basis of that cap.
Assuming USCIS acts like it is supposed to, follows all rules etc........They start using new numbers on Oct1st of the new FY with a fresh slate of 140k available.
Now by law, they will first divide the cap into the 5 EB categories -EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 and EB5. Now once they reach the 7%(or 9) cap in any of the categories, they will have to stop assigning numbers for that country. So for EB3, once they reach the 7 or 9% quota for I,C,M,P - they will need to stop. The rest of the countries(ROW) will get the 100 - (7 x 4) = 72% of the quota. This could be divied up between UK, France, Pak, Germany etc etc. As none of them are going over the 7%, the country cap doesn't affect them. But Since there are a lot of apps under EB3-ROW, there's never any number to spill over to the capped countries.
In case of EB2, only 2 countries hit the cap - India and China. In this case even P and M are part of ROW. But since the apps from ROW is less than the remaining quota of (100 - 7 x 2)% of the EB2 quota, the remaining will be spilled over. The spillover rules will determine who these go to.
The way the current spillover rules stand, your final calculations will still hold true for EB2 due to the spillover ultimately remaining the same to EB2. But not for EB3.
This is not the correct understanding. I know this myth is propogated millions of times in millions of board and so now this myth has become "truth" for millions. But that is not the correct way USCIS does things.
Country specific limit - 9% does NOT have any realtion to "assigning numbers". it is just meant to "approve 485 - mail you a real physical green card".
In ROW cataegory other countries are also bound with this 9 (7 + 2) % limit for Visa granting. For an example - For Pakistan USCIS will never grant more than 9% visa per year no matter how many applications from Pakistan have been assigned a valid visa number. Same will go true for Britain or any "other" country.
In reality How USCIS divide 28.6% among countires - That is unknown mystery and nobody surely know that. And that is why I had to assume "equal shares - 5 part" in my analysis assuming USCIS works fairly but we all know that is a bullshit too :)
As I mentioned in my other post, the categorisation for I,P,C,M and ROW is based on the fact that I,P,C,M are the only countries with demand exceeding the annual limit.
ROW = All countries not hitting the 7%(or 9%) country limit. That doesn't mean they are capped at X/5. What would be the basis of that cap.
Assuming USCIS acts like it is supposed to, follows all rules etc........They start using new numbers on Oct1st of the new FY with a fresh slate of 140k available.
Now by law, they will first divide the cap into the 5 EB categories -EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 and EB5. Now once they reach the 7%(or 9) cap in any of the categories, they will have to stop assigning numbers for that country. So for EB3, once they reach the 7 or 9% quota for I,C,M,P - they will need to stop. The rest of the countries(ROW) will get the 100 - (7 x 4) = 72% of the quota. This could be divied up between UK, France, Pak, Germany etc etc. As none of them are going over the 7%, the country cap doesn't affect them. But Since there are a lot of apps under EB3-ROW, there's never any number to spill over to the capped countries.
In case of EB2, only 2 countries hit the cap - India and China. In this case even P and M are part of ROW. But since the apps from ROW is less than the remaining quota of (100 - 7 x 2)% of the EB2 quota, the remaining will be spilled over. The spillover rules will determine who these go to.
The way the current spillover rules stand, your final calculations will still hold true for EB2 due to the spillover ultimately remaining the same to EB2. But not for EB3.
This is not the correct understanding. I know this myth is propogated millions of times in millions of board and so now this myth has become "truth" for millions. But that is not the correct way USCIS does things.
Country specific limit - 9% does NOT have any realtion to "assigning numbers". it is just meant to "approve 485 - mail you a real physical green card".
In ROW cataegory other countries are also bound with this 9 (7 + 2) % limit for Visa granting. For an example - For Pakistan USCIS will never grant more than 9% visa per year no matter how many applications from Pakistan have been assigned a valid visa number. Same will go true for Britain or any "other" country.
In reality How USCIS divide 28.6% among countires - That is unknown mystery and nobody surely know that. And that is why I had to assume "equal shares - 5 part" in my analysis assuming USCIS works fairly but we all know that is a bullshit too :)
more...
