h1techSlave
10-01 10:24 AM
[FONT="Microsoft Sans Serif"]
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Thanks to Macaca, now we know that during the previous years some of the unused EB visas were effectively used for Family based GCs.
My question (and suggestion) is, can the reverse happen in 2007-2008?
I know, this is an opportunistic and shameless suggestion from my part. But the fact of the matter is, we are rightfully entitled to the same number of visa numbers that we effectively 'loaned' to the FB visa category in the previous years.
What is important is that this sort of give and take can happen with out any law change. We only need to cry louder than FB folks, and USCIS may give unused FB visas to EB category.
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Thanks to Macaca, now we know that during the previous years some of the unused EB visas were effectively used for Family based GCs.
My question (and suggestion) is, can the reverse happen in 2007-2008?
I know, this is an opportunistic and shameless suggestion from my part. But the fact of the matter is, we are rightfully entitled to the same number of visa numbers that we effectively 'loaned' to the FB visa category in the previous years.
What is important is that this sort of give and take can happen with out any law change. We only need to cry louder than FB folks, and USCIS may give unused FB visas to EB category.
wallpaper Emma Watson Latest Hot New Wallpapers, Emma Watson Pictures, Photos amp; Images
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
wandmaker
03-12 11:19 AM
It is very easy to contradict or find errors.
No body is getting paid here to have a tester test it.
Yes I like the idea of donor for paid members. There are 31000 members not even 2500 members are contributing. This is one way of making them pay for the services or the info you get from the forum.
Actual ball park is 300-350 members, who actually come forward for all campaigns and contribute, and around 50 one-timers.
No body is getting paid here to have a tester test it.
Yes I like the idea of donor for paid members. There are 31000 members not even 2500 members are contributing. This is one way of making them pay for the services or the info you get from the forum.
Actual ball park is 300-350 members, who actually come forward for all campaigns and contribute, and around 50 one-timers.
2011 images Emma Watson - Wallpaper
InTheMoment
07-18 02:07 PM
Adjudication means the process of an adjudicator going thro' your file to see whether you are eligible for adjustment!
Here pre-adjudication means irrespective whether the PD is current or not or availabilty of visa numbers the adjudication process continues.
In other words even though visa numbers are "U" till October they would not simply warm their seats but do something !
See http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
Here pre-adjudication means irrespective whether the PD is current or not or availabilty of visa numbers the adjudication process continues.
In other words even though visa numbers are "U" till October they would not simply warm their seats but do something !
See http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
more...
plreddy
07-14 02:43 PM
Bank Of America Bill Pay Confirmation Number: 7YB5R-TV1TL for $ 5.00.
sj2273
06-11 07:05 PM
Dear Nitinboston,
I am in 100% agreement with you on the notion that Congress probably doesnt care about people who are not voters/citizens etc. But let me quote you an example from history. I am making an extra effort to be optimistic here, but in saying that, nothing can be done will not lead us anywhere either. If we try, then we can atleast go to bed in peace thinking we tried! Here is the example though:
Blacks in this country did not have any voting rights before 1965. In order to be a registered voter they had be recommended by a white person and go through an exam. they practically had no rights. no status. nothing! I am talking about Alabama in early 50s when blacks were not even allowed to board buses from the front door. The bus driver had the right to pull out a gun if a black person did not give up his/her seat. Rosa parks ignited the Montogomery bus boycott in 1955 December and that lasted for more than a year. The result was that blacks came together and held together persistently till people in higher ranks noticed it. It wasnt easy, black leaders were bombed, harrassed and threatened for doing so. In 1964 the civil rights act came about and 1965 voters right act. And today we have a black president. Unbelievable transition from a time when even the drinking water fountains were seperate for whites and blacks.
This is just an example but what I am really trying to get to is that the Government today is much different than it was several years ago. If they could make the congress hear at that time, why cant we.
It wouldnt be wrong to say that this country still is the most tolerant country in the world. Compare this to Australia or New Zealand or Canada.
People in the government will listen if the cause is right. Its just a matter of making enough noise in a decent manner that people hear.
Thats all I have to say! I hope we can take you in the stride of our optimism. You will make a terrific addition to our optimistic force!
Thank you for reading my post.
I am in 100% agreement with you on the notion that Congress probably doesnt care about people who are not voters/citizens etc. But let me quote you an example from history. I am making an extra effort to be optimistic here, but in saying that, nothing can be done will not lead us anywhere either. If we try, then we can atleast go to bed in peace thinking we tried! Here is the example though:
Blacks in this country did not have any voting rights before 1965. In order to be a registered voter they had be recommended by a white person and go through an exam. they practically had no rights. no status. nothing! I am talking about Alabama in early 50s when blacks were not even allowed to board buses from the front door. The bus driver had the right to pull out a gun if a black person did not give up his/her seat. Rosa parks ignited the Montogomery bus boycott in 1955 December and that lasted for more than a year. The result was that blacks came together and held together persistently till people in higher ranks noticed it. It wasnt easy, black leaders were bombed, harrassed and threatened for doing so. In 1964 the civil rights act came about and 1965 voters right act. And today we have a black president. Unbelievable transition from a time when even the drinking water fountains were seperate for whites and blacks.
This is just an example but what I am really trying to get to is that the Government today is much different than it was several years ago. If they could make the congress hear at that time, why cant we.
It wouldnt be wrong to say that this country still is the most tolerant country in the world. Compare this to Australia or New Zealand or Canada.
People in the government will listen if the cause is right. Its just a matter of making enough noise in a decent manner that people hear.
Thats all I have to say! I hope we can take you in the stride of our optimism. You will make a terrific addition to our optimistic force!
Thank you for reading my post.
more...
laborman
04-26 12:38 PM
As per the latest update provided by the DOL to the AILA, of the 363,000 backlog cases pending 108,000 have been completed; 50,000 Certifications have been issued and 255,000 cases remain pending. The DOL further advises that they are on track to issue 45 day letters on all remaining cases by end of June 2006.
My PD is Sept 2003 and I haven't yet got my 45 - day letter. :(
My PD is Sept 2003 and I haven't yet got my 45 - day letter. :(
2010 sexy Emma Watson wallpaper
Lollerskater
05-08 01:32 PM
Love your attitude. Basically it is "I got the stimulus so tough luck if you didn't."
Second thing. Nobody has posted in this thread for days. However, by making a comment, all you did was bump it to the top of the discussion. If you don't like this thread, why are you bumping it?
I took the time to read over your posts and understand your case. You sir, have a very valid case and a good point to make. The OP's intentions however, are CLEARLY far different from yours. By reading the thread title in the topic view, the information is extremely misleading. These are two seperate cases, sir.
Second thing. Nobody has posted in this thread for days. However, by making a comment, all you did was bump it to the top of the discussion. If you don't like this thread, why are you bumping it?
I took the time to read over your posts and understand your case. You sir, have a very valid case and a good point to make. The OP's intentions however, are CLEARLY far different from yours. By reading the thread title in the topic view, the information is extremely misleading. These are two seperate cases, sir.
more...
485Mbe4001
08-13 04:37 PM
Till last year EB 3 would get additional visa from the leftovers of ROW, both EB2 and EB 3-I would benefit from the ROW visia, now all the visas are going to EB2, so i agree with you, there is little hope for EB 3.
Why are there no repurcussions if USCIS admits that they were incorrectly allocating the visa earlier. they can suddenly change the rules and everybody keeps quiet....strange.
EB-3 won't need help when everyone else is done because the only people left to allocate visas would be EB-3 only . I guess we are just in for a long long wait.
Why are there no repurcussions if USCIS admits that they were incorrectly allocating the visa earlier. they can suddenly change the rules and everybody keeps quiet....strange.
EB-3 won't need help when everyone else is done because the only people left to allocate visas would be EB-3 only . I guess we are just in for a long long wait.
hair emma watson latest
nitinboston
06-11 03:56 PM
We are fighting against anti-immigrant idiots like you.
Greencard is our right because we have been waiting long enough and paid a lot for it, and we will not just take greencard but also get our citizenship. After getting citizenship we will make our pro-immigrant senators win election and help defeat anti-immigrant Senators. We will contribute money in getting pro-immigrant lawmakers get elected. Got it ?
We will also tackle idiot old good for nothing racist programmers like you and make sure you remain losers in life.
So its the 6 th fundamental right. I am amazed how people confuse rights with privilege.
Greencard is our right because we have been waiting long enough and paid a lot for it, and we will not just take greencard but also get our citizenship. After getting citizenship we will make our pro-immigrant senators win election and help defeat anti-immigrant Senators. We will contribute money in getting pro-immigrant lawmakers get elected. Got it ?
We will also tackle idiot old good for nothing racist programmers like you and make sure you remain losers in life.
So its the 6 th fundamental right. I am amazed how people confuse rights with privilege.
more...
SS12
07-18 04:57 PM
Contributed $100 today and more to come.
If I can't volunteer my time, the least that I can do is contribute $.
If I can't volunteer my time, the least that I can do is contribute $.
hot Emma Watson wallpaper from her
Macaca
09-12 04:06 PM
RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
NEELA BANERJEE: nbanerjee@nytimes.com *
JAMES BARRON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
NINA BERNSTEIN: nbernstein@nytimes.com *
JULIE BOSMAN
EMILY BRADY
CARA BUCKLEY
DAVID W. CHEN
MARJORIE CONNELLY (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
HELENE COOPER
ANNIE CORREAL
NICOLE COTRONEO
MONICA DAVEY
LAWRENCE DOWNES
TIMOTHY EGAN
KAREEM FAHIM
ALAN FEUER
ROBIN FINN
IAN FISHER
SAMUEL G. FREEDMAN sgfreedman@nytimes.com
DAVID GONZALEZ
STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Clyde Haberman
RAYMOND HERNANDEZ (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
JOSEPH P. HOAR
JOHN HOLUSHA
CARL HULSE (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
KIRK JOHNSON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
CLIFFORD KRAUSS
PAUL KRUGMAN krugman@nytimes.com
MARC LACEY
BRUCE LAMBERT
DAVID LEONHARDT Leonhardt@nytimes.com
PATRICIA NELSON LIMERICK
STEVE LOHR: slohr@nytimes.com *
MICHAEL LUO (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
NEIL MacFARQUHAR
EILEEN MARKEY
ROBERT D. McFADDEN
JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr.
TIM MURPHY
MIREYA NAVARRO
JACQUELINE PALANK: jpalank@nytimes.com
ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) rpear@nytimes.com
JULIA PRESTON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) juliapreston@nytimes.com
ANTHONY RAMIREZ: aramirez@nytimes.com | anthonyramirez@nytimes (did not work)
DAVID K. RANDALL
SAM ROBERTS
JESS ROW
JIM RUTENBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
MARC SANTORA (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
JENNIFER STEINHAUER (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
DAVID STOUT (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
HEATHER TIMMONS
ROBIN TONER
MICHAEL WINERIP parenting@nytimes.com
JEFF ZELENY
NEELA BANERJEE: nbanerjee@nytimes.com *
JAMES BARRON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
NINA BERNSTEIN: nbernstein@nytimes.com *
JULIE BOSMAN
EMILY BRADY
CARA BUCKLEY
DAVID W. CHEN
MARJORIE CONNELLY (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
HELENE COOPER
ANNIE CORREAL
NICOLE COTRONEO
MONICA DAVEY
LAWRENCE DOWNES
TIMOTHY EGAN
KAREEM FAHIM
ALAN FEUER
ROBIN FINN
IAN FISHER
SAMUEL G. FREEDMAN sgfreedman@nytimes.com
DAVID GONZALEZ
STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Clyde Haberman
RAYMOND HERNANDEZ (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
JOSEPH P. HOAR
JOHN HOLUSHA
CARL HULSE (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
KIRK JOHNSON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
CLIFFORD KRAUSS
PAUL KRUGMAN krugman@nytimes.com
MARC LACEY
BRUCE LAMBERT
DAVID LEONHARDT Leonhardt@nytimes.com
PATRICIA NELSON LIMERICK
STEVE LOHR: slohr@nytimes.com *
MICHAEL LUO (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
NEIL MacFARQUHAR
EILEEN MARKEY
ROBERT D. McFADDEN
JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr.
TIM MURPHY
MIREYA NAVARRO
JACQUELINE PALANK: jpalank@nytimes.com
ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) rpear@nytimes.com
JULIA PRESTON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) juliapreston@nytimes.com
ANTHONY RAMIREZ: aramirez@nytimes.com | anthonyramirez@nytimes (did not work)
DAVID K. RANDALL
SAM ROBERTS
JESS ROW
JIM RUTENBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
MARC SANTORA (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
JENNIFER STEINHAUER (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
DAVID STOUT (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html)
HEATHER TIMMONS
ROBIN TONER
MICHAEL WINERIP parenting@nytimes.com
JEFF ZELENY
more...
house Emma Watson New Album Leaked
test101
07-06 05:17 PM
From OH mathew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin
The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin
The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
tattoo emma watson wallpapers bikini.
ps57002
07-22 12:48 PM
can people also give idea how long/when u got the certified hard copy of approval esp if from atlanta
more...
pictures wallpaper emma watson latest
pappu
09-12 05:24 PM
/\/\/\
dresses Emma Watson Latest Wallpapers
john2255
07-22 11:05 AM
Hello All,
I live inTexas and fall under Sen. Cornyn constituency. I faxed his Dallas and Washington Office this thank you letter. Everyone of us can send letter to their Senators. After all we are legal tax payers.... what u all say ???
Dear Sen. Cornyn,
Subject: Reintroduce Amendment No. 2339
I applaud your Amendment to provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses. I am one of those who are currently stuck in the muck of USCIS. I would like to request you to not give up on us. Please try to introduce another similar amendment to at least help USCIS clear the humongous backlog of Green Cards. We all really appreciate your help!
Regards,
Name
Tel #
Email ID
Good work greenme. The model of your letter is excellent. Everybody in the forum please follow the same model with necessary modifications and fax to their respective senators. Also please call to the senators office and let them know your opinion. Please refer about the bill and convey your opinion according to the particular senator's voting on the amendment. This is very important coz this will greatly influence them and stimulate them for further similar amendments. Please dont delay. Let us heat up the issue. The amendment shows the senators are already aware of unused employment visas of previous years. Lets take this oppurtunity.
I live inTexas and fall under Sen. Cornyn constituency. I faxed his Dallas and Washington Office this thank you letter. Everyone of us can send letter to their Senators. After all we are legal tax payers.... what u all say ???
Dear Sen. Cornyn,
Subject: Reintroduce Amendment No. 2339
I applaud your Amendment to provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses. I am one of those who are currently stuck in the muck of USCIS. I would like to request you to not give up on us. Please try to introduce another similar amendment to at least help USCIS clear the humongous backlog of Green Cards. We all really appreciate your help!
Regards,
Name
Tel #
Email ID
Good work greenme. The model of your letter is excellent. Everybody in the forum please follow the same model with necessary modifications and fax to their respective senators. Also please call to the senators office and let them know your opinion. Please refer about the bill and convey your opinion according to the particular senator's voting on the amendment. This is very important coz this will greatly influence them and stimulate them for further similar amendments. Please dont delay. Let us heat up the issue. The amendment shows the senators are already aware of unused employment visas of previous years. Lets take this oppurtunity.
more...
makeup Emma Watson Innocent Smile
snathan
03-12 12:33 PM
No, it does not even do that. it does not let FOIA donors logon too.
First, the whole concept of donor based organisation is so stupid.
I mean really stupid.
If the donor based thing is ON, the future of IV is not good.
Yeah, IV does good work by talking to people all around, from different stratas of lawmaking and what not.
but get real, look around guys, information is everywhere, not only here. and you are working for the greater good of the community, only donors are not going to be benefitting from this.
Instead of making donor based posts, have a FOIA kinda drive every now and then.
unbelievable, and to top that, even donors cant access the so called 'DONOR posts'.
talk about low life bureaucracy, welcome to IV.
Yes...this how we need to work. Why you dont support the donor idea. We dont need the free riders. We need only comitted people and not junks
First, the whole concept of donor based organisation is so stupid.
I mean really stupid.
If the donor based thing is ON, the future of IV is not good.
Yeah, IV does good work by talking to people all around, from different stratas of lawmaking and what not.
but get real, look around guys, information is everywhere, not only here. and you are working for the greater good of the community, only donors are not going to be benefitting from this.
Instead of making donor based posts, have a FOIA kinda drive every now and then.
unbelievable, and to top that, even donors cant access the so called 'DONOR posts'.
talk about low life bureaucracy, welcome to IV.
Yes...this how we need to work. Why you dont support the donor idea. We dont need the free riders. We need only comitted people and not junks
girlfriend Emma Watson in Green Wallpaper
GCFISH
07-18 01:18 PM
Hi,
I made my one time payment yesterday..will do it again soon.
I made my one time payment yesterday..will do it again soon.
hairstyles latest emma watson pics. emma watson latest. one of the trio to finish;
srini1976
07-20 04:39 PM
Is there a way to bring up this Bill again without the H1B part. My guess the H1B part killed it!:mad:
Lets try our best by supporting IV!
Lets try our best by supporting IV!
softcrowd
01-06 12:00 PM
I studied in IIT (B.Tech), got M.S. and Ph.D. from here and now a professor. My observations/opinions are as follows:
2. ....The rest are just crappy. And I know how crappy can they be from my experience. I have the misfortune of teaching 100's of students who come here with an Anna University (or Osmania) B.Tech./B.E. degree in engineering, and knows absolutely nothing. And I am not exaggerating: they cannot write an elementary program in any language (apparently they learn something called "theoretical" computer programming in which they do not actually learn to program); does not know any mathematics (most cannot integrate x*exp(x); one student could not tell me what is f(0.7) by looking at a graph of x vs. f(x)) and cannot operate simple lab equipments. It is just unbelievable! Anyway, moving on.
I am not sure why people jump onto drawing conclusions so fast...look at the above post from a so called professor....he encountered a couple of a folks from some universities & concludes that those universities are just crappy....!! Many of my colleagues are from the professors' "oh-so-good" list of IITs/univs and they are no better!! (In fact, some of them suck so bad)!!
raysaikat - Do you really think any student from the above crappy-univs could not tell what is f(0.7) by looking at the graph?? Do you really think those univs (anna/osm...) are so bad? Now another question for you prof....how come are you working in a university that's giving admissions to such a bunch of crappy folks...!!?? Given this fact, can we also safely assume that the university you are teaching-in is a Crappy one, which could only attract the bottom pile from your above list of crappy-universities??
PS: Sorry for digressing from the main topic of the thread.
2. ....The rest are just crappy. And I know how crappy can they be from my experience. I have the misfortune of teaching 100's of students who come here with an Anna University (or Osmania) B.Tech./B.E. degree in engineering, and knows absolutely nothing. And I am not exaggerating: they cannot write an elementary program in any language (apparently they learn something called "theoretical" computer programming in which they do not actually learn to program); does not know any mathematics (most cannot integrate x*exp(x); one student could not tell me what is f(0.7) by looking at a graph of x vs. f(x)) and cannot operate simple lab equipments. It is just unbelievable! Anyway, moving on.
I am not sure why people jump onto drawing conclusions so fast...look at the above post from a so called professor....he encountered a couple of a folks from some universities & concludes that those universities are just crappy....!! Many of my colleagues are from the professors' "oh-so-good" list of IITs/univs and they are no better!! (In fact, some of them suck so bad)!!
raysaikat - Do you really think any student from the above crappy-univs could not tell what is f(0.7) by looking at the graph?? Do you really think those univs (anna/osm...) are so bad? Now another question for you prof....how come are you working in a university that's giving admissions to such a bunch of crappy folks...!!?? Given this fact, can we also safely assume that the university you are teaching-in is a Crappy one, which could only attract the bottom pile from your above list of crappy-universities??
PS: Sorry for digressing from the main topic of the thread.
prakashv44
01-07 12:17 PM
Just send your I-140 approved docs to the bank. I got the approval with my I-140 itself
No comments:
Post a Comment