indianabacklog
10-24 08:10 AM
YOU ARE INDEED LUCKY! I THOUGHT THE CURRENT PRIORITY DATE for EB3 WORLD is August 2002. MAYBE THERE ARE NO MORE 2002-2005 WAITING FOR EB3 WORLD. THEY NEED TO REVISE THE VISA BULLETIN. HOPE I WILL BE PICKED NEXT....MY LC WAS FILED JAN. 2006...A MONTH AHEAD OF YOU.
Just to let you know there are EB3 ROW still waiting. My priority date is November 2002 and applied for AOS in May. No rhyme or reason to this process it would seem.
Cannot imagine I am the only old PD still waiting while people who applied four years later get their green cards.
Just to let you know there are EB3 ROW still waiting. My priority date is November 2002 and applied for AOS in May. No rhyme or reason to this process it would seem.
Cannot imagine I am the only old PD still waiting while people who applied four years later get their green cards.
wallpaper and Stephen Colletti
Honda
04-15 02:28 PM
Yesterday, I was told by the client that my project is going to end by this month end i.e Apr 30. Actually it was supposed to go for the next 2 years. I am currently in the project working for the project. They said the lay off was becoz of budget issues. But I see I am the only one that is target in this lay-off. I am working with the same client for the past 3 years. The lay off news was really shocking and devastating.
I am currently 9 months pregnant. As the client did that to me, I thought that atleast I might have some options with my current employer. My employer is a desi consultancy. I never been on Bench for single day for the Past 6 years ( Day 1 that I entered into US to till now).
When I spoke to my employer today he gave me a termination letter stating that my project end date will be my last date with them. It was more shocking. I will be on maternity leave anytime in month of may depending on the delivery. I don't see any possible options that any client can take me into project when I am in 9th month of pregnancy.
As my husband is doing consulting, I filed the green card thru this employer, 485 is pending more than 180 days, 140 approved in EB2 category. We paid all the attorney fees and filing fees from our pocket. We spent nearly $10,000 for the GC process. My husband was on bench for the past 2 months. He got a job on EAD which is going to start next week.
1. I see that my employer is terminating me immediately because he can avoid maternity expenses. I told him that I will take 3 months FMLA for unpaid maternity leave from Apr 30th. And look for the Job immediately after delivery and get into the Job. But still he is telling he won't provide me that time. Maintaining the status is very important for me as me and my husband depends on the EAD.
2.My medical insurance is with my employer, If I get laid off in this critical situation, I won't be having insurance. We can't afford the delivery expenses without insurance.
3. Even though my husband will get insurance with the new company, We are not sure that company will cover the pre-existing pregnancy that is in final stages.
4. And also not sure that the insurance will be under the network of OBG/YN and the hospital I registered for delivery. His job is in different state but he will find out the options once he starts his job next week.
5. Does anyone think that my employer is discriminating the law? He is terminating me immediately becoz I am pregnant.
I am not sure whether he is doing the right thing but the situation I am in is the worst situation I ever expected of. Its lot of stress on me and my baby. We are unable to sleep for hour with all the tensions ahead. My husband's job is dependent on my valid status. If something screw up we both be in very bad situation. I really don't want any one in my situation.
Please help me, if any one know any options where I can maintain my status during the pregnancy and maternity leave, Please tell me.
Sorry to hear your situation. Please let me know right now which state you are? i have some options to tell you.
I am currently 9 months pregnant. As the client did that to me, I thought that atleast I might have some options with my current employer. My employer is a desi consultancy. I never been on Bench for single day for the Past 6 years ( Day 1 that I entered into US to till now).
When I spoke to my employer today he gave me a termination letter stating that my project end date will be my last date with them. It was more shocking. I will be on maternity leave anytime in month of may depending on the delivery. I don't see any possible options that any client can take me into project when I am in 9th month of pregnancy.
As my husband is doing consulting, I filed the green card thru this employer, 485 is pending more than 180 days, 140 approved in EB2 category. We paid all the attorney fees and filing fees from our pocket. We spent nearly $10,000 for the GC process. My husband was on bench for the past 2 months. He got a job on EAD which is going to start next week.
