manderson
01-11 10:20 AM
I personally think 1 yr+ wait should work. But definitely take the letters-to-congressmen route first.
BTW I am basing my answer on some of the case studies I have read in http://www.ilw.com/ (sorry I didn't save any links)
BTW I am basing my answer on some of the case studies I have read in http://www.ilw.com/ (sorry I didn't save any links)
wallpaper wiz khalifa and amber rose
go_guy123
03-01 11:40 PM
I am in the same boat as you. I landed in Sep 2006 and have valid Canadian PR till Sep 2011. My 3 year expiry is nearing. And I am really confused with my EB3 India 2004 PD in retro. But also I have gotten married and not applied my wife on my Canadian PR at all. So that is another problem. I intend to voluntarily relinquish my Canadian PR status and then re-apply brand new with my wife this year as US H1B and GC process rules with USCIS is getting weirder by the day.
Also you can absolutely without any problem go and stay for next two years (730 days) before your first PR card expires even though you were out of Canada or were never resident there for first 3 years and retain your Canadian PR status. I know it for sure.
what do mean by "voluntarily relinquish my Canadian PR status and then re-apply brand new with my wife "
To apply for your spouse you need to fine a family based immigration for your wife
The rules have be tightened now. Are you aware of that. So you may not qualify the seocnd time. Also the second time they wont give you the PR
There was a major change in the visa rule in Feb 2008
The setence "visa ficer shall" was changed to "visa officer may"
http://www.cba.org/CBA/sections_Cship/pdf/08-24-eng%5B1%5D.pdf
Also you can absolutely without any problem go and stay for next two years (730 days) before your first PR card expires even though you were out of Canada or were never resident there for first 3 years and retain your Canadian PR status. I know it for sure.
what do mean by "voluntarily relinquish my Canadian PR status and then re-apply brand new with my wife "
To apply for your spouse you need to fine a family based immigration for your wife
The rules have be tightened now. Are you aware of that. So you may not qualify the seocnd time. Also the second time they wont give you the PR
There was a major change in the visa rule in Feb 2008
The setence "visa ficer shall" was changed to "visa officer may"
http://www.cba.org/CBA/sections_Cship/pdf/08-24-eng%5B1%5D.pdf
eadguru
11-05 01:50 PM
No Finger Print Notice yet. Did any one in the same situation (Aug 03rd. TSC -> VSC -> TSC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I-1485/131/765 Sent to TSC on 08/03/07(TSC -> VSC -> TSC). ND=10/16/07
I-485 transferred to TSC on 10/17/07
EAD card ordered on 10/24, Received 11/01
AP - RFE for clear copies of PP 11/01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I-1485/131/765 Sent to TSC on 08/03/07(TSC -> VSC -> TSC). ND=10/16/07
I-485 transferred to TSC on 10/17/07
EAD card ordered on 10/24, Received 11/01
AP - RFE for clear copies of PP 11/01
2011 Wiz Khalifa#39;s Eye Candy Amber
rayen
05-27 07:08 PM
Experts,
I am in the process of applying AP ( Paper) What should I put Q3# Class of Admission . I used my AP while entering but still in H1. Please advice.
Thanks,
I am in the process of applying AP ( Paper) What should I put Q3# Class of Admission . I used my AP while entering but still in H1. Please advice.
Thanks,
more...
lskreddy
07-02 03:59 PM
I am not sure about whether you could sue or not but USCIS's processing order is wreaking havoc, and if there was any way to bring the buggers to task, that would be great.
For the person who asked whether you saw 2008 application approved before 2007, I am a prime case. I have couple of I140's going, one in EB3 and the other in EB2. EB3's I140 was filed in July 2007 and EB2's I140 was filed in Feb 2008. The one filed in Feb 2008 was approved a few days back and the July app is still pending.
Had they followed Kaiser's logic, they would not have approved my Feb app too as my Feb app is no where current, but there is hardly any sense to their order. Its as if the applications come in, they put it in crates and stashed somewhere. The crates are pulled in random order.
As a theory, they might be approving much later filed apps as a means to acheive better 'average' processing times. If you take me as an example, I have one app pending for 12 months and the other approved in 4 months. So, the average is 8 and that might be what the higher up might care for. But, none of this is fathomable by souls like us...
For the person who asked whether you saw 2008 application approved before 2007, I am a prime case. I have couple of I140's going, one in EB3 and the other in EB2. EB3's I140 was filed in July 2007 and EB2's I140 was filed in Feb 2008. The one filed in Feb 2008 was approved a few days back and the July app is still pending.
