retropain
09-05 01:47 PM
The CIR includes increases in legal immigration. If the dems take the house, then the house alongwith the already pro-immigrant senate will pass big increases in immigration (family and eb). If i was a republican, i would try to pass CIR after the november elections and before the new congress in January, when he party still has some control. If the dems solve the immigration issue in the next congress when they have the reins, the hispanic vote will heavily tilt democratic for a long time to come.
dingox100
11-19 02:18 PM
My friend tried to get his brother. his brother is working in some IT company in india. The visa officer asked only one question
Visa officer: Whats your Age?
my friends brother: 26
Visa officer: sorry , visa cant be issued.. rejected.
No more questions and no more answers
Visa officer: Whats your Age?
my friends brother: 26
Visa officer: sorry , visa cant be issued.. rejected.
No more questions and no more answers
jkmc
02-16 11:02 AM
not really, but close.
i-94 expire 10/01/2007. married 09/12/2007. i-485 received by uscis on 11/26/2007.
Hi Surge
You should then consult a lawyer.
i-94 expire 10/01/2007. married 09/12/2007. i-485 received by uscis on 11/26/2007.
Hi Surge
You should then consult a lawyer.
yabayaba
11-10 04:15 PM
This is my first time too coming across such a rfe. I really dont know if this kind of rfe was issued before.I called USCIS but as always they are saying send all the docs mentioned in rfe. My attorney is saying we will send them originals and transcripts. Dont know exaclty if they are doing an educational evaluation.Would like to see any attorneys suggestion on how to deal with this.
Call the USCISor take infopass appointment and check whether Notary signature would be suffient for them to process your application
Call the USCISor take infopass appointment and check whether Notary signature would be suffient for them to process your application
more...
hary536
05-19 03:17 PM
Hello Pappu, can you please move this post to the "Ask a Lawyer" forum. I intended to post it under that forum. But i think due to duplication you moved it to the other forum. Pls, post it to Attorney forum. I really need some advise in this case. Thanks.
pune_guy
02-19 05:20 PM
I would suggest that you follow the option of joining some other company, if that is possible. You would be joining with enough experience so as to qualify for a new EB2 application. You can retain your EB3 application and priority date if 180 days have passed since filing 485, which in your case has happened so you are OK.
Trying to file an EB2 application through the same employer might be tricky because you cannot count the experience that you have gained with the employer. Even though a case could be made that you have a masters degree in business but I suspect that that may not be enough as, if I understand you correctly, you have no "business development" experience from your previous employment. Thus you would be a candidate with a degree but no experience.
Just my two cents.
Trying to file an EB2 application through the same employer might be tricky because you cannot count the experience that you have gained with the employer. Even though a case could be made that you have a masters degree in business but I suspect that that may not be enough as, if I understand you correctly, you have no "business development" experience from your previous employment. Thus you would be a candidate with a degree but no experience.
Just my two cents.
more...
axp817
04-09 02:54 PM
Is this legal?
Yes.
Is it a common practice?
Apparently.
If for some reason, I485 is denied and you challenge the decision using MTR, will you still be legal status if the MTR process takes several months?
Yes, and you can also work on the EAD, unless the 485 denial notice specifically states that the EAD is also revoked/denied/rendered invalid, in which case, you can't use the EAD to work, but you are still okay to be in the country.
Is there a limit on how many times you can challenge USCIS decision? If they reject your application 10 times and you know the reason they rejected each time is incorrect, do you get to challenge them if you have enough evidence that your application was rejected incorrectly?
Chances of a 485 application being denied multiple times due to the same reason are bleak, although if it does happen (wrongful denial of course), or if it is denied multiple times, but due to a different reason each time, my understanding is that you can keep challenging/appealing the decision.
Good luck.
Yes.
Is it a common practice?
Apparently.
If for some reason, I485 is denied and you challenge the decision using MTR, will you still be legal status if the MTR process takes several months?
Yes, and you can also work on the EAD, unless the 485 denial notice specifically states that the EAD is also revoked/denied/rendered invalid, in which case, you can't use the EAD to work, but you are still okay to be in the country.