1. I see that my employer is terminating me immediately because he can avoid maternity expenses. I told him that I will take 3 months FMLA for unpaid maternity leave from Apr 30th. And look for the Job immediately after delivery and get into the Job. But still he is telling he won't provide me that time. Maintaining the status is very important for me as me and my husband depends on the EAD.
2.My medical insurance is with my employer, If I get laid off in this critical situation, I won't be having insurance. We can't afford the delivery expenses without insurance.
3. Even though my husband will get insurance with the new company, We are not sure that company will cover the pre-existing pregnancy that is in final stages.
4. And also not sure that the insurance will be under the network of OBG/YN and the hospital I registered for delivery. His job is in different state but he will find out the options once he starts his job next week.
5. Does anyone think that my employer is discriminating the law? He is terminating me immediately becoz I am pregnant.
I am not sure whether he is doing the right thing but the situation I am in is the worst situation I ever expected of. Its lot of stress on me and my baby. We are unable to sleep for hour with all the tensions ahead. My husband's job is dependent on my valid status. If something screw up we both be in very bad situation. I really don't want any one in my situation.
Please help me, if any one know any options where I can maintain my status during the pregnancy and maternity leave, Please tell me.
Sorry to hear your situation. Please let me know right now which state you are? i have some options to tell you.
chanduv23
05-10 03:24 PM
My 4th contribution today $100 - from my bank
Immigration Voice
Member ID : chanduv23 $100.00 05/16
Contributed $400 so far along with this.
IV is doing a great job. Great going IV.
Immigration Voice
Member ID : chanduv23 $100.00 05/16
Contributed $400 so far along with this.
IV is doing a great job. Great going IV.
2011 Stephen Colletti. 5 June 2011
reachinus
08-11 05:23 AM
If you see the post 3205 which was posted at 6:35pm in EB2-EB3 Predictions (Rather Calculations), it says the same date as in the bullletine.
more...
aadimanav
08-14 08:49 AM
bump
engineer
02-28 07:07 PM
Works Cited
Arshad, Mehreen. Personal Interview. 2 May 2006.
"Great Teachers Make Great Public Schools." National Education Association. 06 May 2006 <http://www.nea.org/teacherday/want2teach.html>.
Murthy, Sheela. "Bill Gates Says End H1B Cap." MurthyDotCom. 29 April. 2006
< http://www.murthy.com/news/n_bilgat.html>.
Rosseter, Robert. "Nursing Shortage." American Association of Colleges of Nursing
October 2005. 5 May 2006 <http://www.acn.nche.edu/Media/FactSheets/Nur
singShortage.htm>.
Shah, Shivali. "What is NADISA?" Network of Advocated of Dependent Spouses of America. 14 April 2006 < http://www.hvisasurvey.org/what_is_nadisa.htm>.
Shah, Shivali. "VAWA 2005 Provision Will Assist Thousands of Battered Immigrant
Women Married to Temporary Visa Holders." Network of Advocated of Dependent Spouses of America 5 Feb 2006. 4 May 2006 <http://hvisa
survey.org/VAWA_PressRelease1.htm>.
"Temporary Workers". U.S. Department of of State. 10April.2006 <http:/travel. state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1271.html>.
Arshad, Mehreen. Personal Interview. 2 May 2006.
"Great Teachers Make Great Public Schools." National Education Association. 06 May 2006 <http://www.nea.org/teacherday/want2teach.html>.
Murthy, Sheela. "Bill Gates Says End H1B Cap." MurthyDotCom. 29 April. 2006
< http://www.murthy.com/news/n_bilgat.html>.
Rosseter, Robert. "Nursing Shortage." American Association of Colleges of Nursing
October 2005. 5 May 2006 <http://www.acn.nche.edu/Media/FactSheets/Nur
singShortage.htm>.
Shah, Shivali. "What is NADISA?" Network of Advocated of Dependent Spouses of America. 14 April 2006 < http://www.hvisasurvey.org/what_is_nadisa.htm>.
