Googler
02-20 03:21 PM
Do you belive this guy?. His name is Ron Gotcher. All he will say is GOTCHA!!!!:D
But seriously, Any chance of Eb3 advancing this year?.
Dude. I am *so* not Ron Gotcher. :)
He was rushing and didn't give me any specifics for EB-3 India.
But seriously, Any chance of Eb3 advancing this year?.
Dude. I am *so* not Ron Gotcher. :)
He was rushing and didn't give me any specifics for EB-3 India.
wallpaper Vanessa Hudgens gets eastly!
cal_dood
07-05 03:01 PM
But I have been using murthy forums - which are free - for a long long time...even before IV came along....talking abt quality...same kinda ppl post there....dont see any diff....
I'm sure IV is doing a great job on something....but please do a little research before asserting that this is the only immigration forum in the world...
Dont mean to start a p***ing contest here.... those who want to and can pay shd pay....but thinking that ppl will pay for the forums is not really a solution.
Yeahaaaaaaaaa! Great!
20 USD per month + satisfaction of fighting for a cause
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (very very less than)
15 min Murthy session for 225 USD
Beautifcukingful
I'm sure IV is doing a great job on something....but please do a little research before asserting that this is the only immigration forum in the world...
Dont mean to start a p***ing contest here.... those who want to and can pay shd pay....but thinking that ppl will pay for the forums is not really a solution.
Yeahaaaaaaaaa! Great!
20 USD per month + satisfaction of fighting for a cause
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (very very less than)
15 min Murthy session for 225 USD
Beautifcukingful
CADude
02-21 11:19 AM
Your friends lawyer is stupid. I know many who are GC holder by converting. File new EB2 LCA and Port the EB3 date in I140 filing. Nothing wrong with it. My company (F 500) don't do it by some crap policy. I am still waiting since PD 2001 to see light. Why? Because EB2 India is always current but EB3 India PD is May 2001 or before from last 3 years. So if possible take advantage or I am living example. Waiting from 8+ years. Sorry for venting.. :)
My co-worker tried that and now has 3 RFE's to respond to.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
My co-worker tried that and now has 3 RFE's to respond to.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
2011 vanessa hudgens and stella hudgens 2009. Vanessa Hudgens and Zac Efron
nojoke
01-22 11:57 AM
Nothing is right or wrong, as meaning of quality of life is a very subjective thing.
In Japan, people work hard, send money/products to the US, and be happy for better quality of life by looking at increasing balances in their bank books each morning, and don't care what homes/cars they have.
In the US, people get happy for better quality of life by looking at their new BMW's, and nicely furnished homes (bought by money borrowed from Japanese investors), and don't care what they owe.
Both are unhappy too, for not having enough what they want more, Japanese want to have bigger balances in their bank books, and American want bigger BMW's and homes.
"Peace of Mind - Do you have" referenced in posts above is just a price for the quaility of life they "enjoy". No enjoyment comes without a price.
My issue is not with the quality of life. Don't we need to consider the risks associated with the quality of life? I see that there is a sense of entitlement that you should live your american dream or whatever at whatever cost.
In Japan, people work hard, send money/products to the US, and be happy for better quality of life by looking at increasing balances in their bank books each morning, and don't care what homes/cars they have.
In the US, people get happy for better quality of life by looking at their new BMW's, and nicely furnished homes (bought by money borrowed from Japanese investors), and don't care what they owe.
Both are unhappy too, for not having enough what they want more, Japanese want to have bigger balances in their bank books, and American want bigger BMW's and homes.
"Peace of Mind - Do you have" referenced in posts above is just a price for the quaility of life they "enjoy". No enjoyment comes without a price.
My issue is not with the quality of life. Don't we need to consider the risks associated with the quality of life? I see that there is a sense of entitlement that you should live your american dream or whatever at whatever cost.
more...
immique
07-01 04:22 PM
online petition is a very good idea. it is bound to gain increased attention as we make our views clear. having country quotas/limits in EB system does not make any sense. if not addressed quickly the people from retrogressed countries have to wait 15-20 years before they can ever see their green card while applicants from other countries get their green cards in a few months.
thomachan72
11-12 04:40 PM
And the war begins....pretty soon the initial topic would be completely forgotten....
more...
axp817
05-26 07:12 PM
Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
No it isn't. :p
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=keene,+nh+to+colebrook,+nh&sll=44.531759,-71.30127&sspn=1.969612,4.921875&ie=UTF8&ll=43.893934,-71.806641&spn=1.991056,4.921875&z=8&saddr=keene,+nh&daddr=colebrook,+nh
The White mountain area probably is within a 100 miles of Canada though.
Jokes aside,
I read a similar rant on IV a few years ago, that was when I learned about this rule/law/requirement (immigrants required to carry immigration documents on them).
