go_guy123
02-24 06:38 PM
I have MBA from an American university, do you think it's going to help me?
MBA is always better than a MS from US..guaranteed. MS doesn't fetch much. I know it first hand. I have MS from US and worked in India. I then got an MBA from Canada.
MBA is always better than a MS from US..guaranteed. MS doesn't fetch much. I know it first hand. I have MS from US and worked in India. I then got an MBA from Canada.
wallpaper Mae+ploy+sweet+chili+sauce
dask
09-01 11:00 AM
Came to US in 2000 Labor filed 2002 Jan 31st in EB-3........took 4 yrs to clear labor from Dallas backlog center...I-140 approved in 2007 and filed I-485....
Still counting days...........gave up actually....USCIS will probably start VIBYORG instead of
VIBGYOR
First :Violet card
Second: Indigo card
Third: Blue card
Fourth: Yellow card
Fifth: Orange card
Sixth: Red card
Seventh: Green card
:mad:
good luck to all......
~dask
PD Jan 31st 2002 EB-3 (I)
Still counting days...........gave up actually....USCIS will probably start VIBYORG instead of
VIBGYOR
First :Violet card
Second: Indigo card
Third: Blue card
Fourth: Yellow card
Fifth: Orange card
Sixth: Red card
Seventh: Green card
:mad:
good luck to all......
~dask
PD Jan 31st 2002 EB-3 (I)
nk2006
07-06 01:10 PM
He is trying to spin a news and get a answer of his comfort. Guyz never stop :)
The way DOS/USCIS behaved last couple weeks anything is possilbe - now its very easy to spin news. If someone comes here and says USCIS will not accept any applications for next two years - many of us might think "logically" and suspect the news - but last week proved that logic and USCIS/DOS dont go together.
Anything is possible with is freaking idiotic dumbass orgnanization. Now I can feel a bit better - at least for next 30 mts. :)
The way DOS/USCIS behaved last couple weeks anything is possilbe - now its very easy to spin news. If someone comes here and says USCIS will not accept any applications for next two years - many of us might think "logically" and suspect the news - but last week proved that logic and USCIS/DOS dont go together.
Anything is possible with is freaking idiotic dumbass orgnanization. Now I can feel a bit better - at least for next 30 mts. :)
2011 Marnita#39;s Sweet Chili Sauce
bsbawa10
09-12 10:03 AM
The campaign will fail in my opinion. Because anytime you ask people to spend money, many will not. Such activity and motivation for the campaign will die out next week when visa bulletin fever is over. We will again get agitated next month same time. So unless we figure out a campaign idea that costs us no money, it is bound to fail. I am for a phone call campaign. Or if we really want to do something big, we should do a rally in DC with 10 thousand members.
I agree that calculator /flower campaign can fail. But poster (actually pamphlet) and letter campaign will cost only 41 cents stamp from us.
I agree that calculator /flower campaign can fail. But poster (actually pamphlet) and letter campaign will cost only 41 cents stamp from us.
more...
msp1976
01-10 03:08 PM
May be yes....applying greencard is required to extend the H1...having said that one has to spend huge money in applying for GC...at the same time one can also stay out of US for an year and come back if required...
I came to US when I was 24 years old...I delayed the filing and not a day goes by that I donot repent that...My friend are GC holders and bought their houses..I am 30 now..
I think that even at your age..a GC is good to have....It opens up many possibilities....Whatever money you save doing a job...I doubt that you can go back and retire..The prices of everything keep going up in India...One still would need to work....
Even if social security benefits get reduced in US, they would still pay something...In time if you have citizenship you can get whatever you can from that and whatever you saved would make a living...In fact if you donot have a concrete plan of returning in 1 year, file for GC immediately....
When this organization is successful, you would at least have a 485 filed and your spouse can work and they would not throw you out summarily...
I came to US when I was 24 years old...I delayed the filing and not a day goes by that I donot repent that...My friend are GC holders and bought their houses..I am 30 now..
I think that even at your age..a GC is good to have....It opens up many possibilities....Whatever money you save doing a job...I doubt that you can go back and retire..The prices of everything keep going up in India...One still would need to work....
Even if social security benefits get reduced in US, they would still pay something...In time if you have citizenship you can get whatever you can from that and whatever you saved would make a living...In fact if you donot have a concrete plan of returning in 1 year, file for GC immediately....
When this organization is successful, you would at least have a 485 filed and your spouse can work and they would not throw you out summarily...
mps
03-04 01:22 PM
Doesnt seem like anything is cooking at TSC! I-140 and I-485 still shows
"On Oct 1st 2007 we received....blah blah blah...."
-GCisaDawg
Hi gcisa*:
I have not seen any LUDs on my case either.