Shah, Shivali. "VAWA 2005 Provision Will Assist Thousands of Battered Immigrant
Women Married to Temporary Visa Holders." Network of Advocated of Dependent Spouses of America 5 Feb 2006. 4 May 2006 <http://hvisa
survey.org/VAWA_PressRelease1.htm>.
"Temporary Workers". U.S. Department of of State. 10April.2006 <http:/travel. state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1271.html>.
more...
new_horizon
09-23 10:46 AM
I just called all of them, including the not favoring congressman/women (cm/cw)
to those not favoring, I told I understand the cm/cw does not support the bill HR5882, but I would like to share few points that might help him/her reconsider their decision.
I then told about us not taking away any jobs since we already been employed for several years, and the bill if not approved we'll still continue to be employed in our current status. But on the positive side, if the bill is approved we'll greatly benefit the economy esp. the housing industry since several hundreds of applicants are ready to buy their house. and about us having paid taxes, and being a great consumer, etc.
and then I told I would really like the cm/cw to reconsider her/his decision and to support the bill which is up for markup today.
---------------
I hope this helps others with some talking points.
Could someone point out who are the ones supporting the bills, so we only call them to thank them for supporting the bill. I called one cm's office, after going thru all the talking points, he told me that the cm already supports the bill. I then said sorry, and asked him to convey my thanks to the cm. I don't remember who that was 'coz I was really in a hurry to call of them in the short break I took at work.
so pls everyone CALL before it is too late.
to those not favoring, I told I understand the cm/cw does not support the bill HR5882, but I would like to share few points that might help him/her reconsider their decision.
I then told about us not taking away any jobs since we already been employed for several years, and the bill if not approved we'll still continue to be employed in our current status. But on the positive side, if the bill is approved we'll greatly benefit the economy esp. the housing industry since several hundreds of applicants are ready to buy their house. and about us having paid taxes, and being a great consumer, etc.
and then I told I would really like the cm/cw to reconsider her/his decision and to support the bill which is up for markup today.
---------------
I hope this helps others with some talking points.
Could someone point out who are the ones supporting the bills, so we only call them to thank them for supporting the bill. I called one cm's office, after going thru all the talking points, he told me that the cm already supports the bill. I then said sorry, and asked him to convey my thanks to the cm. I don't remember who that was 'coz I was really in a hurry to call of them in the short break I took at work.
so pls everyone CALL before it is too late.
2010 Stephen Colletti and Chelsea
admin
03-28 10:09 AM
Mindblowing. Do people really believe the Oct 2007 deadline? Haven't we seen many deadlines come and go? This is extrememly unfair to those stuck at BEC; don't go around spreading this impression that the BEC issue has been resolved.
If indeed the majority at IV believe that BEC is not a problem, then it would not be a stated goal of IV. Let me repeat, so long as it is listed as a goal, it is the moral responsibility of all of to support and work towards resolving the issue.
This is important. Don't just pretend to support IV and play down what matters to others. Your must support all the goals we have at IV and not pick and choose what you like.
Also please don't repeat the false logic of "labor certs will be taken care of by PERM." If that is the case why would we at IV have BEC resolution as a goal? The least you can do it not try to dilute the seriousness of the BEC issue, even if you don't care much about the problem.
anai,
Resolving the BEC problem is definitely one of IV's main goals. There is no way I will believe in DOL's claim of clearing all the back logs by Oct 2007.
IV has had a number of discussions with lawmakers and administrative officials, first to understand the issue and next to solve it. From our discussions, it has become clear that the lawmakers still view this as a temporary problem and are not willing to legislate for getting any more into this. Never the less all of them did agree that the efficiency of the BECs left a lot to be desired. So we were working a bi-partisan coalition of lawmakers who were willing to put pressure on DOL and USCIS on the need for efficiency and transparency.
All of this was before the crazy pace with which the Comprehensive Immigration Bill began to move. We do have to realize that this bill is a golden chance to have our provisions in place and we have less than 2 weeks to works on it. Frist wants either of the Immigration Bills to be passed before Apr 7th. If we do miss out on our goals in this bill and this bill gets passed, we will not be able to revisit our issues for a long time. So right now a lot of the attention is being given to it. This does not mean that BEC is forgotten. Hope you do understand.