CADude
09-20 03:03 PM
USCIS has to work in FIFO process not RIRO(Random In Random Out)... So they can't send Receipt Notice to Aug 17th filer and then look for July 2nd filer. I sent my concern to congressmen? Now choice is your? I can't force you or USCIS for any action but i can do what ever possible by me.. :)
PS: PD: July 2001 and waiting approx 8 years for GC where my friends are applying for citizenship, if they choose to do so. :)
Question is that there are so many July 2 filers (including me) who have not got any response yet. Therefore, it is not an isolated case. I don't know if emailing to the Director does any good, as long as USCIS keeps admitting that they have not yet sent all receipts (inspite of weekly bulletins). Until 90 days are over, I guess, USCIS will be unresponsive to individual inquiries.
PS: PD: July 2001 and waiting approx 8 years for GC where my friends are applying for citizenship, if they choose to do so. :)
Question is that there are so many July 2 filers (including me) who have not got any response yet. Therefore, it is not an isolated case. I don't know if emailing to the Director does any good, as long as USCIS keeps admitting that they have not yet sent all receipts (inspite of weekly bulletins). Until 90 days are over, I guess, USCIS will be unresponsive to individual inquiries.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
pitha
09-26 10:38 AM
cir failed because the senate did not have a filibuster proof majority (60) to pass cir. This time the democrats are expected to gain 4 to 5 seats in the senate, that will take there majority to 54 or 55 from the current 50 (49 +liberman). With a majority of 54 or 55 the filibuster will not happen again in senate and cir will pass in the senate.
The difference between Bush and obama in calling for cir is that Bush was an unpopular lame duck president, his party was a minority in both the house and senate. Obama if elected president would have the democrats in control of both the house and senate, therefore when obama says he wants to pass cir, it will happen, so take it seriously and dont live in a fantasy that CIR will fail again.
to all those people who cliam that cir won't be bad, please, please name some provisions that were good for Eb immigrants. Please dont use words like "hope", might" etc,durbin wants to knock the living daylights out of EB immigrants. I want to know if there was anything good in cir, not good things you hope to be in cir
These are a list of bad things that were in cir and will be in durbin cir
-DId cir have stem exemption? answer no
-Did cir have visa recapture? answer no
-Did cir increase the eb quota to reduce the backlog? answer no
-Did cir exempt the existing EB applicants from the new "points based
system", answer this seems to be a gray area, no clear answer (there is a
debate about this)
-Did cir have draconian restrictions on H1, answer yes
if there are any more nagatives please add to the list.
guys, the reason behind this post is not to pick a fight with anyone or to win an argument, but to look at the facts and realize the deep shit we will be in and address the issues. Just like a sick patient will expire if he lives in denial and does not take his medicine, we the eb immigrants will expire with cir if we dont realize we will be sick with cir and start looking for medicine.
The difference between Bush and obama in calling for cir is that Bush was an unpopular lame duck president, his party was a minority in both the house and senate. Obama if elected president would have the democrats in control of both the house and senate, therefore when obama says he wants to pass cir, it will happen, so take it seriously and dont live in a fantasy that CIR will fail again.
to all those people who cliam that cir won't be bad, please, please name some provisions that were good for Eb immigrants. Please dont use words like "hope", might" etc,durbin wants to knock the living daylights out of EB immigrants. I want to know if there was anything good in cir, not good things you hope to be in cir
These are a list of bad things that were in cir and will be in durbin cir
-DId cir have stem exemption? answer no
-Did cir have visa recapture? answer no
-Did cir increase the eb quota to reduce the backlog? answer no
-Did cir exempt the existing EB applicants from the new "points based
system", answer this seems to be a gray area, no clear answer (there is a
debate about this)
-Did cir have draconian restrictions on H1, answer yes
if there are any more nagatives please add to the list.
guys, the reason behind this post is not to pick a fight with anyone or to win an argument, but to look at the facts and realize the deep shit we will be in and address the issues. Just like a sick patient will expire if he lives in denial and does not take his medicine, we the eb immigrants will expire with cir if we dont realize we will be sick with cir and start looking for medicine.
more...
Raju
01-27 04:19 PM
Thanks a lot. I am glad we all gathered here. I am confident we will win.
Please click the following link
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/ITFIAF/news_012506.php
Dr. Martin recommends that:
1.Policies must be flexible enough to respond to changing market conditions;
2.Visa categories, which have become so complicated they often require professional assistance to navigate, should be simplified;
3.The government apparatus for managing applications should be better funded and more efficient;
4.Requirements for workers and employers should be reasonable and consistent with the way the labor market functions (so for jobs that are not temporary, workers should be given an option to transition to permanent status);
5.Workers should have mobility among jobs and employers; and
6.Employment of unauthorized migrants must be curtailed.