Had they followed Kaiser's logic, they would not have approved my Feb app too as my Feb app is no where current, but there is hardly any sense to their order. Its as if the applications come in, they put it in crates and stashed somewhere. The crates are pulled in random order.
As a theory, they might be approving much later filed apps as a means to acheive better 'average' processing times. If you take me as an example, I have one app pending for 12 months and the other approved in 4 months. So, the average is 8 and that might be what the higher up might care for. But, none of this is fathomable by souls like us...
karanp25
06-13 10:10 PM
Looks like you are in a rush .. You filed your labor in 2007 and expect to get a GC before a guy who is waiting in EB3 from 2002 0r 2003 ?
There is nothing wrong in converting from EB3 to EB2 , if you are qualified . How long you are going to wait in EB3 ?
By the way I m Eb2 2006.
Were you qualified to file EB2 on the date your EB3 LC was filed? This is preposterous and i agree with earlier postings that EB3---> EB2 conversion should not be allowed. If you want eB2--then you should get a later priority date when u indeed became eligible for EB2.
There is nothing wrong in converting from EB3 to EB2 , if you are qualified . How long you are going to wait in EB3 ?
By the way I m Eb2 2006.
Were you qualified to file EB2 on the date your EB3 LC was filed? This is preposterous and i agree with earlier postings that EB3---> EB2 conversion should not be allowed. If you want eB2--then you should get a later priority date when u indeed became eligible for EB2.
more...
waitnwatch
12-13 11:01 AM
and did anybody notice that the ICE is changing its track. They are now charging these folks of stealing ID's instead of the normal illegal charge. Ultimately this is opening up the way for local law-enforcement to charge people not on immigration violations but ID theft. This is pretty innovative and must have some political backing somewhere.
2010 Amber, who rose to prominence
superdude
07-19 01:18 AM
My lawyer sent me the fedex tracking sheet for the I-485 package sent to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
Lincoln, NE 68508
I did not see any PO Box on the Fedex tracking sheet. I am not sure if she put the PO Box on the shipping label or not??
Is it a big deal?? Will my application be accepted.
Please help
It is avery common address. Track the shipment via SedEx, It will be delivered.
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
Lincoln, NE 68508
I did not see any PO Box on the Fedex tracking sheet. I am not sure if she put the PO Box on the shipping label or not??
Is it a big deal?? Will my application be accepted.
Please help
It is avery common address. Track the shipment via SedEx, It will be delivered.
more...
andycool
04-21 01:50 PM
Contributed a small amount for this cause....
hair wiz khalifa tattoos amber rose
brij523
02-23 09:23 PM
Friends,
Please contact congress representative from your area before this meeting as time is less and work is more. It is not easy to get appointment with congress representative because of their busy schedule.
Please contact congress representative from your area before this meeting as time is less and work is more. It is not easy to get appointment with congress representative because of their busy schedule.
more...
ashkam
09-14 07:42 AM
I watched Schindler's list and I don't know, I feel the Jews had it a bit worse than the "highly skilled immigrant" community. You know, what with the gas chambers and millions executed and what not.
hot wiz khalifa amber rose tongue.
Legal_In_A_Limbo
01-14 06:10 PM
The problem is the employement letter does not says anything. We will be looking into the handbook of the company, to see what it says.
Thanks.
Even the handbook also does not talk about anything.
Any other place i can try to get information from except talking to someone in my company.
Thanks.
Even the handbook also does not talk about anything.
Any other place i can try to get information from except talking to someone in my company.
more...
house are wiz khalifa and amber rose dating. Wiz Khalifa and Amber Rose.
gc_nebraska
01-11 11:48 AM
Siddharta ! My wife is a Canadian PR since 2 yrs and we live in the US, Can i apply for Canadian PR through spouse living in the US? Do you recommend any website for applications, is there any process please help.
Thanks in Advance
Thanks in Advance
tattoo Amber Rose and Wiz Khalifa Are
GCOP
09-24 10:39 AM
Guys, HR 5882 is having Total recapture of 550,000 visas (Employment Based + Family Based) . We all were hoping that this bill would pass, but it did not pass in Judiciary Committee so far. Probably because of opposition from some lawmakers, may be group of some people due to current state of Economy.
