may 21 judgement day
images Judgment Day May 21: Harold
chanduv23
10-27 03:45 PM
Folks - everyday I go to sleep I wish that tomorrow the sun will rise in the west. When I wake up I see that nothing has changed.
Change is hard - but change definitely brings new hope and prosperity.
With bad economy, Green Card issues, visa retrogression, layoffs, bad stocks, housing crisis and with growing inflation - all we do is hope and strive towards betterment.
Diwali is a celebration of the victory of good over evil and I wish this Diwali will bring victory to the well deserved.
Lets all be together in turbulent times and work towards the change that we always want to see.
IV has helped us all and continue to help us. IV is nothing but all of us together. Lets all pledge our support to IV on this thread.
Change is hard - but change definitely brings new hope and prosperity.
With bad economy, Green Card issues, visa retrogression, layoffs, bad stocks, housing crisis and with growing inflation - all we do is hope and strive towards betterment.
Diwali is a celebration of the victory of good over evil and I wish this Diwali will bring victory to the well deserved.
Lets all be together in turbulent times and work towards the change that we always want to see.
IV has helped us all and continue to help us. IV is nothing but all of us together. Lets all pledge our support to IV on this thread.
wallpaper hair may 21 judgement day
hsd31
05-12 10:04 AM
Please search the forums. This has been discussed multiple times (and frowned upon by some multiple times :)). The gist of it is: it is not your qualifications, but the Job requirements that determine if it is EB2 or EB3. Also, you cannot count the experience you have gained with your employer when filing for GC with the same employer. Moreover, since the July 07 fiasco, EB2 filings for tech jobs are been closely looked at by USCIS and can be subject to a Business Necessity RFE, unless the position is on the Managerial side of things. The best advice I can give you is: Consult with your lawyer since each case is unique and there could be justification for a port in certain cases.
techbuyer77
07-20 08:54 AM
If u dont use ur EAD for the first 6 months, then u can join the new employer any time using ur H1B. But immediately after the date of EAD activation, u will need to stick with the corresponding employer for the next 6 mnths.[/QUOTE]
this is not correct. You can use EAD to work wherever and whenever you want. If you get laid off after let say 1 month from filing, it is safer to transfer h1b, but it is not true that if you use EAD you should go back to original sponsor.
You must only go back IF AOS IS APPROVED within 180 dyas from filing.
this is not correct. You can use EAD to work wherever and whenever you want. If you get laid off after let say 1 month from filing, it is safer to transfer h1b, but it is not true that if you use EAD you should go back to original sponsor.
You must only go back IF AOS IS APPROVED within 180 dyas from filing.
2011 is may 21 judgement day. this
Winner
04-23 12:46 PM
Raj,
Try to help if you can, if not just shut the **** up, only the person on the wrong side can feel the pain. He'll consult attorney anyways.
Hey Guys, I'm the OP. I'm not on the wrong side of the law, I was asking those "What if" questions to get more information on this subject and try to convince my employer to renew my H1B instead of using EAD.
Please don't start a fight here. Please try to respect each other in public forums.
Try to help if you can, if not just shut the **** up, only the person on the wrong side can feel the pain. He'll consult attorney anyways.
Hey Guys, I'm the OP. I'm not on the wrong side of the law, I was asking those "What if" questions to get more information on this subject and try to convince my employer to renew my H1B instead of using EAD.
Please don't start a fight here. Please try to respect each other in public forums.
more...
OLDMONK
06-15 02:52 PM
Initially I thought its the number on I-94, but apparantly not. This is required to be filled on almost all forms which are required to be filed now that the dates are current. I485, 131, 765 etc.
Is this the number which is on my approved I-140 (A099 XXX XXX) ?
Is this the number which is on my approved I-140 (A099 XXX XXX) ?
gultie2k
11-04 10:51 AM
Case resolved!!
All is well that ends well. Well my case got reopened, new RFE sent, and case is approved once the RFE resposne is submitted.
Reason given for the denial of the case is abadonded RFE, even though no RFE was sent in the first place.
All is well that ends well. Well my case got reopened, new RFE sent, and case is approved once the RFE resposne is submitted.
Reason given for the denial of the case is abadonded RFE, even though no RFE was sent in the first place.
more...
gcformeornot
01-02 10:53 AM
Please vote.
2010 It was said that May 21,
pappu
08-24 07:18 PM
are they from same EB catagory? or different?I like many others got a PERM labor & got 140 based on PERM labor.
Recenty , I applied 485 (based on this 140 )in this mad rush
Meanwhile, I have also received Labor approval ( from the same employer) from backlog center with an EARLIER PD .
The question is ..... Can I change the PD based on EARLIER PD after I have filed 485 ?????
I am sure many of us double PDs & might need to find an answer to this ?
can someone help ??
Thanks
Recenty , I applied 485 (based on this 140 )in this mad rush
Meanwhile, I have also received Labor approval ( from the same employer) from backlog center with an EARLIER PD .
The question is ..... Can I change the PD based on EARLIER PD after I have filed 485 ?????
I am sure many of us double PDs & might need to find an answer to this ?
can someone help ??
Thanks
more...
pitha
05-22 07:28 PM
I am not sure it says only people who applied for I140 after May 21 retain there priority date. Everybody retains there priority date no matter when they applied for I140.
Since there is a quota, priority date will come into play. That is why the new bill specifies that those who files I-140 after May 21, 2007 and those whose LC are approved or pending will maintain their priority dates. Anyone who files under the new point based system will have their receipt dates as their priority dates.
Since there is a quota, priority date will come into play. That is why the new bill specifies that those who files I-140 after May 21, 2007 and those whose LC are approved or pending will maintain their priority dates. Anyone who files under the new point based system will have their receipt dates as their priority dates.
hair May 21 Judgement Day Details
drona
07-11 02:25 PM
Are any of you planning to go to this? Maybe a group of us could drive up there and show our support. I know its a long way but it's worth it (and SF is a beautiful city to visit) :) Maybe we could prepare banners and flyers here and take them with us.
more...
SunnySurya
08-21 02:47 PM
No problems, I looking for an airconditioned office to work at..
I once explored the Indian job market. The sun is really hot!!! Beware of the Surya. :)
I once explored the Indian job market. The sun is really hot!!! Beware of the Surya. :)
hot that reads quot;Judgment Dayquot;
ysiad
08-11 06:18 PM
why would address change delay processing ur 485? This is the most ridiculous question ever asked. Inviting panic, for the heck of it....
just make sure u have some overlap where u can receive mail on both addresses just to account for uscis delays in address update....they r not going to penalize u for moving.
Well, I read someone said if you change address, USCIS might think you changed the job and give you a REF. That might casue delay... Since I don't know how the process work, just want to make sure this will not happen.
just make sure u have some overlap where u can receive mail on both addresses just to account for uscis delays in address update....they r not going to penalize u for moving.
Well, I read someone said if you change address, USCIS might think you changed the job and give you a REF. That might casue delay... Since I don't know how the process work, just want to make sure this will not happen.
more...
house May 21 Judgement Day Hoax?
natrajs
09-16 03:27 PM
Recd CPO e mail @ 7 PM EDT - 9/15/09 ( Self & Spouse) - TSC
June 04 EB2I
8/8/07 - RD
9/28/07 - ND
8/28/08 - SLUD
9/15/09 - HLUD - CPO E mail
Thank Q IV
Best Wishes and Good Luck
June 04 EB2I
8/8/07 - RD
9/28/07 - ND
8/28/08 - SLUD
9/15/09 - HLUD - CPO E mail
Thank Q IV
Best Wishes and Good Luck
tattoo May 21 Judgement Day
ImmiLosers
09-25 05:23 PM
I dont think EB3 is current for Nov 2004. Infact, it is unavailable for all countries of charge until Oct First. If you are Phillipines or rest of the world, you still need to wait until OCt First to file
PD is ported irrespective of the EB class
PD is ported irrespective of the EB class
more...
pictures JUDGMENT DAY ON MAY 21,
gc_chahiye
07-11 08:03 PM
What I dont understnad is that if they skipped security clearances on AOS applications to use up numbers..how does it imply taht they would have to eat crow and accept July application...Logic doesnt explain this,
They have alrady made teh blunder of skipping sec clearances...What they can now request is to go back and correct that mistake and ask that any and all applications in July be rejected so that they can do sec clearance on the ones they already used up/approved..
Does that make sense.?
I think the statement from Greg Siskind is that 'if they dont want to answer these questions about security clearance etc, the simplest way out is to accept the July Applications and get everyone off their back (irrespective of whether visa numbers are there or not).
One issue though is, even if they want to kill this controversy by accepting July applications, they need some face-saving way to do this about-turn. They cant say they are scared of an inquiry or a lawsuit. Settling the AILF lawsuit is probably that way out. Gettings AILF of their back, and will also stop senators and representatives from asking them uncomfortable questions...
They have alrady made teh blunder of skipping sec clearances...What they can now request is to go back and correct that mistake and ask that any and all applications in July be rejected so that they can do sec clearance on the ones they already used up/approved..
Does that make sense.?
I think the statement from Greg Siskind is that 'if they dont want to answer these questions about security clearance etc, the simplest way out is to accept the July Applications and get everyone off their back (irrespective of whether visa numbers are there or not).
One issue though is, even if they want to kill this controversy by accepting July applications, they need some face-saving way to do this about-turn. They cant say they are scared of an inquiry or a lawsuit. Settling the AILF lawsuit is probably that way out. Gettings AILF of their back, and will also stop senators and representatives from asking them uncomfortable questions...
dresses for quot;Judgement Day May 21,
$eeGrEeN
05-31 11:50 AM
EVERYBODY PLS PLS CONTRIBUTE....
[/COLOR]
Do the math ??? u did it for us ;)
[/COLOR]
Do the math ??? u did it for us ;)
more...
makeup May 21st Judgement Day is Less
immi_enthu
09-28 05:05 PM
That's the reason why they are now changing the receipt date to September even if you filed on July 2nd..
I think this is just their way of saying......give us another month.
They have already got around it. They ARE NOT receipting the applications on the actual date they receive them. They are stamping the received dates only when they 'enter' it into their system.
The receipt date on my receipt notice days July 2nd not September. The online one says September 7th. I have evedence by document from them that my application was received on July 2nd.
I think this is just their way of saying......give us another month.
They have already got around it. They ARE NOT receipting the applications on the actual date they receive them. They are stamping the received dates only when they 'enter' it into their system.
The receipt date on my receipt notice days July 2nd not September. The online one says September 7th. I have evedence by document from them that my application was received on July 2nd.
girlfriend Judgment Day May 21 [Why the
alterego
09-11 03:19 AM
After reading this, I was not sure whether that 140K included the Labour backlogs. I know the BECs have been a lot more active lately and have been pumping out approvals/denials more rapidly.
If infact 140K backlogs do include them, then perhaps that would be a good thing, since atleast then we can perhaps begin to get our arms around this and understand how long our waits will actually be.
One thing is for sure they have definitely stepped up the speed of things at the USCIS with other filings after retrogression hit.
If infact 140K backlogs do include them, then perhaps that would be a good thing, since atleast then we can perhaps begin to get our arms around this and understand how long our waits will actually be.
One thing is for sure they have definitely stepped up the speed of things at the USCIS with other filings after retrogression hit.
hairstyles May 21 2011 Judgement Day
Rajeev
10-11 09:43 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
vbkris77
04-13 11:06 PM
Here is the extract from Immigration and naturalization act. It is as clear as mud.. But most lawyers interpret the way we said in my previous post at least for kids born in USA.
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=c9fef57852dc066cfe16a4cb81683 8a4
(b) Rules for Chargeability. - Each independent country, self-governing dominion, mandated territory, and territory under the international trusteeship system of the United Nations, other than the United States and its outlying possessions, shall be treated as a separate foreign state for the purposes of a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) when approved by the Secretary of State. All other inhabited lands shall be attributed to a foreign state specified by the Secretary of State. F or the purposes of this Act the foreign state to which an immigrant is chargeable shall be determined by birth within such foreign state except that-
(1) an alien child, when accompanied by or following to join his alien parent or parents, may be charged to the foreign state of either parent if such parent has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa, if necessary to prevent the separation of the child from the parent or parents, and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such parent has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year;
(2) if an alien is chargeable to a different foreign state from that of his spouse, the foreign state to which such alien is chargeable may, if necessary to prevent the separation of husband and wife, be determined by the foreign state of the spouse he is accompanying or following to join, if such spouse has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such spouse has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level estab lished under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year; (3) an alien born in the United States shall be considered as having been born in the country of which he is a citizen or subject, or, if he is not a citizen or subject of any country, in the last foreign country in which he had his residence as determined by the consular officer; and (4) an alien born within any foreign state in which neither of his parents was born and in which neither of his parents had a residence at the time of such alien's birth may be charged to the foreign state of either parent.
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=c9fef57852dc066cfe16a4cb81683 8a4
(b) Rules for Chargeability. - Each independent country, self-governing dominion, mandated territory, and territory under the international trusteeship system of the United Nations, other than the United States and its outlying possessions, shall be treated as a separate foreign state for the purposes of a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) when approved by the Secretary of State. All other inhabited lands shall be attributed to a foreign state specified by the Secretary of State. F or the purposes of this Act the foreign state to which an immigrant is chargeable shall be determined by birth within such foreign state except that-
(1) an alien child, when accompanied by or following to join his alien parent or parents, may be charged to the foreign state of either parent if such parent has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa, if necessary to prevent the separation of the child from the parent or parents, and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such parent has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level established under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year;
(2) if an alien is chargeable to a different foreign state from that of his spouse, the foreign state to which such alien is chargeable may, if necessary to prevent the separation of husband and wife, be determined by the foreign state of the spouse he is accompanying or following to join, if such spouse has received or would be qualified for an immigrant visa and if immigration charged to the foreign state to which such spouse has been or would be chargeable has not reached a numerical level estab lished under subsection (a)(2) for that fiscal year; (3) an alien born in the United States shall be considered as having been born in the country of which he is a citizen or subject, or, if he is not a citizen or subject of any country, in the last foreign country in which he had his residence as determined by the consular officer; and (4) an alien born within any foreign state in which neither of his parents was born and in which neither of his parents had a residence at the time of such alien's birth may be charged to the foreign state of either parent.
David C
August 8th, 2005, 10:43 PM
A good technique idea - sort of a customisable ND filter in result.
This is also a bit of a strange co-incidence for me - in that I had just finished doing a couple of Quantum Mechanics thought experiments using the idea of crossed linear polarizers combined with beam-splitters and then read this thread...
This is also a bit of a strange co-incidence for me - in that I had just finished doing a couple of Quantum Mechanics thought experiments using the idea of crossed linear polarizers combined with beam-splitters and then read this thread...
entrada de Vukahynew @ 12:55
0 comentarios
0 comentarios:
Publicar un comentario
Suscribirse a Enviar comentarios [Atom]
<< Inicio