Is there a limit on how many times you can challenge USCIS decision? If they reject your application 10 times and you know the reason they rejected each time is incorrect, do you get to challenge them if you have enough evidence that your application was rejected incorrectly?
Chances of a 485 application being denied multiple times due to the same reason are bleak, although if it does happen (wrongful denial of course), or if it is denied multiple times, but due to a different reason each time, my understanding is that you can keep challenging/appealing the decision.
Good luck.
newbee7
12-18 01:53 PM
if you invest in foriegn stocks using a us broker you don't have to worry much. Your 1099 will have it spelled out. If you send money out of country you will have to report those earnins to IRS even though they might not show up in 1099.
more...
gsc999
06-29 11:12 AM
My friend
What else we lose if we stand up the plate to express some legitimate concerns?
Most of the members of this forum (and so many more) have already lost the prime time of their lives because we just followed the path of playing by rules.
Unless some compelling personal reasons, i do not see any thing wrong to raise the voice
---
satyasaich,
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. It seems my attempt at sarcasm didn't work.
CIR is not amnesty. It is a solution to a problem. People who label CIR as "amnesty" are narrowly viewing the legal definition rather than taking the broader view of trying to solve the problem of immigration. The issue here is not what is the legal definition of amnesty but a comprehensive solution to immigration.
What else we lose if we stand up the plate to express some legitimate concerns?
Most of the members of this forum (and so many more) have already lost the prime time of their lives because we just followed the path of playing by rules.
Unless some compelling personal reasons, i do not see any thing wrong to raise the voice
---
satyasaich,
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. It seems my attempt at sarcasm didn't work.
CIR is not amnesty. It is a solution to a problem. People who label CIR as "amnesty" are narrowly viewing the legal definition rather than taking the broader view of trying to solve the problem of immigration. The issue here is not what is the legal definition of amnesty but a comprehensive solution to immigration.
Jim
January 5th, 2005, 08:27 PM
Very nice, Freddy. I like what you have done with this image. The red is perfect.
more...
illusions
02-13 05:16 PM
All future GC holders click here
No Immigrant, No Cry
Click here to send a private message for Bush -- FREE!
No Immigrant, No Cry
Click here to send a private message for Bush -- FREE!
kzinjuwadia
05-13 11:42 PM
I'd stay in canada and wait for the call from the consulate. One of my friends had similar situation in vancouver consulate and it took around 2wks for the call and they got the visa. Going out of canada is not good idea as canada consulate is working on your case and only they will issue your visa as it's in progress. if the visa is denied, then you can go to consulate in india and retry.
more...
ksrk
12-31 04:50 PM
Our files assinged to Adjudicating officer on Nov 30th. (PD is current ) Nothing happend sofar.
Is it time to worry ? I seen in this forum cases processed within two weeks after assinging. Any input will be appriciated.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL :)
Hey Chris,
If your PD is current (for your EB category) then someone is looking at your case - as against it gathering dust on some shelf.
Else, it may not mean anything...
Good luck anyhow!
Is it time to worry ? I seen in this forum cases processed within two weeks after assinging. Any input will be appriciated.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL :)
Hey Chris,
If your PD is current (for your EB category) then someone is looking at your case - as against it gathering dust on some shelf.
Else, it may not mean anything...
Good luck anyhow!
vts31
10-20 03:33 PM
photoshop is more editing oriented while painter is more create oriented. Painter is designed to be used with a wacom tablet, so if you dont have one its pretty lame. Painter 5 sucks because the layers were retarded, Painter 6's layers are much more like photoshop.
more...
waitingnwaiting
11-16 01:35 PM
ABC NEWS: Will Congress Vote on DREAM Act for Illegal Immigrants in 2010?
Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi Weigh Lame-Duck Vote on Immigration
By DEVIN DWYER
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15, 2010�
Senate Vote on DREAM Act, Immigration in Lame-Duck Congress? - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-dream-act-immigration-lame-duck-congress/story?id=12136182)
They came through for him during a tight reelection campaign in Nevada. Now Hispanic voters are looking to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to return the favor.