But How about, if we would just try for "Recapture for Employment Based visas , for Adjustment of Status" ( EB Visa recapture Numbers are arround 218,000). By this way, no American job would be taken away as this is just a recpture of visas for just Adjustment of Status. So, if we can drop Family Based Visa Recapture from the bill (approx.332,000 visa), this bill might pass in the congress. Looks like, we do not have any choice and bill might still have possibility of passing in lame duck session. Don't get me wrong, I also want to keep Family Based Visas in the Current State of HR 5882 Bill. But if we would be able to pass just recapture of Employment Based visas at this stage, Family based visas recapture can be taken up later on. This is just a thought. IV core group and members can discuss this idea for further action.
But How about, if we would just try for "Recapture for Employment Based visas , for Adjustment of Status" ( EB Visa recapture Numbers are arround 218,000). By this way, no American job would be taken away as this is just a recpture of visas for just Adjustment of Status. So, if we can drop Family Based Visa Recapture from the bill (approx.332,000 visa), this bill might pass in the congress. Looks like, we do not have any choice and bill might still have possibility of passing in lame duck session. Don't get me wrong, I also want to keep Family Based Visas in the Current State of HR 5882 Bill. But if we would be able to pass just recapture of Employment Based visas at this stage, Family based visas recapture can be taken up later on. This is just a thought. IV core group and members can discuss this idea for further action.
more...
pictures makeup I#39;m sure Wiz Khalifa had some are wiz khalifa and amber rose
PD_Dec2002
05-22 08:21 AM
Please correct me if I am wrong, but the Hammond Law Group (HLG) was hired by IV for its lobbying efforts, correct? What does HLG have to say about the fact that none of the provisions for legal immigrants went into the CIR? What's their take on the chances that favorable amendments for legal immigrants will make it?
Would be interesting to get their point of view...
Thanks,
Jayant
Would be interesting to get their point of view...
Thanks,
Jayant
dresses Starf*cker Amber Rose is in
Jimi_Hendrix
11-17 04:34 PM
for agreeing about the layout for this thread and forum. Agreement is so blissful around here.
Now let us get to work and start actively working on IV's objectives:p
Now let us get to work and start actively working on IV's objectives:p
more...
makeup Amber+rose+wiz+khalifa+
jonty_11
09-21 03:07 PM
u have to be in a similar at time ur GC gets approved..if not then it will be rejected..
in shorrt u have to find another job
in shorrt u have to find another job
girlfriend amber rose and wiz khalifa dating. Amber Rose, Ms. Sunshine!
pthoko
08-03 01:06 PM
Yes
hairstyles is wiz khalifa and amber rose
shx
09-29 04:55 PM
Thanks everyone for all the responses!
SR2610
07-12 02:25 PM
I got different answers from Khanna and Murthy.
Khanna office saying we can apply for 485 with old priority date(140 will be approved with new pritority date), murthy office said it's better to get 140 approval with old priority date and then go for 485.
check with your attorney.
Khanna office saying we can apply for 485 with old priority date(140 will be approved with new pritority date), murthy office said it's better to get 140 approval with old priority date and then go for 485.
check with your attorney.
purgan
01-06 11:20 PM
What the failure to pass the Appropriations bills means to American science...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK TIMES
January 7, 2007
Congressional Budget Delay Stymies Scientific Research
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
The failure of Congress to pass new budgets for the current fiscal year has produced a crisis in science financing that threatens to close major facilities, delay new projects and leave thousands of government scientists out of work, federal and private officials say.
�The consequences for American science will be disastrous,� said Michael S. Lubell, a senior official of the American Physical Society, the world�s largest group of physicists. �The message to young scientists and industry leaders, alike, will be, �Look outside the U.S. if you want to succeed.� �
Last year, Congress passed just 2 of 11 spending bills � for the military and domestic security � and froze all other federal spending at 2006 levels. Factoring in inflation, the budgets translate into reductions of about 3 percent to 4 percent for most fields of science and engineering.
Representative Rush D. Holt, a New Jersey Democrat and a physicist, said that scientists, in most cases, were likely to see little or no relief. �It�s that bad,� Mr. Holt said. �For this year, it�s going to be belt tightening all around.�
Congressional Democrats said last month that they would not try to finish multiple spending bills left hanging by the departed Republican majority and would instead keep most government agencies operating under their current budgets until next fall. Except for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, the government is being financed under a stopgap resolution. It expires Feb. 15, and Democrats said they planned to extend a similar resolution through Sept. 30.
Some Republicans favored not finishing the bills because of automatic savings achieved by forgoing expected spending increases. Democrats and Republicans alike say that operating under current budgets, in some cases with less money, can strap federal agencies and lead to major disruptions in service.
Scientists say that is especially true for the physical sciences, which include physics, chemistry and astronomy. When it comes to federal financing, such fields in recent years have fared poorly compared with biology. The National Institutes of Health, for instance, spend more than $28 billion annually on biomedical programs, five times more than all federal spending for physical sciences.
For 2007, Congress and the Bush administration agreed that the federal budget for the physical sciences should get a major increase. A year ago, in his American Competitiveness Initiative, President Bush called for doubling the money for science over a decade. That prompted schools and federal laboratories to prepare for long-deferred repairs and expansions, plans that appear now to be in jeopardy.
Among the projects at risk is the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, on Long Island. The $600 million machine � 2.4 miles in circumference � slams together subatomic particles to recreate conditions at the beginning of time, some 14 billion years ago, so scientists can study the Big Bang theory. It was already operating partly on charitable contributions, officials say, and now could shut down entirely, throwing its 1,069 specialists into limbo.
�For us, it�s quite serious,� said Sam Aronson, the Brookhaven director. For the nation, Dr. Aronson added, the timing is especially bad because the collider has given the United States a head start on European rivals, who hope to build a more powerful machine.
�Things are pretty miserable for a year in which people talked a lot about regaining our competitive edge,� Dr. Aronson said. �I think all that�s stalled.�
Another potential victim is the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois, where a four-mile-long collider investigates the building blocks of matter. Its director, Piermaria Oddone, said the laboratory would close for a month as most of the staff of 4,200 are sent home.
Congress and the Bush administration could restore much of the science financing in the 2008 budget. Scientists say it would help enormously, but add that senior staff members by that point may have already abandoned major projects for other jobs that were more stable.
Other projects affected by the budget freeze include:
�A $1.4 billion particle accelerator at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee meant to probe the fine structure of materials and aid in cutting-edge technologies. Its opening might be delayed a year.
�A $30 million contribution to a global team designing an experimental reactor to fuse atoms rather than break them apart. Controlled fusion, if successful, would offer a nearly inexhaustible source of energy.
�A $440 million X-ray machine some two miles long at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in California that would act like a microscope to peer inside materials, aiding science and industry. Construction, begun last year, would slow.
�It�s pretty bad,� said Burton Richter, a Nobel laureate in physics. �There�s going to be another year of stagnation. That hurts a lot.�
The National Science Foundation, which supports basic research at universities, had expected a $400 million increase over the $5.7 billion budget it received in 2006. Now, the freeze is prompting program cuts, delays and slowdowns.
�It�s rather devastating,� said Jeff Nesbit, the foundation�s head of legislative and public affairs. �While $400 million in the grand scheme of things might seem like decimal dust, it�s hugely important for universities that rely on N.S.F. funding.�
The threatened programs include a $50 million plan to build a supercomputer that universities would use to push back frontiers in science and engineering; a $310 million observatory meant to study the ocean environment from the seabed to the surface; a $62 million contribution to a global program of polar research involving 10 other nations; and a $98 million ship to explore the Arctic, including the thinning of its sheath of floating sea ice.
Missions at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration are also threatened, with $100 million in cuts. Paul Hertz, the chief scientist at NASA�s science mission directorate, said potential victims included programs to explore Mars, astrophysics and space weather.
Physicists said a partial solution to the crisis would let the Energy Department do what it wanted to do all along for 2007: move $500 million left over from environmental cleanup accounts into the physical sciences. That would require Congressional approval but no budget increase.
Raymond L. Orbach, the department�s under secretary for science, in a recent statement seemed to call for such legislative relief.
�A yearlong continuing resolution takes away many of the opportunities for advancing science,� Dr. Orbach said. �We urge Congress to continue critical investments in America�s scientific leadership.�
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK TIMES
January 7, 2007
Congressional Budget Delay Stymies Scientific Research
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
The failure of Congress to pass new budgets for the current fiscal year has produced a crisis in science financing that threatens to close major facilities, delay new projects and leave thousands of government scientists out of work, federal and private officials say.
�The consequences for American science will be disastrous,� said Michael S. Lubell, a senior official of the American Physical Society, the world�s largest group of physicists. �The message to young scientists and industry leaders, alike, will be, �Look outside the U.S. if you want to succeed.� �
Last year, Congress passed just 2 of 11 spending bills � for the military and domestic security � and froze all other federal spending at 2006 levels. Factoring in inflation, the budgets translate into reductions of about 3 percent to 4 percent for most fields of science and engineering.
