ganguteli
06-17 02:06 PM
Would you like to send a mass mailer to all to generate momentum ???
I am posting it on a forum used by my Brazilian friends. Folks let us spread the word and post about it everywhere.
I am posting it on a forum used by my Brazilian friends. Folks let us spread the word and post about it everywhere.
wallpaper disney wallpaper, computer
vin13
06-25 03:39 PM
Source:washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062501914.html?hpid=moreheadlines)
Just hours before President Obama hosts lawmakers for a discussion on immigration at the White House, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel conceded that Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill do not have the votes to pass a comprehensive reform bill.
"If the votes were there, you wouldn't need to have the meeting. You could go to a roll call," Emanuel told reporters during an hour-long breakfast.
About 20 senators and House members are due to arrive at the White House at 2 p.m. for the discussion in the State Dining Room. Aides to the president said the meeting was intended to "launch a policy conversation by having an honest discussion about the issues and identifying areas of agreement and areas where we still have work to do."
The president will announce administrative actions that the White House has already taken to chip away at the issues, including a modernization of computers that allow people to quickly see their immigration status. Officials said the White House hopes to begin the more controversial debate over a comprehensive approach to address illegal immigration later this year.
But Emanuel offered reporters a more realistic assessment, saying that while it is "not impossible" to get immigration reform done this year, it is more likely to be pushed off.
"It's not impossible to do it this year," he said. "Could you get it in this year? Yes. I think the more important thing is to get it started this year."
Responding to a question about the political implications for Democrats of delay, Emanuel said, "It's better that it happens politically. It's also better that we continue to focus on improving the economy."
Just hours before President Obama hosts lawmakers for a discussion on immigration at the White House, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel conceded that Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill do not have the votes to pass a comprehensive reform bill.
"If the votes were there, you wouldn't need to have the meeting. You could go to a roll call," Emanuel told reporters during an hour-long breakfast.
About 20 senators and House members are due to arrive at the White House at 2 p.m. for the discussion in the State Dining Room. Aides to the president said the meeting was intended to "launch a policy conversation by having an honest discussion about the issues and identifying areas of agreement and areas where we still have work to do."
The president will announce administrative actions that the White House has already taken to chip away at the issues, including a modernization of computers that allow people to quickly see their immigration status. Officials said the White House hopes to begin the more controversial debate over a comprehensive approach to address illegal immigration later this year.
But Emanuel offered reporters a more realistic assessment, saying that while it is "not impossible" to get immigration reform done this year, it is more likely to be pushed off.
"It's not impossible to do it this year," he said. "Could you get it in this year? Yes. I think the more important thing is to get it started this year."
Responding to a question about the political implications for Democrats of delay, Emanuel said, "It's better that it happens politically. It's also better that we continue to focus on improving the economy."
jgh_res
06-26 03:23 PM
Dude, You are looking at not getting a RFE based on the pics. Not that picture people or JCPenny takes great pics and make u look like Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise.
:D :p
I got 2 RFE's for pictures only. Those are the only 2 RFE's till date for me.
I had real bad experience with digital pics. But there are many people who didnt have any issues. So it is all your luck.
If you have RFE, it sets u back by 2 months for the approval.
Just my 2 cents.....
My experience with Picture People was ok - fair, I guess those are fine pictures as per USCIS specifications, but nothing out of the ordinary. 14.99 for a set of 4 pictures. Set me back about $80 for 3 sets of 8 pictures.
But my own pictures came out better and are as per specifications. The question is whether to take a chance in case i missed anything or to go with Ok-Fair pictures from Picture People. decisions.. decisions... damn.. retrogression
:D :p
I got 2 RFE's for pictures only. Those are the only 2 RFE's till date for me.
I had real bad experience with digital pics. But there are many people who didnt have any issues. So it is all your luck.
If you have RFE, it sets u back by 2 months for the approval.
Just my 2 cents.....
My experience with Picture People was ok - fair, I guess those are fine pictures as per USCIS specifications, but nothing out of the ordinary. 14.99 for a set of 4 pictures. Set me back about $80 for 3 sets of 8 pictures.
But my own pictures came out better and are as per specifications. The question is whether to take a chance in case i missed anything or to go with Ok-Fair pictures from Picture People. decisions.. decisions... damn.. retrogression
2011 Wallpaper of aladdin800
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
more...
.jpg "Cartoon Wallpapers, Latest")
eb3retro
10-19 04:40 PM
onemore came, check your PM..
what isa fax number to expedite the process for NSC, it will great if you can share the format of expedite letter.
what isa fax number to expedite the process for NSC, it will great if you can share the format of expedite letter.
kiran_k02
08-05 09:16 PM
My Status
NC pending since Sep 30, 2007 (Should be able to approve my case on 180 day rule).
I140 AD: Jun, 30-2007
I485 ND: Sep 21, 2007 --AD ??
PD: Sep-2004.
NC pending since Sep 30, 2007 (Should be able to approve my case on 180 day rule).