These days, I don't ever leave home without my EAD card, if I am going anywhere within driving distance of where I live. If I fly, I usually carry my passport as well (not sure if that is any good since I am on AOS exclusively, but I do).
No it isn't. :p
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=keene,+nh+to+colebrook,+nh&sll=44.531759,-71.30127&sspn=1.969612,4.921875&ie=UTF8&ll=43.893934,-71.806641&spn=1.991056,4.921875&z=8&saddr=keene,+nh&daddr=colebrook,+nh
The White mountain area probably is within a 100 miles of Canada though.
Jokes aside,
I read a similar rant on IV a few years ago, that was when I learned about this rule/law/requirement (immigrants required to carry immigration documents on them).
These days, I don't ever leave home without my EAD card, if I am going anywhere within driving distance of where I live. If I fly, I usually carry my passport as well (not sure if that is any good since I am on AOS exclusively, but I do).
2010 vanessa hudgens and stella
TeddyKoochu
09-10 02:01 PM
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
Agreed that the I140 data may not be exact due to system limitations but approximation can still work, they take up more people, EB2 ROW was current the whole of last year, FB2 is at Apr 2010. Even I140 statistics are shown on the volumes chart so I believe that the approximate numbers per country can be very easily derived or they can test the waters in small steps if they like. Since there is no guideline on this the agencies are legal in using judicious discretion.
Agreed that the I140 data may not be exact due to system limitations but approximation can still work, they take up more people, EB2 ROW was current the whole of last year, FB2 is at Apr 2010. Even I140 statistics are shown on the volumes chart so I believe that the approximate numbers per country can be very easily derived or they can test the waters in small steps if they like. Since there is no guideline on this the agencies are legal in using judicious discretion.
more...
nixstor
07-05 01:00 PM
Assume you make it paid. Then what. We will have maximum 400-500 users and you want to go and lobby or fight with congress with that much number of users. I still do not understand why this thread is still active. Well my post is going to bump it up so I'll not respond to this post any more. Lets focus on other drives as suggested by pappu. We are just waiting too much time discussing fruitile things.
Lets do some quick math here. Assuming that we have 500 guys who are paying. you make IV paid. You will have alteast another 200 guys who will realize the importance of IV and join. People have come to IV time and over when ever shyt has hit the roof and they will come.
700 is better or 500 with a boat load of people who are just hovering around is better?
Lets do some quick math here. Assuming that we have 500 guys who are paying. you make IV paid. You will have alteast another 200 guys who will realize the importance of IV and join. People have come to IV time and over when ever shyt has hit the roof and they will come.
700 is better or 500 with a boat load of people who are just hovering around is better?
hair vanessa hudgens and stella hudgens 2009.
psam
06-11 12:15 AM
This amendment treats foreign workers like slaves.
When we need you, we take you in. But when there are layoffs, you are supposed to pack your bags and leave? Even if you are the best performer in your group?
Layoffs happen at respectable companies like Microsoft as well. And Microsoft indeed has hired some of the brightest brains from all over the world. Why should families of these people take all the heat of layoff?
I wish that next Microsoft, Apple, Google happens outside of U.S.
When we need you, we take you in. But when there are layoffs, you are supposed to pack your bags and leave? Even if you are the best performer in your group?
Layoffs happen at respectable companies like Microsoft as well. And Microsoft indeed has hired some of the brightest brains from all over the world. Why should families of these people take all the heat of layoff?
I wish that next Microsoft, Apple, Google happens outside of U.S.
more...
eb3retro
08-16 03:39 PM
Because you guys are not as clever as EB2s.
easy there pray...people can get offended by your statement. Not a good statement for your first post.
easy there pray...people can get offended by your statement. Not a good statement for your first post.
hot hudgens , lil sister
gc_chahiye
12-21 12:54 AM
He did not pay you. Thats all. don't worry about it. Even I know people who got GC's even with a real degree I mean completed degree even from INdia. Its all LUCK.
unfortunately even if the employer screwed up, if an employee in H1-B does not get paid, he is out of status and pays the consequences. Does not matter if employer stopped paying suddenly or whatever else...
the OPs travel outside US and back after this out-of-status is what has 'saved' him in this case, since the out-of-status clock got reset with that re-entry. Also, 180 days of out-of-status past your last re-entry is forgiven. This might still come up in an interview, but cannot be grounds for denial from what I know.
unfortunately even if the employer screwed up, if an employee in H1-B does not get paid, he is out of status and pays the consequences. Does not matter if employer stopped paying suddenly or whatever else...
the OPs travel outside US and back after this out-of-status is what has 'saved' him in this case, since the out-of-status clock got reset with that re-entry. Also, 180 days of out-of-status past your last re-entry is forgiven. This might still come up in an interview, but cannot be grounds for denial from what I know.
more...
house photo | Vanessa Hudgens
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
tattoo Im Stella Teodora Hudgens,
desi3933
03-10 01:43 PM
This is turning out to be TRUE.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
>> Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Would you mind explaining two "they" here? Whom you are referring to?
Hint: This is a trap question.
Past week, I made this comment and some people made fun of it. But, it's turning out to be true. They are now fully focusing on EB3 and I think they will continue to do untill they finish all Eb3. Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB. They don't have to make EB3-ROW current to give some spill-over to EB3-I. What ever will be left at the end of quarter will be spilled across EB's.
I am expecting lot of REDs on this one.
Thanks,
MDix
>> Once they reached last quarter then they will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Would you mind explaining two "they" here? Whom you are referring to?
Hint: This is a trap question.
more...
pictures Stella Hudgens Pics
paskal
07-03 09:13 PM
If this is true, then everyone who thinks this is unfair must write letters to USCIS, Ombudsman, WH etc
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
dresses for u guys (Vanessa hudgens
indianindian2006
07-14 05:56 PM
Should I send a AC21 letter to USCIS along with my new employment letter?
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
Ajthakur,
Is their any ways you could contact your previous employer and try to find answers if your 140 is cancelled by that employer as that would give you a good idea of how to reply on this RFE.As suggested by others you have to reply to this RFE or your 485 is in jeopardy.
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
Ajthakur,
Is their any ways you could contact your previous employer and try to find answers if your 140 is cancelled by that employer as that would give you a good idea of how to reply on this RFE.As suggested by others you have to reply to this RFE or your 485 is in jeopardy.
more...
makeup Stella Hudgens. Say Thank You!
swo
08-15 08:14 PM
It's very easy to forget that PDs can swing by YEARS at a time. (4 years in the case of the July Bulletin!) Things could easily swing back a year or two in only a month or two.
You can predict to your hearts content but I wouldn't get too hinged on those predictions.
Fact is that we were expecting Us and many were NOT Us. Similarly, PDs in October could be brought forward if there are insuffient applications ready for visas in some categories (ie ROW) in October.
Also remember that the number of newly filed EB applicaitons will be far, FAR less in coming months. Only PERM labors are done now and those will all have late PDs that will be ineligible for a long time. As a result, I think bulletins will start to become more consistent as the predictions of become more reliable after a couple of months of volatility in October.
The only real unknown after getting all the 485 data entry done is going to be the FBI namecheck factor.
You can predict to your hearts content but I wouldn't get too hinged on those predictions.
Fact is that we were expecting Us and many were NOT Us. Similarly, PDs in October could be brought forward if there are insuffient applications ready for visas in some categories (ie ROW) in October.
Also remember that the number of newly filed EB applicaitons will be far, FAR less in coming months. Only PERM labors are done now and those will all have late PDs that will be ineligible for a long time. As a result, I think bulletins will start to become more consistent as the predictions of become more reliable after a couple of months of volatility in October.
The only real unknown after getting all the 485 data entry done is going to be the FBI namecheck factor.
girlfriend Stella Hudgens (Vanessa#39;s
gc28262
08-10 03:26 PM
Before proposing a solution, we need to make sure these are valid arguments. We need to crack INA ourselves to make sure were making a valid legal argument.
Those of you are willing to join effort on the following thread, please pm GCPerm.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1599562-team-visa-allocation-by-dos.html#post1977684
Those of you are willing to join effort on the following thread, please pm GCPerm.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1599562-team-visa-allocation-by-dos.html#post1977684
hairstyles Vanessa Hudgens Vanessa
BlueSunD
03-04 01:39 PM
Ladies & gentlemen, we are now 6 days away from the due date!
Hope to see the completed versions of the wips we�ve seen so far, and maybe, of some we haven�t! ;)
Goodluck to everybody!
Hope to see the completed versions of the wips we�ve seen so far, and maybe, of some we haven�t! ;)
Goodluck to everybody!
kosu
08-15 03:57 PM
September is out.. I cannot beleive what i am seeing..
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
sunny1000
07-02 02:07 AM
I talked to my Professor where I did my masters and he agreed to sign the online petition. He is one of top researchers in his field. Imagine if we can get signatures from such great . Professors, outstanding Scientists, CEO's and Directors of big companies, Journalists (like the one who wrote nice article in Washington post about legal immigration) and probably Bill Gates. This would create great attention for our cause. They are lots of people out there who support legal immigration and its time to bring them together and show it to the world in a petition.
If anyone thinks this is a good idea, can you just leave a message saying that you support it. At least we know how many people are interested in this forum.
I will gladly sign this petition as well.
Can you please ask your professor to call Rep.Lamar Smith to voice his support for the Lofgren bills? That would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
If anyone thinks this is a good idea, can you just leave a message saying that you support it. At least we know how many people are interested in this forum.
I will gladly sign this petition as well.
Can you please ask your professor to call Rep.Lamar Smith to voice his support for the Lofgren bills? That would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment