kshitijnt
06-26 01:27 AM
Some one has got a problem with me calling USCIS and Congress as bloody morons in above post. Funny people, really.
wallpaper wallpapers for pc in hd
santb1975
06-11 09:08 PM
That is better than yesterday. We can do better.
Thanks to contributors today
Thanks to contributors today
indio0617
03-09 10:48 AM
Amendment - To Eliminate Retroactive act laws which is harsh and unjust.
2011 hd wallpapers games. wallpaper
Milind123
09-14 01:05 AM
The last sixth round and this seventh round is to encourage people, who beleive in IV, to contribute their first Ben Franklin ($100). I still need 3 people to close this round. I absolutely positively confirm that this is the last time I am going to single you out.
Looking at the last few posts, I think I am talking to myself. Time to go to sleep. Good night. People on the west coast, please help to keep this thread on the screen by bumping it.
Looking at the last few posts, I think I am talking to myself. Time to go to sleep. Good night. People on the west coast, please help to keep this thread on the screen by bumping it.
more...
485_se_dukhi
07-18 08:31 PM
Done......
$50 is approx the cost of two lunches (for two people) per month => we are going to eat out two fewer times each month.
So, we eat healthier food and the IV fund grows. :)
$50 is approx the cost of two lunches (for two people) per month => we are going to eat out two fewer times each month.
So, we eat healthier food and the IV fund grows. :)
DSJ
07-06 01:15 PM
Forgot in a hurry, it is updated now
ok this is from Oh's website..pelase always quote source.
ok this is from Oh's website..pelase always quote source.
more...
pa_arora
06-10 01:33 PM
That is the victory due to our admin fixes campaign. Your thousands of letters are working here.
We had received good feedback in our meetings with the administration.
The whole process of making final announcements is just too slow!!
We recently had another meeting to discuss one more admin fix item that has not been addressed yet and was part of our letters. Let us hope some decision comes out soon enough.
Pappu, then why no to plan for another letter campaign, if that is what making things work a little bit.
We had received good feedback in our meetings with the administration.
The whole process of making final announcements is just too slow!!
We recently had another meeting to discuss one more admin fix item that has not been addressed yet and was part of our letters. Let us hope some decision comes out soon enough.
Pappu, then why no to plan for another letter campaign, if that is what making things work a little bit.
2010 wallpaper pc hd. with some
optimystic
09-10 04:32 PM
To the commenter who red dotted with the comment
"bas*$%^&d - Take it easy. Either u want the system the way it is, or if u want it reformed, someone else has the equal right to get the benefit. I want the people with oldest PD's to get GC first; but please be nice to others.
"
I dont think I said anywhere in my post that I don't want "someone else to have the equal right to get benefit"...
What I actually said was in fact that everyone (not just some lucky ones) should have the equal right to get fair benefit within the scope of the existing set of rules that USCIS has itself put in place (Honoring PDs etc).
Please read posts carefully before commenting. And I personally usually refrain from giving red dots and comments in the backgroudd (Somehow it just seems a bit cowardly to me..but that's just my personal opinion).
And as far as bas*$%^&d, it was just a way of expression...Haven't you heard the phrase "You lucky bastard"
...although I agree people could percieve some element of frustration in there...and hence the 'no offence' additive in the brackets in my original post.
I would rather be frustrated at USCIS which richly deserves everone's anger/frustration, than at some unknown lucky bas*$%^&d :D
Now please go ahead and give me some greens so I can become eligible for the IV chat feature.... :D
Btw, I also came across a 'red dot vigilante', who gave me a red dot with the comment "I usually give red dots to people who complain about red dots" . (This was for some other post). Nice work sir...You seem to have a lot of time on your hands to do some vigilante work on the side lines :) . Please give some red dots to USCIS :D
"bas*$%^&d - Take it easy. Either u want the system the way it is, or if u want it reformed, someone else has the equal right to get the benefit. I want the people with oldest PD's to get GC first; but please be nice to others.
"
I dont think I said anywhere in my post that I don't want "someone else to have the equal right to get benefit"...
What I actually said was in fact that everyone (not just some lucky ones) should have the equal right to get fair benefit within the scope of the existing set of rules that USCIS has itself put in place (Honoring PDs etc).