I140 AD: Jun, 30-2007
I485 ND: Sep 21, 2007 --AD ??
PD: Sep-2004.
more...
sumanitha
01-12 02:59 PM
In Dallas (Las Collinas), if you dont have medical insurance, you can have an arrangement with the Doctor and Hospital.
Like one of my friend paid 3K for everything for Delivery + 5K I think for the hospitals. Ofcourse this is based on the delivery is not complicated / C-section couple of years ago.
Hope this helps.
IV friends,
Sub: Immigrant requiring info on Maternity insurance.
I need information about maternity insurance** in Texas (in particular Dallas). Your help and advice is highly appreciated.
What are your inputs on Maternity Advantage, I got this information from Pregnancy Insurance.org
Also please provide me info, if any, on hospitals which provides maternity insurance.
Any thoughs, suggestions, guidance, & information would be considered helpful is highly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks,
Shamu
** for pregnant with individual health insurance which does not cover maternity.
Like one of my friend paid 3K for everything for Delivery + 5K I think for the hospitals. Ofcourse this is based on the delivery is not complicated / C-section couple of years ago.
Hope this helps.
IV friends,
Sub: Immigrant requiring info on Maternity insurance.
I need information about maternity insurance** in Texas (in particular Dallas). Your help and advice is highly appreciated.
What are your inputs on Maternity Advantage, I got this information from Pregnancy Insurance.org
Also please provide me info, if any, on hospitals which provides maternity insurance.
Any thoughs, suggestions, guidance, & information would be considered helpful is highly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks,
Shamu
** for pregnant with individual health insurance which does not cover maternity.
2010 free disney cartoon wallpaper
pointlesswait
07-22 05:23 PM
to port..the pD..u need to send in the earlier approved 140 with the new 140 that you file..
i have read of instances when the PD was successful and few instances when it was not...
so i am not sure..what the criteria is..
but if you are in the same industry..PD porting should not be an issue..
....
i have a feeling sooner or later PD porting may be banned by USCIS..;-)
I am exploring the possibility of making the Inter-filing. I have been speaking to some well known, street-smart attornies. One mentioned that the "Priority Date" is decided only upon approval of I-140. He also wrote that for keeping the earlier priority date, the 2nd I-140 application (new) should be filed along with copy of the approval of the first I-140.
In your case, it appears that you did not send the approval copy of the first I-140 along with 2nd I-140 application.
Probably, you can send the approval of EB-2 I-140 with earlier PD, along with I-485 receipt copy to the Service Center and ask them to allot the earlier PD. Please take the assistance of attorney for doing this.
i have read of instances when the PD was successful and few instances when it was not...
so i am not sure..what the criteria is..
but if you are in the same industry..PD porting should not be an issue..
....
i have a feeling sooner or later PD porting may be banned by USCIS..;-)
I am exploring the possibility of making the Inter-filing. I have been speaking to some well known, street-smart attornies. One mentioned that the "Priority Date" is decided only upon approval of I-140. He also wrote that for keeping the earlier priority date, the 2nd I-140 application (new) should be filed along with copy of the approval of the first I-140.
In your case, it appears that you did not send the approval copy of the first I-140 along with 2nd I-140 application.
Probably, you can send the approval of EB-2 I-140 with earlier PD, along with I-485 receipt copy to the Service Center and ask them to allot the earlier PD. Please take the assistance of attorney for doing this.
more...
Legal
07-25 02:13 PM
[QUOTE=alterego;267244]I hate to say it but this is starting to sound very much like an Alcoholics anonymous support group session. LOL.QUOTE]
The titles of some of these threads have entertainment value:).
Like the one we had recently on "lovebirds separated by the cruelty of USCIS".
The titles of some of these threads have entertainment value:).
Like the one we had recently on "lovebirds separated by the cruelty of USCIS".
hair Disney Cartoon Mickey Mouse
tonyHK12
04-29 03:00 PM
If the immigration processes will get affected because India excluded Boing and Lockheed. .
:D
Actually the SU-30MKI beat both the F-15 and Eurofighter in training with the US and RAF, and is developed jointly by HAL.
Eurofighter has also invited India to partner in its development
:D
Actually the SU-30MKI beat both the F-15 and Eurofighter in training with the US and RAF, and is developed jointly by HAL.
Eurofighter has also invited India to partner in its development
more...
gcbikari
06-02 02:18 PM
Done. Thanks.
hot Cartoon Wallpapers, Latest
sameer2730
11-21 09:12 AM
And if it plays by money may be have an auction for GC ... highest bidder gets it first ;)
There is a seperate quota for that as well. 1 million invested and you will get a GC.
There is a seperate quota for that as well. 1 million invested and you will get a GC.
more...
house Cartoon Bolt Disney#39;s iPhone 4
jonty_11
05-22 03:20 PM
more i want more of these options.....as logiclife said - THIS IS NOT A JOKE ....