Please click the following link
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/ITFIAF/news_012506.php
Dr. Martin recommends that:
1.Policies must be flexible enough to respond to changing market conditions;
2.Visa categories, which have become so complicated they often require professional assistance to navigate, should be simplified;
3.The government apparatus for managing applications should be better funded and more efficient;
4.Requirements for workers and employers should be reasonable and consistent with the way the labor market functions (so for jobs that are not temporary, workers should be given an option to transition to permanent status);
5.Workers should have mobility among jobs and employers; and
6.Employment of unauthorized migrants must be curtailed.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
baburob2
01-07 10:29 PM
not that i know of , but i have heard at number of places this coming up very faster. it might be one of those s1932 clauses in disguise. i will keep a tab on this legislation which seems to be very good.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
gans
09-24 05:41 PM
Are we missing another important information in the calculations here? Taken from the visa bulletin - "2. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320."
For example, in the case of India, there cannot be more than 25620 [7%(226000+140000)] + 7320 [2%(226000+140000)] = 32940 green cards/year (excepting the spill-overs) inclusive of family and employment based categories (and their different quotas).
I guess, unless we get the numbers for family-based applications, similar to EB-485 that has just been released, the conclusions are based on approximations and assumptions, although I wish to point out how much I have learned and appreciate all the analysis here.
Because, if there can only be 32940 green cards for all people (family + employment) from India in a particular year(excepting the spill-overs), the employment-based green cards alone are 1960(EB4) + 1960(EB5) + 8008(EB1) + 8008(EB2) + 8008(EB3) = 27944. Does it mean that there are only 32940-27944=4996 family based green cards for India/year (excepting the spill-overs)? And also, I believe that family-based has a higher priority than employment-based as a result of which the spill-overs are larger for the former.
Does anyone seem to agree with me?
For example, in the case of India, there cannot be more than 25620 [7%(226000+140000)] + 7320 [2%(226000+140000)] = 32940 green cards/year (excepting the spill-overs) inclusive of family and employment based categories (and their different quotas).
I guess, unless we get the numbers for family-based applications, similar to EB-485 that has just been released, the conclusions are based on approximations and assumptions, although I wish to point out how much I have learned and appreciate all the analysis here.
Because, if there can only be 32940 green cards for all people (family + employment) from India in a particular year(excepting the spill-overs), the employment-based green cards alone are 1960(EB4) + 1960(EB5) + 8008(EB1) + 8008(EB2) + 8008(EB3) = 27944. Does it mean that there are only 32940-27944=4996 family based green cards for India/year (excepting the spill-overs)? And also, I believe that family-based has a higher priority than employment-based as a result of which the spill-overs are larger for the former.
Does anyone seem to agree with me?
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
nat23
04-05 05:19 PM
Let's assume the date moves to Aug 07 by September of this year.
What will happen after that? I mean what would be the rate of movement
What will happen after that? I mean what would be the rate of movement
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
karl65
08-11 12:35 PM
I called today to help a friend who has been stuck in namecheck status for almost a year and a half and spoke to an immigration officer who calmly explained to me that the name check isn't done only nationally but also "internationally" meaning, not only do they do a background check on you in the US, they also look you up in your country of origin. In all my time reading about this I have never heard her version before, so I had assumed the namecheck was only done at the national level. No wonder it's taking so long, with the FBI waiting for a response from those countries. :(
Unfortunately it is true. I have read that this check is done especially for people whose country is consider in risk. For example I am from Peru. My country has drug traffic problems, so my name must be checked with the Peruvian police records too.
That�s life!!!!!!
Unfortunately it is true. I have read that this check is done especially for people whose country is consider in risk. For example I am from Peru. My country has drug traffic problems, so my name must be checked with the Peruvian police records too.
That�s life!!!!!!
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
snathan
08-20 06:31 PM
I wont switch to vonage because i dont make much phone calls. Try to use google talk to cut expenses.
Hows Airtel 1c plan? Is the call quality and connection good ?
Thanks
Quality is good. But the problem is they ask you call the local number which some time not working.
Hows Airtel 1c plan? Is the call quality and connection good ?
Thanks
Quality is good. But the problem is they ask you call the local number which some time not working.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
dreamworld
09-19 04:11 PM
It is possible to use your new approved 140(EB2). Your date are current and do request USCIS and go in front of GC line. Good luck.
