a_yaja
06-07 03:54 PM
Heard on CNN ...
Looks like the Vote to Limit the number of Debates (On Amendments) on CIR has failed.
The reporter stated that If the bill fails it will fail by Sundown today
before the eggs hatch
We need to wait for sundown. Looks like some backroom manuvering is going on.
Looks like the Vote to Limit the number of Debates (On Amendments) on CIR has failed.
The reporter stated that If the bill fails it will fail by Sundown today
before the eggs hatch
We need to wait for sundown. Looks like some backroom manuvering is going on.
wallpaper red hulk vs juggernaut
srgadi
06-30 02:12 AM
Thanks all. I think the labor only says BS + min 3 years experience in related field. What are the chances that if I proceed on Monday, I will get an RFE on this? And would there be anyway I could respond to that RFE successfully?
zamoo
09-03 01:41 PM
Hello Folks,
I'm Aug-2005 EB2-I.
Haven't received my GC yet.
I think, based on various experiences mentioned here, opening a SR, taking local immigration office appointments, etc is a way to get USCIS to look at your file.
I also read, if there was a pending EAD renewal, your case might get looked at and instead of renewing your EAD, USCIS will rather give you GC - provided PD is current and there are no other issues.
I know none of these 2 things have a documented backing...apart from people's experiences (which, I value a lot - don't get me wrong there).
My EAD was also up for renewal - filed in June. Got the "card production ordered" e-mail @ that yesterday. And, no change on the AOS case.
So, should I take other steps @ my AOS case - like, opening a SR, taking IO appointment, etc ?
Thanks
I'm Aug-2005 EB2-I.
Haven't received my GC yet.
I think, based on various experiences mentioned here, opening a SR, taking local immigration office appointments, etc is a way to get USCIS to look at your file.
I also read, if there was a pending EAD renewal, your case might get looked at and instead of renewing your EAD, USCIS will rather give you GC - provided PD is current and there are no other issues.
I know none of these 2 things have a documented backing...apart from people's experiences (which, I value a lot - don't get me wrong there).
My EAD was also up for renewal - filed in June. Got the "card production ordered" e-mail @ that yesterday. And, no change on the AOS case.
So, should I take other steps @ my AOS case - like, opening a SR, taking IO appointment, etc ?
Thanks
2011 the Hulk versus Superman,
shivarajan
08-14 08:14 PM
USCIS is considering to "permit pre-filing of I-485 applications upon approval of I-140 petitions for preadjudication of the I-485 applications pending immigrant visa number availability."
News From The Oh Law Firm Site: Link (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
Possible good news for folks who missed 07' July Fiasco and still waiting to file I-485
News From The Oh Law Firm Site: Link (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
Possible good news for folks who missed 07' July Fiasco and still waiting to file I-485
more...
gc78
10-09 02:00 PM
I had to travel to Switzerland recently and was in a similar situation. I explained to the visa officer that my H1B stamp had expired and was planning on using AP for travel. She was fine with it, mentioned that AP supersedes H1B stamp anyway and issued the Swiss visa.
lecter
November 9th, 2004, 07:38 AM
4/3's?? Hard to say..... It's certainly going to get a following. But it's limited compared to where larger Sensors will go ultimately.. Certainly the E1 is a NICE image machine.
For your $1,000 do you want new or have you considered second hand??
Rob
For your $1,000 do you want new or have you considered second hand??
Rob
more...
parablergh
08-27 02:55 PM
- just a note - I would also strongly recommend filing your spouse's AOS as soon as possible (once current). Please note that this should be done prior to receiving approval for your Adjustment.
2010 Trion Juggernaut vs Hulk With
chanduv23
10-30 04:35 PM
yeah the meeting was really good..I got to meet many people but had to leave a bit early. For a first meeting (for me) I got an overview of IV etc and put faces to the handles I see in here. For future meetings I think we should
1) establish action items
2) find volunteers to carry out specific action items
3) set drop-dead dates for each item
4) find a conduit for communicating back the results /feedback from the implemented tasks (yahoo groups works fine)
5) list out our progress/obstacles/lessons learnt
Thanks for the excellent feedback. Do please write to the yahoogroups your overall experience during the NJ meet.
We are currently restructuring the yahoogroups, we removed all bouncing and anonymous ids and making it extra secure. The idea is to make yahoogroups exclusively for local chapter activities and mobilization within the chapter.
Tri State still needs mobilization in Long Island and Upstate NY and I am trying to jump start these sub units, I want help from people living in those places.
1) establish action items
2) find volunteers to carry out specific action items
3) set drop-dead dates for each item
4) find a conduit for communicating back the results /feedback from the implemented tasks (yahoo groups works fine)
5) list out our progress/obstacles/lessons learnt
Thanks for the excellent feedback. Do please write to the yahoogroups your overall experience during the NJ meet.
We are currently restructuring the yahoogroups, we removed all bouncing and anonymous ids and making it extra secure. The idea is to make yahoogroups exclusively for local chapter activities and mobilization within the chapter.
Tri State still needs mobilization in Long Island and Upstate NY and I am trying to jump start these sub units, I want help from people living in those places.
more...
pappu
02-09 01:39 PM
Call up AILA and ask them what are your options. Do not tell them the lawyer name yet.
Contact the state bar of this lawyer. Each lawyer is licensed to practice in his state. call them up and ask for your options.
pls post your answers on this thread so that everyone can know how to deal with such lawyers and what rights (clients) have.
Contact the state bar of this lawyer. Each lawyer is licensed to practice in his state. call them up and ask for your options.
pls post your answers on this thread so that everyone can know how to deal with such lawyers and what rights (clients) have.
hair World War Hulk versus
anandrajesh
12-18 10:40 PM
bumping this back up
MN members, please post here and join us
we have only 9 people so far
there are surely more of us
Are we gonna have a concall sometime soon to discuss?
MN members, please post here and join us
we have only 9 people so far
there are surely more of us
Are we gonna have a concall sometime soon to discuss?
more...
gc28262
07-28 01:48 PM
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration;_ylt=AgcIIY.ht_GJNzOqM3G8sH 6s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNta2N1b3FnBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNz I4L3VzX2FyaXpvbmFfaW1taWdyYXRpb24EY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBv cHVsYXIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwM3BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW 5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNqdWRnZWJsb2Nrc3A-)
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
PHOENIX – A federal judge dealt a serious rebuke to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown on hold just hours before it was to take effect.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton sets up a lengthy legal battle as Arizona fights to enact the nation's toughest-in-the-nation law. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said the state likely appeal the ruling and seek to get the judge's order overturned.
But for now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also delayed parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places — a move aimed at day laborers. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.
She said the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.
The law was signed by Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections. The law has inspired similar law elsewhere, prompted a boycott against the state and led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave the state.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants. Arizona is the busiest gateway into the country for illegal immigrants, and the border is awash in drugs and smugglers that the state badly wants to stop.
"It's a temporary bump in the road, we will move forward, and I'm sure that after consultation with our counsel we will appeal," Brewer told the Associated Press. "The bottom line is we've known all along that it is The responsibility of the feds and they haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
In a sign of the international interest in the law, about 100 protesters in Mexico City who had gathered in front of the U.S. Embassy broke into cheers when speakers told them about the federal judge's ruling. The demonstrators had been monitoring the news on a laptop computer on the stage.
The crowed clapped and started chanting, "Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!"
Gisela and Eduardo Diaz went to the Mexican consulate in Phoenix on Wednesday seeking advice because they were worried about what would happen to their 3-year-old granddaughter if they were pulled over by police and taken to a detention center.
"I knew the judge would say that part of the law was just not right," said Diaz, a 50-year-old from Mexico City who came to Arizona on a since-expired tourist visa in 1989. "It's the part we were worried about. This is a big relief for us."
Opponents argued the law would lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. She added that a requirement of the law that police determine the immigration status of all arrested people will prompt legal immigrants to be "swept up by this requirement."
Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.