If indeed the majority at IV believe that BEC is not a problem, then it would not be a stated goal of IV. Let me repeat, so long as it is listed as a goal, it is the moral responsibility of all of to support and work towards resolving the issue.
This is important. Don't just pretend to support IV and play down what matters to others. Your must support all the goals we have at IV and not pick and choose what you like.
Also please don't repeat the false logic of "labor certs will be taken care of by PERM." If that is the case why would we at IV have BEC resolution as a goal? The least you can do it not try to dilute the seriousness of the BEC issue, even if you don't care much about the problem.
anai,
Resolving the BEC problem is definitely one of IV's main goals. There is no way I will believe in DOL's claim of clearing all the back logs by Oct 2007.
IV has had a number of discussions with lawmakers and administrative officials, first to understand the issue and next to solve it. From our discussions, it has become clear that the lawmakers still view this as a temporary problem and are not willing to legislate for getting any more into this. Never the less all of them did agree that the efficiency of the BECs left a lot to be desired. So we were working a bi-partisan coalition of lawmakers who were willing to put pressure on DOL and USCIS on the need for efficiency and transparency.
All of this was before the crazy pace with which the Comprehensive Immigration Bill began to move. We do have to realize that this bill is a golden chance to have our provisions in place and we have less than 2 weeks to works on it. Frist wants either of the Immigration Bills to be passed before Apr 7th. If we do miss out on our goals in this bill and this bill gets passed, we will not be able to revisit our issues for a long time. So right now a lot of the attention is being given to it. This does not mean that BEC is forgotten. Hope you do understand.
more...
pappu
01-29 01:05 PM
Public announcement
Immigrationvoice would like to reach out to its community to find out if they are facing any problem with AC21 related issues or had faced any such issue in the past. If you had received a denial of your application for example not having the same designation/ different salary/different location etc... please contact and we would like to assist. This would also help us try solve the larger issue of restrictions on applicants during their greencard journey where they are bound with employers, salary, designation, narrow occupation field etc.
Please contact us at info at immigrationvoice.org
Do post this information on other forums so that we can help out others in need on this issue.
Immigrationvoice would like to reach out to its community to find out if they are facing any problem with AC21 related issues or had faced any such issue in the past. If you had received a denial of your application for example not having the same designation/ different salary/different location etc... please contact and we would like to assist. This would also help us try solve the larger issue of restrictions on applicants during their greencard journey where they are bound with employers, salary, designation, narrow occupation field etc.
Please contact us at info at immigrationvoice.org
Do post this information on other forums so that we can help out others in need on this issue.
hair Stephen Colletti. 5 June 2011
apb
07-25 01:48 PM
Delivered on July/19th.
more...
manishs7
08-19 05:24 PM
no please donot do that there shouldnt be any recapture
WTF.. in the other thread you said no SKILL bill. Get the hell out of the IV.:mad:
WTF.. in the other thread you said no SKILL bill. Get the hell out of the IV.:mad:
hot Posted on: June 6th, 2011Rita
shreekhand
10-03 11:07 AM
This rule of having at least one parent Indian citizen is in existence since atleast 2006. Just search around. I also know this as one of my close friend's OCI application was his kid was rejected based on this rule more than a couple of years ago !
You are correct. The rules must have changed recently. I wonder what made them make that change, Now children of US citizens (who were once Indian citizens) have an advantage over children who has both parents as Indian citizens. Weird.. isn't it?
You are correct. The rules must have changed recently. I wonder what made them make that change, Now children of US citizens (who were once Indian citizens) have an advantage over children who has both parents as Indian citizens. Weird.. isn't it?
more...
house Plus, Stephen tells us Chase
pankaj_n
04-20 09:00 AM
Hi Pankaj,
Was your case rejected due to the number of years of education (10+2+3+2 = 17)?