Reid has promised a Senate vote this year on a small piece of immigration legislation known as the DREAM Act, which would give hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants a conditional path to legal residency.
"The answer is yes," Reid told Univision host Jorge Ramos in October when pressed about whether there will be a vote. "I have the right to bring that up any time I want."
As Congress reconvenes this week for the final session of the year, Reid now has roughly a month to make good on his promise.
Many immigrants and immigrant advocates, particularly Hispanics, have been disappointed by Congress' inaction on legislation to address the situation of millions of the country's undocumented immigrants, particularly those who are young children.
However, Republican opposition to efforts to legalize undocumented immigrants, a packed end-of-year legislative agenda and a bleak track record for controversial bills during lame-duck sessions all cast doubt on chances of the bill's passage this year.
The DREAM Act would grant legal status to immigrants who complete college or at least two years of military service and maintain "good moral character." It would apply to immigrants younger than 36 years old who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children under the supervision of their parents.
"We are very confident this will come up for a vote," said Flavia de la Fuente of the adovacy group DreamActivist.org. "We are confident that the American people and that the moderate GOP will make the right choice when it comes to investing in the future of this country."
Reid attempted to attach the measure as an amendment to the defense authorization bill in September, drawing intense protest from Republicans, who accused the Democrat of playing pre-election politics.
Ultimately, Republicans blocked the effort to bring the defense bill to the floor for debate, precluding a chance of adding the DREAM Act. The bill also included a repeal of the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy.
"We're going to vote on the Dream Act; it's only a question of when," Reid said after the vote. "It's a question of fairness. This is not the end of this."
Many activists on both sides of the issue agree, however, that chances of the bill's passage are only going to grow dimmer with an influx of Republicans set to join the House and Senate in January.
Roy Beck, president of Numbers USA, a group that favors tighter immigration controls and supports Republicans' efforts to block the DREAM Act, said the measure is flawed.
"Some of these [immigrants] are compelling cases, no doubt about it," said Beck. "But you've got to draw some lines a lot narrower than the DREAM Act draws them. This is about giving millions of illegal aliens permanent work permits, and I don't think in this economy that this is a very happy time to be doing that."
President Obama supports the legislation, as does Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says it would help recruitment, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who says it's "the right thing to do for our country."
But it's unclear whether the administration will push behind the scenes in the weeks ahead to make it a legislative priority. The Congress already faces challenging debates over whether to extend the Bush tax cuts, fund the federal government through 2011, and approve a controversial defense spending bill.
"The president supports the DREAM Act and I support the DREAM Act. The president supports immigration reform, and I support immigration reform. And how Congress takes that up is for the Congress and the leadership to decide," said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in September.
The DREAM Act has received some bipartisan Senate support in the years since it was first introduced in 2001. It was approved as part of immigration reform bill in 2006, but the package later failed in the House. In 2007, the Act was filibustered when it came up for an up-or-down vote.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has decided not to list DREAM Act as a priority for this week, a senior Democratic aide told ABC News. But it could come up after Thanksgiving.
According to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, about 2 million of the nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. could be eligible for legalization under the DREAM Act.
The group also estimates, however, that only 825,000 of those immigrants would ultimately take advantage of the law if it were enacted.
ABC News' John Parkinson contributed to this report.
DESERT NEWS: Sign the Utah Compact
Published: Sunday, Nov. 14, 2010 12:00 a.m. MST
Sign the Utah Compact | Deseret News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700081235/Sign-the-Utah-Compact.html)
Already recognized by Forbes Magazine as the top state in the nation for business, Utah further burnished its reputation for pro-family and pro-growth policies this week as civic, business and religious leaders signed the Utah Compact, a declaration for principled immigration reform.
Historically, during periods of economic recession, business leaders and policy-makers have reverted to what economists call zero-sum thinking � the belief that one person gains only when another loses. When we only have so much pie, it is entirely rational to worry about how the pieces are divvied out. And when the pie is shrinking, the rules for who gets a slice become even more critical.