Bolton noted that the expected increase in immigration checks from Arizona will divert federal resources away from other priorities and said the federal government has shown that it's likely to succeed on its claim that such mandatory checks under the Arizona law would be trumped by federal law.
Responding to the ruling, Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said that the agency understands the frustration of Arizona residents with the immigration system. She added that a wide range of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement.
Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.
Brewer is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives. It's not yet clear how the ruling will affect her campaign, but her opponent was quick to pounce.
"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat. "It is time to look beyond election year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."
Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's top supporters, said he was disappointed by the ruling and that he expects it to ultimately end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"I don't think the judge's statements in the hearings justify this ruling," Kavanagh said. "I don't think the law justified her injunction."
hot juggernaut vs the avengers
saurin
02-10 08:02 AM
Hi Ann,
Yes I do have an EAD. Thanks for your reply.
Yes I do have an EAD. Thanks for your reply.
more...
house hulk bapes
anilsal
12-09 01:39 PM
Now where are the members in IL? Repeated requests passed to members returns no response!
tattoo marvel juggernaut vs hulk,
krishnam70
03-25 07:55 PM
-
Are you serious? Is this a serious question? why did u edit all your posts?
- cheers
kris
Are you serious? Is this a serious question? why did u edit all your posts?
- cheers
kris
more...
pictures Upcoming juggernaut vs. red
crzyBanker
08-24 06:03 PM
Applied i140 and 485 on July 2nd and yesterday my i140 got approved. So I guess no need for premium processing now as the process is moving faster.
dresses juggernaut vs hulk.
kartikiran
02-18 12:29 PM
If you can you should move up to EB2.
Even if it is file your spouse's I-485, what moving up means is you both can be free out of this mess.
There is no guarantee with PD dates for EB3-India moving to Dec 2001. It has not touched that date ever since retrogression was introduced. Go figure. BTW, USCIS still thinks there are thousands and thousands of apps filed before Dec 2001.
Best of luck.
The PD for my GC application is Dec 10, 2001. I filed under EB3 category and my chargeability is India. Going by the backlog that we are currently experiencing for EB3, is it worth filing for an upgrade of the GC application from EB3 to EB2 based purely on timelines for both EB3 and EB2?
Even if it is file your spouse's I-485, what moving up means is you both can be free out of this mess.
There is no guarantee with PD dates for EB3-India moving to Dec 2001. It has not touched that date ever since retrogression was introduced. Go figure. BTW, USCIS still thinks there are thousands and thousands of apps filed before Dec 2001.
Best of luck.
The PD for my GC application is Dec 10, 2001. I filed under EB3 category and my chargeability is India. Going by the backlog that we are currently experiencing for EB3, is it worth filing for an upgrade of the GC application from EB3 to EB2 based purely on timelines for both EB3 and EB2?
more...
makeup Wolverine vs Hulk
smartboy75
07-17 07:25 PM
Hi All
As the dates become current, I see a lot of people asking the same questions again and again....why can't people do a little search on the forumn before posting repeated questions already asked before ..For eg: Filling i-485 and presence in US or filling without the help of lawyers....
I mean come on guys..we call ourselves highly skilled labours and don't even have the skill to find out answers to common questions by searching the forumns???? I am really begining to doubt the IQ of some cause if not how do u explain it...
DON'T GET ME WRONG....ACT SMART
As the dates become current, I see a lot of people asking the same questions again and again....why can't people do a little search on the forumn before posting repeated questions already asked before ..For eg: Filling i-485 and presence in US or filling without the help of lawyers....
I mean come on guys..we call ourselves highly skilled labours and don't even have the skill to find out answers to common questions by searching the forumns???? I am really begining to doubt the IQ of some cause if not how do u explain it...
DON'T GET ME WRONG....ACT SMART
girlfriend @TheJuggernautpunch: its canon
guyfromsg
07-26 08:24 PM
For the experts on this board, my H1 expires on 9/30/07. Should I wait till after Aug. 17 to qualify for a 3-year extension?
jazz
Please see the update in Oh law's site
Under the update July 2007 VB, visa number was unable for the entire July 2007. It remained such until July 17, 2007 when both DOS and USCIS reversed their positions. There could be some 104(c) H-1B three-year extension petitions filed in July bore the 17th. Since the July 2007 VB has been reversed and remains "current" in July, it will remain a challenging issue for these filers. Those who file after July 17, 2007 and before August 1, 2007 may not be entitled to the benefit of 104(c) extension. Accordingly, those who need three-year extension under 104(c) should not file the H-1B extension until after August 1, 2007 to obtain three year extension, even though they will have to pay the increased filing of $320 rather than the current $190. In August, the EB visa number will remain "unavailable" for the entire EB classifications, presenting the best opportunity to file such 104(c) three-year increment H-1B extension petition. What a twist and irony of the development of events?
jazz
Please see the update in Oh law's site
Under the update July 2007 VB, visa number was unable for the entire July 2007. It remained such until July 17, 2007 when both DOS and USCIS reversed their positions. There could be some 104(c) H-1B three-year extension petitions filed in July bore the 17th. Since the July 2007 VB has been reversed and remains "current" in July, it will remain a challenging issue for these filers. Those who file after July 17, 2007 and before August 1, 2007 may not be entitled to the benefit of 104(c) extension. Accordingly, those who need three-year extension under 104(c) should not file the H-1B extension until after August 1, 2007 to obtain three year extension, even though they will have to pay the increased filing of $320 rather than the current $190. In August, the EB visa number will remain "unavailable" for the entire EB classifications, presenting the best opportunity to file such 104(c) three-year increment H-1B extension petition. What a twist and irony of the development of events?
hairstyles Hulk vs Juggernaut
sammyb
10-09 04:01 PM
chandu... seems am only one visiting this thread ... lets see how many people responds ... :D
Come on folks - all the way to Riverhead we have tonnes of people living in these areas affected by Retrogression.
EAD is not a solution - EAD just makes our life a bit easier than on h1b - the struggle continues even on EAD.
How can you expect govt to fix your problem if you lack motivation?
Lets start mobilizing the chapter
Remember, we are no VIPs, we are in a mass distribution system and no one has special previlidges here, your lives won't change uless you motivate yourselves and speak up for yourselves.
We need a very strong resprsentation from everyone in the community.
Ignoring our requests only puts all of us in a tougher situation
Come on folks - all the way to Riverhead we have tonnes of people living in these areas affected by Retrogression.
EAD is not a solution - EAD just makes our life a bit easier than on h1b - the struggle continues even on EAD.
How can you expect govt to fix your problem if you lack motivation?
Lets start mobilizing the chapter
Remember, we are no VIPs, we are in a mass distribution system and no one has special previlidges here, your lives won't change uless you motivate yourselves and speak up for yourselves.
We need a very strong resprsentation from everyone in the community.
Ignoring our requests only puts all of us in a tougher situation
Green.Tech
08-03 05:11 PM
AFAIK, one can amend the EB-3 485 petition and inform USCIS to use the new EB-2 labor and 140 for the same 485 application from before. I don't think that a new 485 needs to be filed in this case. I may be wrong though.
Anyone has any legal insights into this?
Anyone has any legal insights into this?
Saburi
04-28 10:00 AM
Hello Freinds.
After a long wait of 8 years today i got an RFE i don't know what the RFE is all about and will be waiting to get the letter in the mail, do you know how much time does it takes for the paper RFE to come to your lawyer.
RFE was issued today but unlike the email which i got says the status on hold, thats strange
Current Status: REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD
is this normal or is this is an indication of something wrong and bad.
Please do advice gurus
Best Regards
Saburi
After a long wait of 8 years today i got an RFE i don't know what the RFE is all about and will be waiting to get the letter in the mail, do you know how much time does it takes for the paper RFE to come to your lawyer.
RFE was issued today but unlike the email which i got says the status on hold, thats strange
Current Status: REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD
is this normal or is this is an indication of something wrong and bad.
Please do advice gurus
Best Regards
Saburi
No comments:
Post a Comment