What if it is 3 + 3 ( 3 year Bsc Physics + 3 Year MCA) 10 + 2+3+3 = 18? I am wondering if USCIS would consider this equivalent to US masters? Came across a memo used by Nebraska Service center that says USCIS would consider 3+3 equivalent to US masters, but that memo was from 2006.
yes my case rejected due to number of years of education.
My case they rejected because i have 3 year Bsc and 2 year master now funny thing is that i know my friend who did similar course from same university but he did same master degree like me but in part time so he complete in 3 years and he got approval in 2009.
Was your case rejected due to the number of years of education (10+2+3+2 = 17)?
What if it is 3 + 3 ( 3 year Bsc Physics + 3 Year MCA) 10 + 2+3+3 = 18? I am wondering if USCIS would consider this equivalent to US masters? Came across a memo used by Nebraska Service center that says USCIS would consider 3+3 equivalent to US masters, but that memo was from 2006.
yes my case rejected due to number of years of education.
My case they rejected because i have 3 year Bsc and 2 year master now funny thing is that i know my friend who did similar course from same university but he did same master degree like me but in part time so he complete in 3 years and he got approval in 2009.
tattoo Spotted: Stephen Colletti and
Tito_ortiz
11-20 10:43 AM
Guys,
Regarding Mathew Oh comments:
"...There is a possibility the DREAM Act could be passed, allowing the children of undocumented immigrants (who complete their high school educations in the United States)..."
How do you think the passage of the DREAM ACT could impact our situation ? If they pass this, they would allay a sizeable portion of illegal immigrants to get amnesty through their children (few millions). I am just wondering whether the illegal alien supporters would lose steam to support CIR after this ? Ironically, they would get a sizeable amnesty, overhelm USCIS with millions of applicants and probably make the passage of a CIR bill more distant. I can't think of something less advantageous to us than this. I hope I am totally wrong.
What do you guys think ?
You may be already familiar with this, but just in case ...
Mid-Term Elections and U.S. Immigration Law & Policy
Posted Nov 17, 2006
�MurthyDotCom
Recent mid-term elections resulted in wins for the Democrats, who will take control of the U.S. House of Representatives and virtually the U.S. Senate as of January 2007. The ensuing two-year term, many believe, may be ripe for some sort of comprehensive immigration reform. President George W. Bush has been espousing all along the cause for comprehensive reform in this area. Most people recognize that there are immigration problems and governmental delays that exist. Most also believe that the system needs to be changed for the better. But just how this should be accomplished is not so easily agreed upon, and so it is a hot-button issue. Many of the hardliners, who took a strong anti-immigration position, lost the recent elections. But there are some who took this stance and won. It also is widely believed that many of the newly elected Democrats expressed anti-immigrant sentiments in their campaigns. Achieving any strong pro-immigration measures may prove to be more daunting than originally was anticipated; certainly more than many hoped it would be. Needless to say, we can expect 2007 to mark the beginning of a time for change and flux in the arena of U.S. immigration law. There is a possibility the DREAM Act could be passed, allowing the children of undocumented immigrants (who complete their high school educations in the United States) to obtain conditional "green card" status if they enroll in college or join the U.S. armed services. Both the Democratic and Republican parties seem inclined to help children. There are individuals, however, who are not willing to give any benefits to children of undocumented immigrants. Whatever the outcome, one thing is for sure – we can and should expect some debate on the matter of immigration law and policy in the coming year. Your input, therefore, is critical to the process. Whether your interest is as an employer or an employee or some other capacity, it is important to make your voice heard in Congress by eMailing, writing, or calling your U.S. senator, congressperson, or their immigration aides. Contact them regularly on issues that concern you and your business. That is a part of our democratic process. So, if you care, you must dare to go out there and do your part!
Regarding Mathew Oh comments:
"...There is a possibility the DREAM Act could be passed, allowing the children of undocumented immigrants (who complete their high school educations in the United States)..."
How do you think the passage of the DREAM ACT could impact our situation ? If they pass this, they would allay a sizeable portion of illegal immigrants to get amnesty through their children (few millions). I am just wondering whether the illegal alien supporters would lose steam to support CIR after this ? Ironically, they would get a sizeable amnesty, overhelm USCIS with millions of applicants and probably make the passage of a CIR bill more distant. I can't think of something less advantageous to us than this. I hope I am totally wrong.
What do you guys think ?
You may be already familiar with this, but just in case ...
Mid-Term Elections and U.S. Immigration Law & Policy
Posted Nov 17, 2006
�MurthyDotCom
Recent mid-term elections resulted in wins for the Democrats, who will take control of the U.S. House of Representatives and virtually the U.S. Senate as of January 2007. The ensuing two-year term, many believe, may be ripe for some sort of comprehensive immigration reform. President George W. Bush has been espousing all along the cause for comprehensive reform in this area. Most people recognize that there are immigration problems and governmental delays that exist. Most also believe that the system needs to be changed for the better. But just how this should be accomplished is not so easily agreed upon, and so it is a hot-button issue. Many of the hardliners, who took a strong anti-immigration position, lost the recent elections. But there are some who took this stance and won. It also is widely believed that many of the newly elected Democrats expressed anti-immigrant sentiments in their campaigns. Achieving any strong pro-immigration measures may prove to be more daunting than originally was anticipated; certainly more than many hoped it would be. Needless to say, we can expect 2007 to mark the beginning of a time for change and flux in the arena of U.S. immigration law. There is a possibility the DREAM Act could be passed, allowing the children of undocumented immigrants (who complete their high school educations in the United States) to obtain conditional "green card" status if they enroll in college or join the U.S. armed services. Both the Democratic and Republican parties seem inclined to help children. There are individuals, however, who are not willing to give any benefits to children of undocumented immigrants. Whatever the outcome, one thing is for sure – we can and should expect some debate on the matter of immigration law and policy in the coming year. Your input, therefore, is critical to the process. Whether your interest is as an employer or an employee or some other capacity, it is important to make your voice heard in Congress by eMailing, writing, or calling your U.S. senator, congressperson, or their immigration aides. Contact them regularly on issues that concern you and your business. That is a part of our democratic process. So, if you care, you must dare to go out there and do your part!
more...
pictures stephen colletti 2011.
gc_waiter56
07-06 12:03 PM
All,
IV supports AILF efforts to file the lawsuit and feels that if the lawsuit has a favourable judgement then, it will provide respite to lot of people in the Community IV represents. IV is not an organization which works with one motive and that is to get people out of the greencard mess and IV will support whoever helps its member community.
We feel that revision of Visa bulletin was not correct and AILF is absolutely correct to file a lawsuit against this directive and hence we support AILF in their bid to sue USCIS & DOS
IV supports AILF efforts to file the lawsuit and feels that if the lawsuit has a favourable judgement then, it will provide respite to lot of people in the Community IV represents. IV is not an organization which works with one motive and that is to get people out of the greencard mess and IV will support whoever helps its member community.
We feel that revision of Visa bulletin was not correct and AILF is absolutely correct to file a lawsuit against this directive and hence we support AILF in their bid to sue USCIS & DOS
dresses stephen colletti 2011.
kaisersose
07-09 11:29 AM
I am trying to understand something here..... I had consultation with murthy lawyers and they told me that there is no law written anywhere that states that the employer must revoke I-140 if the employees is laid-off or is not working with them anymore. I was laid off and my company is determined to revoke I-140 because thats what Fragomen lawyers suggest. I am having a hard time understanding why would they want to cause problems for me when I am not even leaving on my own and got affected because of layoff.
Does anyone use Fragomen and could ask their attorneys this question whether a company is required or obligated by law to revoke I-140. That way I can try to convince my company's attorney that another attorney within same law firm have different opinion
Everyone who changes jobs under the protection of AC21, must do so under the assumption that the sponsoring 140 will be revoked.
It is not a matter of our convenience. If you quit the sponsoring employer and he has no intention of hiring you again after your GC, then what is the sense in him retaining your 140 for no reason? It only adds complexity to some employers as dangling 140s are counted to evaluate their ability to pay. So even if it is not law, it makes sense for employers to revoke 140s of employees who quit them.