Please read posts carefully before commenting. And I personally usually refrain from giving red dots and comments in the backgroudd (Somehow it just seems a bit cowardly to me..but that's just my personal opinion).
And as far as bas*$%^&d, it was just a way of expression...Haven't you heard the phrase "You lucky bastard"
...although I agree people could percieve some element of frustration in there...and hence the 'no offence' additive in the brackets in my original post.
I would rather be frustrated at USCIS which richly deserves everone's anger/frustration, than at some unknown lucky bas*$%^&d :D
Now please go ahead and give me some greens so I can become eligible for the IV chat feature.... :D
Btw, I also came across a 'red dot vigilante', who gave me a red dot with the comment "I usually give red dots to people who complain about red dots" . (This was for some other post). Nice work sir...You seem to have a lot of time on your hands to do some vigilante work on the side lines :) . Please give some red dots to USCIS :D
more...
NKR
04-02 02:33 PM
That is right. People can express their opinions. No name calling and rough language.
That�s right, no name calling and no country name calling. D.R.D owes us an apology.
That�s right, no name calling and no country name calling. D.R.D owes us an apology.
hair 2560×1600 Hd Wallpaper
chanduv23
05-18 03:59 PM
Hi ind_game, attorney and all readers,
After reading ind_game last quote "God save AC21.....". I have following questions:
1. Do you know any one (your friend, client) used AC21 and faced same problem? Es
2. Is it true that AC-21 info don't get updated in the USCIS records?
3. If yes (2 question), then x-employer I-140 revocation will ALWAYS result in THIS kind of problems (as ind-game is facing)?
4. To attorneys only: Is AC-21 really helpful or misleading? Asking because if it don't update in USCIS records.
Please reply.
thanks,
waitingmygc
Almost everyone who use AC21 and had their ex employer informing USCIS about the job change has gone through this.
There is no case of AC21 being denied. It is the law, no need to be scared if you did everything right.
After reading ind_game last quote "God save AC21.....". I have following questions:
1. Do you know any one (your friend, client) used AC21 and faced same problem? Es
2. Is it true that AC-21 info don't get updated in the USCIS records?
3. If yes (2 question), then x-employer I-140 revocation will ALWAYS result in THIS kind of problems (as ind-game is facing)?
4. To attorneys only: Is AC-21 really helpful or misleading? Asking because if it don't update in USCIS records.
Please reply.
thanks,
waitingmygc
Almost everyone who use AC21 and had their ex employer informing USCIS about the job change has gone through this.
There is no case of AC21 being denied. It is the law, no need to be scared if you did everything right.
more...
bala50
04-30 04:03 PM
Very true, I was close to throwing up when i heard certain comments , so I would suggest please dont eat and watch this at the same time.
can you please upload somewhere so people like me who missed this show can see it. Lawer RON mentioned this morning that it will upset stomach. If want to be sick then see such a show.. I dont care if I become sick let me watch for fun.. A comedy show...
can you please upload somewhere so people like me who missed this show can see it. Lawer RON mentioned this morning that it will upset stomach. If want to be sick then see such a show.. I dont care if I become sick let me watch for fun.. A comedy show...
hot house hd wallpaper pc. red
bpratap
05-28 05:37 PM
My Loan is not Jumbo loan, its under 400K
I don't have 20% down. But I was speaking to the Loan officer, he was telling, it doesn't matter if you put more down or not, 3yr forward continuous visa is req. I never heard this earlier.
I finally got the Loan Approved !
The underwriters was OK with my H1B + I-140 Approval + I-485 Reciept.
Thank you all for the tips and leads.
After a long 60 day wait, I m finally getting the house on Monday. :)
I don't have 20% down. But I was speaking to the Loan officer, he was telling, it doesn't matter if you put more down or not, 3yr forward continuous visa is req. I never heard this earlier.
I finally got the Loan Approved !
The underwriters was OK with my H1B + I-140 Approval + I-485 Reciept.
Thank you all for the tips and leads.
After a long 60 day wait, I m finally getting the house on Monday. :)
more...
house free islamic wallpaper 2011 HD
lonedesi
06-19 10:05 AM
Also, please contact this person:
Helen Parker
Regional Administrator
U.S. Department of Labor/ETA
Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth St. Rm. 6M12
Atlanta,GA 30303
Phone: (404) 562-2092
Fax: (404) 562-2149
Send faxes and call to request them to process our PERM applications. Please act now, if not we will miss the bus.
Helen Parker
Regional Administrator
U.S. Department of Labor/ETA
Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth St. Rm. 6M12
Atlanta,GA 30303
Phone: (404) 562-2092
Fax: (404) 562-2149
Send faxes and call to request them to process our PERM applications. Please act now, if not we will miss the bus.
tattoo dresses hd wallpaper pc. red
fruity
07-23 04:50 AM
My case was completed at the NVC last year, this was when there were still schedule A visas. Then retro came in Nov. In June 2007, NVC asked to re submit ds230. Why did they ask to resubmit it if we weren't assigned a visa number yet? and now that there are no visas left for CP, our file gets stuck again, and when our PD becomes current, do we have to resubmit for the 3rd time our ds230.... So confusing......
more...
pictures free blue islamic wallpaper
I_need_GC
02-27 02:46 PM
It was filed with the Nebraska service center
Fax to Texas
214-962-2632
Providing an covering letter along with a copy of your supporting documents
Fax to Texas
214-962-2632
Providing an covering letter along with a copy of your supporting documents
dresses tattoo WINDOWS 7 HD WALLPAPERS
addsf345
11-20 03:38 PM
Some benefits can be revoked automatically (I-140, I-485), some can be revoked only after determination is made by USCIS and a beneficiary is notified and has an opportunity to respond. EAD is one of the latter.
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
more...
makeup wallpapers for desktop hd.
MeraNaamJoker
09-27 09:49 AM
Arrived in early 1999
started processing GC in 2000
filed 1st application in 2000
left the company, filed second application in 2001
bad immigration management by the company, got the labor approved only in October 2006
got I 140 in February 2007
applied for I485 in June 2007
got EAD on September 2007
got GC approval email on August 5th, 2010
FINALLY GOT GC ON AUGUST 16th, 2010
started processing GC in 2000
filed 1st application in 2000
left the company, filed second application in 2001
bad immigration management by the company, got the labor approved only in October 2006
got I 140 in February 2007
applied for I485 in June 2007
got EAD on September 2007
got GC approval email on August 5th, 2010
FINALLY GOT GC ON AUGUST 16th, 2010
girlfriend Download Full Hd Wallpapers
paisa
07-06 02:15 PM
The USCIS automated line for Priority dates is still playing the PD's for June 2007 showing that EB India cut off June 1st 2003 etc..
We have so contrasting images of the efficiency of USCIS. Hope they keep the same tempo as of the last week of June on Oct 1st when the FT 2008 quota kicks in.
I think we should all chill and not worry what is going to happen. Have a beer. Say Happy Birthday to GW Bush. if the visas are over there is nothing USCIS can do. They cannot generate numbers automatically. So chill everyone.
We have so contrasting images of the efficiency of USCIS. Hope they keep the same tempo as of the last week of June on Oct 1st when the FT 2008 quota kicks in.
I think we should all chill and not worry what is going to happen. Have a beer. Say Happy Birthday to GW Bush. if the visas are over there is nothing USCIS can do. They cannot generate numbers automatically. So chill everyone.
hairstyles house wallpaper hd wallpaper
veni001
08-22 10:30 PM
Here is the link....
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Interim%20Guidance%20for%20Comment/Kazarian%20Guidance%20AD10-41.pdf
:rolleyes:
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Interim%20Guidance%20for%20Comment/Kazarian%20Guidance%20AD10-41.pdf
:rolleyes:
lazycis
11-20 01:11 PM
Some benefits can be revoked automatically (I-140, I-485), some can be revoked only after determination is made by USCIS and a beneficiary is notified and has an opportunity to respond. EAD is one of the latter.
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather — if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday — automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather — if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday — automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
desperatedesi
09-10 02:04 PM
Hello,
I would have loved to be there in DC but here is my small contribution of $100
Google Order #211034816607767
Thanks
DD
I would have loved to be there in DC but here is my small contribution of $100
Google Order #211034816607767
Thanks
DD
No comments:
Post a Comment