You can request USCIS with reference to this citation/pdf.
http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/seminars/august2002_citation2c.pdf
Please make a token contribution to IV.
I have applied my I485 and EAD based on EB3, I have received EAD for me and my wife, in parallel I had also applied for I140 based on my EB2 application. Now my I140 has been approved for EB2 and PD is current for EB2. I was wondering if there is any way that I can get my I485 transferred to EB2 and how can I get it done...
Could someone please suggest...
Thanks in advance
You can request USCIS with reference to this citation/pdf.
http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/seminars/august2002_citation2c.pdf
Please make a token contribution to IV.
I have applied my I485 and EAD based on EB3, I have received EAD for me and my wife, in parallel I had also applied for I140 based on my EB2 application. Now my I140 has been approved for EB2 and PD is current for EB2. I was wondering if there is any way that I can get my I485 transferred to EB2 and how can I get it done...
Could someone please suggest...
Thanks in advance
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
walking_dude
10-31 03:58 PM
Let us all send AC21 action item mails to USCIS. Let us send some more through our spouses and teenage children. Also get some more signed by our friends and neighbors.
The letters are very generic. They can be sent by anyone including GC holders and citizens too. All it costs is a few Dollars! So what are you waiting for you? If you have hired a nanny, make her send one too :)
The letters are very generic. They can be sent by anyone including GC holders and citizens too. All it costs is a few Dollars! So what are you waiting for you? If you have hired a nanny, make her send one too :)
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
kshitijnt
05-11 12:11 AM
See the url below.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/training/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=215900774&subSection=H1B
I don't give a damn what your epics say or what you practice in India. All I pointed out was teh corruption in India pointed out by international agencies compared to western democracies.
Oh there is no corruption in western democracies. :) LOL
Iraq war had no corruption
Halliburton deal had no corruption,
AIG had no corruption, BOA , Citi had no corruption.
Lobbying had no corruption
The texas cops who took money were not corrupt.
Abu Ghraib was very morally correct.
Blackwater was a very level headed company.
Did all this happen in some communist eastern state?
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/training/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=215900774&subSection=H1B
I don't give a damn what your epics say or what you practice in India. All I pointed out was teh corruption in India pointed out by international agencies compared to western democracies.
Oh there is no corruption in western democracies. :) LOL
Iraq war had no corruption
Halliburton deal had no corruption,
AIG had no corruption, BOA , Citi had no corruption.
Lobbying had no corruption
The texas cops who took money were not corrupt.
Abu Ghraib was very morally correct.
Blackwater was a very level headed company.
Did all this happen in some communist eastern state?
Tantra
07-12 08:00 AM
Gandhigiri in Amrikka!!! -- http://mutiny.in/2007/07/11/gandhigiri-in-amrikka/
Indian green card seekers' novel approach -- http://www.gulfnews.com/world/U.S.A/10138698.html
Indian green card seekers' novel approach -- http://www.gulfnews.com/world/U.S.A/10138698.html
arihant
05-25 05:37 PM
Hi,
I went for my medical exam this week. My shot record has one entry for DTP (10 year booster) which I took earlier this month. I used to take this vaccine as a child regularly (back then it used to be valid for 6 months), but I have no written evidence of it.
Anyway, in the spplumental form to I-693, the doctor I visited checked the "Not appropriate age" in the first row for DT/DTP. In the second row for Td, the doctor filled out the Date Rec'd column from my shot record but also checked "Insufficient time interval". When I asked the doctor about this, he said that it will be "alright". Is this going to be ok with USCIS? Or do I have to demand the doctor to do a Titer for Tetanus and Diptheria to prove I have immunity for it?
Regards.
I went for my medical exam this week. My shot record has one entry for DTP (10 year booster) which I took earlier this month. I used to take this vaccine as a child regularly (back then it used to be valid for 6 months), but I have no written evidence of it.
Anyway, in the spplumental form to I-693, the doctor I visited checked the "Not appropriate age" in the first row for DT/DTP. In the second row for Td, the doctor filled out the Date Rec'd column from my shot record but also checked "Insufficient time interval". When I asked the doctor about this, he said that it will be "alright". Is this going to be ok with USCIS? Or do I have to demand the doctor to do a Titer for Tetanus and Diptheria to prove I have immunity for it?
Regards.