Status is same as yours.
That shouldn't be a big deal, as I have seen some approvals with no LUDs at all.
"On Oct 1st 2007 we received....blah blah blah...."
-GCisaDawg
Hi gcisa*:
I have not seen any LUDs on my case either.
Status is same as yours.
That shouldn't be a big deal, as I have seen some approvals with no LUDs at all.
more...
csriram45
09-09 05:59 PM
Came to US in Aug 1997. My first company start up closed in 2002 recession and so joined another which by the time started the process etc.. delayed till Sep 2004 PD with EB3.
13 years in the US and waiting....
13 years in the US and waiting....
2010 beef in sweet chili sauce
javadeveloper
08-14 05:33 PM
USCIS should come up with strategy like if you are in US for 'X' years and if your 485 pending for 'Y' years and if you own a house worth 'XXX$' , then they should give GCs irrespective of Category(Eb1,Eb2,Eb3,Eb4 etc..)
more...
pcs
07-05 10:45 AM
Why Dont You Do It ??????????
hair with sweet chili sauce
AllVNeedGcPc
04-13 07:52 AM
Enjoy the moments!!!
I just sent a mail to my Senator last week.
Got the card production e-mail today, thank you everyone for your endless support the past 7 years.
I just sent a mail to my Senator last week.
Got the card production e-mail today, thank you everyone for your endless support the past 7 years.
more...
gcisadawg
02-08 02:39 AM
If the girl is working and earning money, she has all the rights to spend the way she wants, including giving money to her parents. If she is not working, then help should be based only on humanitarian basis because we never know when one's financial situation changes. I can't understand how any girl can force her husband to spend for her parents and siblings especially when she is not earning.
hot Technically, it#39;s Sweet Chili
swede
06-30 09:40 AM
Got my LC approved June 05 2006.
Took only (!) 4 years from first application...
DOL recevied: Dec 5, 2002.
Got my 45 day letter in Feb 2005.
EB3-RIR
Filed in Philly DOL.
3 others from the same company got theirs LC approved 2.5 years ago and 2 of them have their green card since a year ago. And Im the only one with a US masters degree. Great system...
Took only (!) 4 years from first application...
DOL recevied: Dec 5, 2002.
Got my 45 day letter in Feb 2005.
EB3-RIR
Filed in Philly DOL.
3 others from the same company got theirs LC approved 2.5 years ago and 2 of them have their green card since a year ago. And Im the only one with a US masters degree. Great system...
more...
house Frank#39;s RedHot Sweet Chili
dvb123
09-13 06:35 PM
Sec. 42. 53 Priority date of individual applicants.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission. Sec. 42. 53 Priority date of individual applicants.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission. Sec. 42. 53 Priority date of individual applicants.
(a) Preference applicant . The priority date of a preference visa applicant under INA 203 (a) or (b) shall be the filing date of the approved petition that accorded preference status.
(b) Former Western Hemisphere applicant with priority date prior to January 1, 1977 . Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, an alien who, prior to January 1, 1977, was subject to the numerical limitation specified in section 21(e) of the Act of October 3, 1965, and who was registered as a Western Hemisphere immigrant with a priority date prior to January 1, 1977, shall retain that priority date as a preference immigrant upon approval of a petition according status under INA 203 (a) or (b) .
(c) Derivative priority date for spouse or child of principal alien . A spouse or child of a principal alien acquired prior to the principal alien's admission shall be entitled to the priority date of the principal alien, whether or not named in the immigrant visa application of the principal alien. A child born of a marriage which existed at the time of a principal alien's admission to the United States is considered to have been acquired prior to the principal alien's admission.
tattoo with sweet chili sauce amp;
qualified_trash
01-03 03:58 PM
I think it is the perspective that has changed. Until 2 years back we were ready to die to live in this country, we thought our country was crowded, polluted etc. etc. Things haven't changed much there. It's still same, criminals are still the most powerful, power, food & Shelter is still scarce, poor count hasn't decreased. It's just we are not seeing now 'the dark side of the moon'. There's no doubt our American dream is screwed up big time. We have ruined the best times in our lives. Out of these 1 million Visa holders, 1000's would have been entrepreneurs, artists, etc. etc. but this green card chase has beaten us down to H1B Visa holder forever.
my contention is that if you had stayed back, you would not even have what you have today.
assuming that 1000's would have done something better is a VERY big assumption.
my contention is that if you had stayed back, you would not even have what you have today.
assuming that 1000's would have done something better is a VERY big assumption.
more...
pictures Needed sweet chili sauce,
MY_GC_DREAMS
11-14 01:31 PM
Hi All,
I am an IV member living in Southern California. I wanted to give a loud 'hello' out to all members in this region. It will be great to know some of the members so that we can interact. Can you please post back a response with what counties you live in? This way we can get some idea about where members are residing.
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Jimi
Hello to all,
reporting from LA county - Los angeles
I am an IV member living in Southern California. I wanted to give a loud 'hello' out to all members in this region. It will be great to know some of the members so that we can interact. Can you please post back a response with what counties you live in? This way we can get some idea about where members are residing.
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Jimi
Hello to all,
reporting from LA county - Los angeles
dresses Sweet Chili Sauce For Spring
willigetgc?
04-30 01:52 PM
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
All the numbers listed by Pappu are correct, and no changes need to be made.
I called both sets of Senators, and gave our stand on this immigration reform issue to each Sen. office, and here is the feedback from them:
Sen Brown: Will review the bill and will let his position known in a weeks time.
Sen Gregg: He has no position currently
Sen Lugar: Since the bill has no language yet, he would like to wait before he gives an opinion. He has previously supported immigration reform. He is continuing to meet with Sen. Schumer
Sen. Enzi: Does not support amnesty and he will let us know what his position on high skilled immigrant provisions in a week
Sen. Graham: Left message
Sen. Ensign: Has no comments, asked for NV address
Sen. Hatch: Staff read the press release regarding yesterday's framework, which states that this is partisan politics, and border enforcement has to be done first. Told him our position and asked for support
Sen. Cornyn: Could not leave message as there was high volume. will call back again. However, the message said that local offices need to be contacted.
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Sen. McConnell: He just wanted our comments and the sen himself did not have any comment regarding immigration.
Sen. Klobucher: Has not fully reviewed what was in the frame work, took our opinion on the matter, and the staff asked for the zipcode irrespective of where you were from.
Sen. McCaskill: Their office has no opinion on the bill. She is in general support of legal immigrants. However, she wanted to see how things progress in the senate.
Sen. Tester: He opposes amnesty. took our opinion but did not want to take a stand on high skilled immigrants issue
Sen. Webb: left a message
Sen. Whitehouse: has not reviewed the framework. took my opinion.
Called Sens. Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein, Menendez and Cardin's offices and thanked them for their support and leadership.
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
All the numbers listed by Pappu are correct, and no changes need to be made.
I called both sets of Senators, and gave our stand on this immigration reform issue to each Sen. office, and here is the feedback from them:
Sen Brown: Will review the bill and will let his position known in a weeks time.
Sen Gregg: He has no position currently
Sen Lugar: Since the bill has no language yet, he would like to wait before he gives an opinion. He has previously supported immigration reform. He is continuing to meet with Sen. Schumer
Sen. Enzi: Does not support amnesty and he will let us know what his position on high skilled immigrant provisions in a week
Sen. Graham: Left message
Sen. Ensign: Has no comments, asked for NV address
Sen. Hatch: Staff read the press release regarding yesterday's framework, which states that this is partisan politics, and border enforcement has to be done first. Told him our position and asked for support
Sen. Cornyn: Could not leave message as there was high volume. will call back again. However, the message said that local offices need to be contacted.
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Sen. McConnell: He just wanted our comments and the sen himself did not have any comment regarding immigration.
Sen. Klobucher: Has not fully reviewed what was in the frame work, took our opinion on the matter, and the staff asked for the zipcode irrespective of where you were from.
Sen. McCaskill: Their office has no opinion on the bill. She is in general support of legal immigrants. However, she wanted to see how things progress in the senate.
Sen. Tester: He opposes amnesty. took our opinion but did not want to take a stand on high skilled immigrants issue
Sen. Webb: left a message
Sen. Whitehouse: has not reviewed the framework. took my opinion.
Called Sens. Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein, Menendez and Cardin's offices and thanked them for their support and leadership.
more...
makeup Thai Sweet Chili Sauce,
m306m
05-27 08:28 AM
^ to the top ^
girlfriend Cock Brand Sweet Chili Sauce
santb1975
05-28 09:52 AM
we are losing momentum. Aren't we?
hairstyles AND SWEET CHILI NOODLES
manderson
12-28 06:31 PM
After some point we need to ask USCIS to update the processing times to reflect this long delay, or take legal action or whatever to expedite this...
add78
06-12 09:47 AM
got 1 friend to donate yest., he should be posting the receipt Id soon.. I have the ID but didn't wanna post myself to double count.
Guys, please persuade your friends and coworkers.
Thanks.
Guys, please persuade your friends and coworkers.
Thanks.
add78
06-18 02:54 PM
please persuade your friends to join IV and donate.
each donation counts towards the goal and inspires others.
bump....
each donation counts towards the goal and inspires others.
bump....
No comments:
Post a Comment