Representative Rush D. Holt, a New Jersey Democrat and a physicist, said that scientists, in most cases, were likely to see little or no relief. �It�s that bad,� Mr. Holt said. �For this year, it�s going to be belt tightening all around.�
Congressional Democrats said last month that they would not try to finish multiple spending bills left hanging by the departed Republican majority and would instead keep most government agencies operating under their current budgets until next fall. Except for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, the government is being financed under a stopgap resolution. It expires Feb. 15, and Democrats said they planned to extend a similar resolution through Sept. 30.
Some Republicans favored not finishing the bills because of automatic savings achieved by forgoing expected spending increases. Democrats and Republicans alike say that operating under current budgets, in some cases with less money, can strap federal agencies and lead to major disruptions in service.
Scientists say that is especially true for the physical sciences, which include physics, chemistry and astronomy. When it comes to federal financing, such fields in recent years have fared poorly compared with biology. The National Institutes of Health, for instance, spend more than $28 billion annually on biomedical programs, five times more than all federal spending for physical sciences.
For 2007, Congress and the Bush administration agreed that the federal budget for the physical sciences should get a major increase. A year ago, in his American Competitiveness Initiative, President Bush called for doubling the money for science over a decade. That prompted schools and federal laboratories to prepare for long-deferred repairs and expansions, plans that appear now to be in jeopardy.
Among the projects at risk is the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, on Long Island. The $600 million machine � 2.4 miles in circumference � slams together subatomic particles to recreate conditions at the beginning of time, some 14 billion years ago, so scientists can study the Big Bang theory. It was already operating partly on charitable contributions, officials say, and now could shut down entirely, throwing its 1,069 specialists into limbo.
�For us, it�s quite serious,� said Sam Aronson, the Brookhaven director. For the nation, Dr. Aronson added, the timing is especially bad because the collider has given the United States a head start on European rivals, who hope to build a more powerful machine.
�Things are pretty miserable for a year in which people talked a lot about regaining our competitive edge,� Dr. Aronson said. �I think all that�s stalled.�
Another potential victim is the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois, where a four-mile-long collider investigates the building blocks of matter. Its director, Piermaria Oddone, said the laboratory would close for a month as most of the staff of 4,200 are sent home.
Congress and the Bush administration could restore much of the science financing in the 2008 budget. Scientists say it would help enormously, but add that senior staff members by that point may have already abandoned major projects for other jobs that were more stable.
Other projects affected by the budget freeze include:
�A $1.4 billion particle accelerator at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee meant to probe the fine structure of materials and aid in cutting-edge technologies. Its opening might be delayed a year.
�A $30 million contribution to a global team designing an experimental reactor to fuse atoms rather than break them apart. Controlled fusion, if successful, would offer a nearly inexhaustible source of energy.
�A $440 million X-ray machine some two miles long at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in California that would act like a microscope to peer inside materials, aiding science and industry. Construction, begun last year, would slow.
�It�s pretty bad,� said Burton Richter, a Nobel laureate in physics. �There�s going to be another year of stagnation. That hurts a lot.�
The National Science Foundation, which supports basic research at universities, had expected a $400 million increase over the $5.7 billion budget it received in 2006. Now, the freeze is prompting program cuts, delays and slowdowns.
�It�s rather devastating,� said Jeff Nesbit, the foundation�s head of legislative and public affairs. �While $400 million in the grand scheme of things might seem like decimal dust, it�s hugely important for universities that rely on N.S.F. funding.�
The threatened programs include a $50 million plan to build a supercomputer that universities would use to push back frontiers in science and engineering; a $310 million observatory meant to study the ocean environment from the seabed to the surface; a $62 million contribution to a global program of polar research involving 10 other nations; and a $98 million ship to explore the Arctic, including the thinning of its sheath of floating sea ice.
Missions at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration are also threatened, with $100 million in cuts. Paul Hertz, the chief scientist at NASA�s science mission directorate, said potential victims included programs to explore Mars, astrophysics and space weather.
Physicists said a partial solution to the crisis would let the Energy Department do what it wanted to do all along for 2007: move $500 million left over from environmental cleanup accounts into the physical sciences. That would require Congressional approval but no budget increase.
Raymond L. Orbach, the department�s under secretary for science, in a recent statement seemed to call for such legislative relief.
�A yearlong continuing resolution takes away many of the opportunities for advancing science,� Dr. Orbach said. �We urge Congress to continue critical investments in America�s scientific leadership.