Fixed-pied concerns are undoubtedly part of what lies behind the complex debate about immigration. There is understandable fear that immigrants might take increasingly scarce jobs and resources from citizens. And any public expenditure on immigrants, whether through social services or law enforcement, draws down a limited public treasury that deserves scrupulous stewardship.
But people also intuitively understand that the best way to ensure more pie over the long term is not to hoard what is being served right now, but instead figure out how to expand the pie. This is what economists call positive-sum thinking � the belief that through exchange we can expand the pie, not simply fret about how it is divided.
The recent recession, followed by a jobless recovery, has served up a fixed-pie economy. But zero-sum or fixed-pie thinking is never the path toward sustained prosperity. And as many of Utah's prominent civic, business, and religious leaders signed a declaration on immigration reform called the Utah Compact, they sent a powerful signal to the world that Utah embraces positive-sum, pie-expanding thought and policies. Instead of creating a hostile environment for immigrants, they have outlined thoughtful principles that embrace the promise afforded through immigration. They have sided with the consensus view of pro-growth free-market economists who recognize that immigration actually creates jobs and revenue. (www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/business/economy/31view.html)
Even more important than the powerful economic growth message inherent in the Utah Compact is its embrace of those core values that support a free, humane and prosperous society: respect for the rule of law, respect for families, respect for individual liberty and respect for the dignity and humanity of each individual. It emphasizes an orderly approach to the critically important concerns of enforcement and security.
The Utah Compact is not itself a policy � it is a thoughtful declaration of principles that lawmakers should use as they work to craft pragmatic legislation that helps our state deal with the problems and promise afforded by immigration. We are impressed by the array of distinguished civic, business, and ecclesiastical leaders who have signed the Utah Compact or endorsed its principles. We encourage our readers to read the Utah Compact (The Utah Compact - Read the Utah Compact (http://www.utahcompact.com)) and sign it.
Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi Weigh Lame-Duck Vote on Immigration
By DEVIN DWYER
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15, 2010�
Senate Vote on DREAM Act, Immigration in Lame-Duck Congress? - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-dream-act-immigration-lame-duck-congress/story?id=12136182)
They came through for him during a tight reelection campaign in Nevada. Now Hispanic voters are looking to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to return the favor.
Reid has promised a Senate vote this year on a small piece of immigration legislation known as the DREAM Act, which would give hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants a conditional path to legal residency.
"The answer is yes," Reid told Univision host Jorge Ramos in October when pressed about whether there will be a vote. "I have the right to bring that up any time I want."
As Congress reconvenes this week for the final session of the year, Reid now has roughly a month to make good on his promise.
Many immigrants and immigrant advocates, particularly Hispanics, have been disappointed by Congress' inaction on legislation to address the situation of millions of the country's undocumented immigrants, particularly those who are young children.
However, Republican opposition to efforts to legalize undocumented immigrants, a packed end-of-year legislative agenda and a bleak track record for controversial bills during lame-duck sessions all cast doubt on chances of the bill's passage this year.
The DREAM Act would grant legal status to immigrants who complete college or at least two years of military service and maintain "good moral character." It would apply to immigrants younger than 36 years old who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children under the supervision of their parents.
"We are very confident this will come up for a vote," said Flavia de la Fuente of the adovacy group DreamActivist.org. "We are confident that the American people and that the moderate GOP will make the right choice when it comes to investing in the future of this country."
Reid attempted to attach the measure as an amendment to the defense authorization bill in September, drawing intense protest from Republicans, who accused the Democrat of playing pre-election politics.
Ultimately, Republicans blocked the effort to bring the defense bill to the floor for debate, precluding a chance of adding the DREAM Act. The bill also included a repeal of the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy.
"We're going to vote on the Dream Act; it's only a question of when," Reid said after the vote. "It's a question of fairness. This is not the end of this."
Many activists on both sides of the issue agree, however, that chances of the bill's passage are only going to grow dimmer with an influx of Republicans set to join the House and Senate in January.