AC21 protects you from such a revoked 140. We have seen some cases where revoking the 140 - even after the 180 day mark - has resulted in 485 denial. This is a mistake from CIS and is easily fixed.
Expecting the previous employer to hold on to your 140 is not very different from expecting him to keep your you previous job open for you - just in case.
Does anyone use Fragomen and could ask their attorneys this question whether a company is required or obligated by law to revoke I-140. That way I can try to convince my company's attorney that another attorney within same law firm have different opinion
Everyone who changes jobs under the protection of AC21, must do so under the assumption that the sponsoring 140 will be revoked.
It is not a matter of our convenience. If you quit the sponsoring employer and he has no intention of hiring you again after your GC, then what is the sense in him retaining your 140 for no reason? It only adds complexity to some employers as dangling 140s are counted to evaluate their ability to pay. So even if it is not law, it makes sense for employers to revoke 140s of employees who quit them.
AC21 protects you from such a revoked 140. We have seen some cases where revoking the 140 - even after the 180 day mark - has resulted in 485 denial. This is a mistake from CIS and is easily fixed.
Expecting the previous employer to hold on to your 140 is not very different from expecting him to keep your you previous job open for you - just in case.
more...
makeup 2011-05-04T23:10:04
vny
04-26 09:54 AM
Days when President started talking about fighting to make sure the immigration bill be passed, I felt even people who are here legally should get a fair chance. Not that it is a competetion for immigration, but its playing a fair game.
The immigration bill if passed, will come and stop at the same place where everyone of us are in now or even worse and pulls the whole system down.
I'm glad to see such a thing like immigration voice. This will make the law makers think with a broader mind.
Cheers!
The immigration bill if passed, will come and stop at the same place where everyone of us are in now or even worse and pulls the whole system down.
I'm glad to see such a thing like immigration voice. This will make the law makers think with a broader mind.
Cheers!
girlfriend Chelsea Kane amp; Stephen
ianlock
07-27 02:11 AM
Hi guys,
well me visa processing fee bill finally got to the soliciters yesterday.
Thats 24 DAYS!!! from the time NVC says it genertaed it, to us getting it.
Sending the money order out today.
Now lets see how long it takes to process that and then send me packet 3!?!?!
The saga continues......
well me visa processing fee bill finally got to the soliciters yesterday.
Thats 24 DAYS!!! from the time NVC says it genertaed it, to us getting it.
Sending the money order out today.
Now lets see how long it takes to process that and then send me packet 3!?!?!
The saga continues......
hairstyles star Stephen Colletti,
sanju
04-17 03:33 PM
What is the $ rate to Rs. today? Ya!! a special request for UK pound and Malagasy franc, please??? I am ready with my coffee and keeping my fingers crossed, waiting to see the real numbers.... alright, lets see!!!!
Anybody?
Anybody?
sriswam
06-30 10:18 PM
Can someone tell that If USCIS says that 29 June 07 is the last date to receive applications for premium processing for I 140 . Does that mean that they shud receive the application by 29th or application shud be post-marked dated 29th in order to be considered for premium processing.
Thanks
We mailed my wife's PP on the 29th. I spoke to the customer service rep at USCIS and he said post mark date is what they see. But I have been seeing other websites say that its got to be received. Thats doesnt sound logical. So wait and watch I guess.
Thanks
We mailed my wife's PP on the 29th. I spoke to the customer service rep at USCIS and he said post mark date is what they see. But I have been seeing other websites say that its got to be received. Thats doesnt sound logical. So wait and watch I guess.
sriramkalyan
05-13 03:31 PM
Here is the Website ..
http://www.immigration.sa.gov.au/site/index.php
Southern Australia Sponsorship for Permanent Residency .
No point in analyzing EB3 injustice.
Go and apply for Australia.
Or Alberta in Canada wants H1b S ..
USA, USCIS .. they not going change ..
http://www.immigration.sa.gov.au/site/index.php
Southern Australia Sponsorship for Permanent Residency .
No point in analyzing EB3 injustice.
Go and apply for Australia.
Or Alberta in Canada wants H1b S ..
USA, USCIS .. they not going change ..