Let explore any and all options here to become illegal and qualify for a Z VISA
Let explore any and all options here to become illegal and qualify for a Z VISA
tattoo disney-Princess-Barbie-with-
yash04
08-01 12:09 PM
mine reached at 10-23 am -2 nd july,by some armstrong guy..no receipt yet,no check cashed
I just checked - mine was L.Armstrong too....
I just checked - mine was L.Armstrong too....
more...
pictures Tigger Cartoon Disney
willwin
06-24 04:32 PM
there is only one action item right now and it is on the forum.
the update and action needed prior to this was handled by state chapters, however everyone is now up to date with what needs to be done.
state chapters are voluntary but very effective in initiating grassroots approaches to our problems, they have also proved very effective with focussed actions recently. a state chapter is simply a local community that networks and offers support. so it really has many other advantages than just a question of updates.
anyway there is no fresh update currently.
I learned that the full committee meeting was scheduled for June 23rd (yesterday). Was it dropped or rescheduled?? Can you give that piece of information?
the update and action needed prior to this was handled by state chapters, however everyone is now up to date with what needs to be done.
state chapters are voluntary but very effective in initiating grassroots approaches to our problems, they have also proved very effective with focussed actions recently. a state chapter is simply a local community that networks and offers support. so it really has many other advantages than just a question of updates.
anyway there is no fresh update currently.
I learned that the full committee meeting was scheduled for June 23rd (yesterday). Was it dropped or rescheduled?? Can you give that piece of information?
dresses Free Disney Cartoon Wallpaper.
lc4gc
04-03 08:32 AM
thank you IV, solute to all of you!!!
more...
makeup Cartoon iPhone wallpaper
TomPlate
07-19 03:32 PM
Tell Embassy that you need to file I485, so they will an earlier appointment.
girlfriend cartoon_02 disney Winnie the
jahnavi
06-20 12:15 PM
Hi,
I just received e-mail notice saying that my case is approved.Seems like they started approving ..
PD:04/2003
I485 & I-140 RD:11/2003
Thanks
I just received e-mail notice saying that my case is approved.Seems like they started approving ..
PD:04/2003
I485 & I-140 RD:11/2003
Thanks
hairstyles hair disney cartoon characters
Sheila Danzig
08-18 03:50 PM
Two things
1. Responding to 8-month old post == free ad
2. Is your posting evaluation or legal advice?
Have a good day!
.
Sorry - for some reason the post showed up as new on my PC and I did not notice the date. This is evaluation advice and certainly not an ad. It is important that everyone understand what they need as many attorneys make mistakes. It was free advice. That is my only reason to be here. The vast majority of my business comes from attorneys and firms. If you can tell me how I can help and not have you think it is an ad each time, then I will do so. I see so many bad situations that could have been avoided if everyone were just a bit more informed. That is all I seek to do here.
1. Responding to 8-month old post == free ad
2. Is your posting evaluation or legal advice?
Have a good day!
.
Sorry - for some reason the post showed up as new on my PC and I did not notice the date. This is evaluation advice and certainly not an ad. It is important that everyone understand what they need as many attorneys make mistakes. It was free advice. That is my only reason to be here. The vast majority of my business comes from attorneys and firms. If you can tell me how I can help and not have you think it is an ad each time, then I will do so. I see so many bad situations that could have been avoided if everyone were just a bit more informed. That is all I seek to do here.
qplearn
12-12 01:02 PM
im waiting for the groans and moans
aren't you one of those who should be groaning too? Or are you one of those who already have the GC and don't need to groan?
There is nothing to be shocked at if a large number of people groan at this. Can't believe your insensitivity. :(
aren't you one of those who should be groaning too? Or are you one of those who already have the GC and don't need to groan?
There is nothing to be shocked at if a large number of people groan at this. Can't believe your insensitivity. :(
gianik
05-25 05:01 PM
Thanks for informative posts. and Thanks specifically for addressing the wages question.
Another Quebec/Ontirio question.
Apart from the French language and referendum threat, are there any other downsides for Montreal? I guess the reason I seem to be fixated is that I think if I am going to make this change I might as well change the life setting to somewhat more European (in terms of architecture and the environment overall) as I am getting tired of American setting some times. So Montreal sounds more European in that sense. I do however, have a wife and kids and not sure if that makes a difference in the choice of destination as oppose to being a single migrant. Any differences in terms of education quality or family friendly policies between Ontario and Quebec?
Thank you
Another Quebec/Ontirio question.
Apart from the French language and referendum threat, are there any other downsides for Montreal? I guess the reason I seem to be fixated is that I think if I am going to make this change I might as well change the life setting to somewhat more European (in terms of architecture and the environment overall) as I am getting tired of American setting some times. So Montreal sounds more European in that sense. I do however, have a wife and kids and not sure if that makes a difference in the choice of destination as oppose to being a single migrant. Any differences in terms of education quality or family friendly policies between Ontario and Quebec?
Thank you