Roy Beck, president of Numbers USA, a group that favors tighter immigration controls and supports Republicans' efforts to block the DREAM Act, said the measure is flawed.
"Some of these [immigrants] are compelling cases, no doubt about it," said Beck. "But you've got to draw some lines a lot narrower than the DREAM Act draws them. This is about giving millions of illegal aliens permanent work permits, and I don't think in this economy that this is a very happy time to be doing that."
President Obama supports the legislation, as does Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says it would help recruitment, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who says it's "the right thing to do for our country."
But it's unclear whether the administration will push behind the scenes in the weeks ahead to make it a legislative priority. The Congress already faces challenging debates over whether to extend the Bush tax cuts, fund the federal government through 2011, and approve a controversial defense spending bill.
"The president supports the DREAM Act and I support the DREAM Act. The president supports immigration reform, and I support immigration reform. And how Congress takes that up is for the Congress and the leadership to decide," said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in September.
The DREAM Act has received some bipartisan Senate support in the years since it was first introduced in 2001. It was approved as part of immigration reform bill in 2006, but the package later failed in the House. In 2007, the Act was filibustered when it came up for an up-or-down vote.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has decided not to list DREAM Act as a priority for this week, a senior Democratic aide told ABC News. But it could come up after Thanksgiving.
According to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, about 2 million of the nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. could be eligible for legalization under the DREAM Act.
The group also estimates, however, that only 825,000 of those immigrants would ultimately take advantage of the law if it were enacted.
ABC News' John Parkinson contributed to this report.
DESERT NEWS: Sign the Utah Compact
Published: Sunday, Nov. 14, 2010 12:00 a.m. MST
Sign the Utah Compact | Deseret News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700081235/Sign-the-Utah-Compact.html)
Already recognized by Forbes Magazine as the top state in the nation for business, Utah further burnished its reputation for pro-family and pro-growth policies this week as civic, business and religious leaders signed the Utah Compact, a declaration for principled immigration reform.
Historically, during periods of economic recession, business leaders and policy-makers have reverted to what economists call zero-sum thinking � the belief that one person gains only when another loses. When we only have so much pie, it is entirely rational to worry about how the pieces are divvied out. And when the pie is shrinking, the rules for who gets a slice become even more critical.
Fixed-pied concerns are undoubtedly part of what lies behind the complex debate about immigration. There is understandable fear that immigrants might take increasingly scarce jobs and resources from citizens. And any public expenditure on immigrants, whether through social services or law enforcement, draws down a limited public treasury that deserves scrupulous stewardship.
But people also intuitively understand that the best way to ensure more pie over the long term is not to hoard what is being served right now, but instead figure out how to expand the pie. This is what economists call positive-sum thinking � the belief that through exchange we can expand the pie, not simply fret about how it is divided.
The recent recession, followed by a jobless recovery, has served up a fixed-pie economy. But zero-sum or fixed-pie thinking is never the path toward sustained prosperity. And as many of Utah's prominent civic, business, and religious leaders signed a declaration on immigration reform called the Utah Compact, they sent a powerful signal to the world that Utah embraces positive-sum, pie-expanding thought and policies. Instead of creating a hostile environment for immigrants, they have outlined thoughtful principles that embrace the promise afforded through immigration. They have sided with the consensus view of pro-growth free-market economists who recognize that immigration actually creates jobs and revenue. (www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/business/economy/31view.html)
Even more important than the powerful economic growth message inherent in the Utah Compact is its embrace of those core values that support a free, humane and prosperous society: respect for the rule of law, respect for families, respect for individual liberty and respect for the dignity and humanity of each individual. It emphasizes an orderly approach to the critically important concerns of enforcement and security.
The Utah Compact is not itself a policy � it is a thoughtful declaration of principles that lawmakers should use as they work to craft pragmatic legislation that helps our state deal with the problems and promise afforded by immigration. We are impressed by the array of distinguished civic, business, and ecclesiastical leaders who have signed the Utah Compact or endorsed its principles. We encourage our readers to read the Utah Compact (The Utah Compact - Read the Utah Compact (http://www.utahcompact.com)) and sign it.
Jaime
08-06 12:12 PM
Yeah, why not? As long as Legals ALSO get green cards!
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
more...
Steve Mitchell
March 12th, 2004, 12:29 AM
Thanks for clarifying skip. It would be great to get the Nikon forum more active.
SB-26 will be a problem. You cannot use TTL flash mode with any Nikon digital camera. It would be like going back to an old thyristor auto flash. Only the DX series flashes work with the digitals.
SB-26 will be a problem. You cannot use TTL flash mode with any Nikon digital camera. It would be like going back to an old thyristor auto flash. Only the DX series flashes work with the digitals.
ArunAntonio
10-17 12:48 PM
I am trying to book an appointment at the chennai consulate through the vfs website.
I fill in all the details on the DS 156 application and on hitting continue I do not seem to be getting the printable version with the bar code that we need to print and take to the consulate during the interview.
Another thing is after clicking on continue I am presented with a page to fill in the DS 157 and petition details and after filling that, I just get options to save and exit or go back.
I am not getting options to select a date to schedule the interview.
Any one who has done this recently please hlep, I am stuck witth this stupid thing for a couple of days now.... Please help ;(
I fill in all the details on the DS 156 application and on hitting continue I do not seem to be getting the printable version with the bar code that we need to print and take to the consulate during the interview.
Another thing is after clicking on continue I am presented with a page to fill in the DS 157 and petition details and after filling that, I just get options to save and exit or go back.
I am not getting options to select a date to schedule the interview.
Any one who has done this recently please hlep, I am stuck witth this stupid thing for a couple of days now.... Please help ;(
unitednations
04-04 01:49 PM
Apologies first. Could not find a link to start a new thread but what I am mentioning below has a direct bearing on people planning/trying for H1 transfers.
**************
Is there a requirement now that an H1 transfer petition must be submitted along with a copy of the company's contract with its client and a copy of the workorder issued by the client, in the canndidate's name?
We are faced with this situation now that we are effecting a candidate's H1 transfer. Our attorney wants these documents. We have also been told that the H1 extension will be granted only till the expiration of the client work order. So if it is a 6 month position, the H1 transfer would be granted for 6 months only. Fortunately in our case it is a much longer assignment.
Has anyone of you encountered this situation or heard about it? If true, does it not mean the end of H1 transfer as we have known it?
Regards
see the link on posting #124 on this thread. there is a court case that uscis is using to justify requesting this type of information.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24555&page=9
**************
Is there a requirement now that an H1 transfer petition must be submitted along with a copy of the company's contract with its client and a copy of the workorder issued by the client, in the canndidate's name?
We are faced with this situation now that we are effecting a candidate's H1 transfer. Our attorney wants these documents. We have also been told that the H1 extension will be granted only till the expiration of the client work order. So if it is a 6 month position, the H1 transfer would be granted for 6 months only. Fortunately in our case it is a much longer assignment.
Has anyone of you encountered this situation or heard about it? If true, does it not mean the end of H1 transfer as we have known it?
Regards
see the link on posting #124 on this thread. there is a court case that uscis is using to justify requesting this type of information.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24555&page=9
h1bmajdoor
03-04 07:52 PM
this is obviously great news for those affected.
however the speed at which the authorities have acted, and the almost total lack of support from the Congress could imply that politics here is (like desh) is quickly heading down the "what's in it for me" path.
however the speed at which the authorities have acted, and the almost total lack of support from the Congress could imply that politics here is (like desh) is quickly heading down the "what's in it for me" path.
jsb
01-26 09:41 AM
If I check my case online I see following
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
Yes, this is very common. See my post of 01/23/2009 above. In my case, and many others, this difference is of several months (RD is July 2,'07, but online RD is Oct 11,'07, which made me down in the list for processing sequence by 1000's of cases)
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
Yes, this is very common. See my post of 01/23/2009 above. In my case, and many others, this difference is of several months (RD is July 2,'07, but online RD is Oct 11,'07, which made me down in the list for processing sequence by 1000's of cases)
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий