for_gc
07-14 03:03 PM
Just Contributed $5 using BofA bill pay.
Guys,
Please stick to $5. The idea is to shake out members who till date have made no contributions into making contributions.
If we start contributing different amounts on this thread then this may dilute the impact of the idea.
Guys,
Please stick to $5. The idea is to shake out members who till date have made no contributions into making contributions.
If we start contributing different amounts on this thread then this may dilute the impact of the idea.
wallpaper Nike Blaze high top shoes
go_guy123
02-24 01:20 PM
Dont assume that people who gone back to India and working a manager are living happily without any issues.
One of my friends whome I used to work in 2005 was promoted to manager in 2007. Now he is in a dilemma whether to continue to go up the ladder or come back doing technical stuff. Salary wise he is not getting that much and he doesnt know how the company will do infuture. It all depends on US economy. If you are looking for 18L above salary, then it is very very tough to get a job in india.
Very coreect uma...you can forget career growth in India without a MBA degree.
One of my friends whome I used to work in 2005 was promoted to manager in 2007. Now he is in a dilemma whether to continue to go up the ladder or come back doing technical stuff. Salary wise he is not getting that much and he doesnt know how the company will do infuture. It all depends on US economy. If you are looking for 18L above salary, then it is very very tough to get a job in india.
Very coreect uma...you can forget career growth in India without a MBA degree.
Leo07
11-09 01:55 PM
Thanks to the glorious service of the Atlanta center :mad: I missed the I-485 bus by 7 days( Labor cleared on Aug end ). Many people with later PD's got cleared from the Chicago PERM center . Now I just watch as all members get their EAD's and AP's while I wait with nothing but hope and watch legislation after legislation fail in the senate and house , and the letters flying all over the place .
Just so that you feel better...I missed by about the same time.
Keep your hopes alive!
Just so that you feel better...I missed by about the same time.
Keep your hopes alive!
2011 nike high tops white.
john2255
07-21 07:42 AM
What you should do.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
more...
sam_hoosier
08-26 01:47 PM
I know this is not the Forum to discuss this matter.
But I hope this should answer some questions
1. Home Loans if the Loan is taken from a US Bank/Mortgage lender
then it is Tax deductible because they send out a 1040 at the end of Tax year.
2. But if the Home Loan is taken from a a NON-US Bank, then it is not Tax deductible in the US. As they do not send out a 1040.
I am not sure thats correct.
Per IRS regulation Section 163 (C), as well as Publication 936, interest paid on primary and secondary residences up to an aggregate one million dollars in loan amount is tax deductible. The IRS regulation does not specify that the home must be located in the United States, and thus it seems logical that interest paid on a home loan on property in India is in fact deductible
(please consult your tax advisor for applicability to your specific tax situation).
But I hope this should answer some questions
1. Home Loans if the Loan is taken from a US Bank/Mortgage lender
then it is Tax deductible because they send out a 1040 at the end of Tax year.
2. But if the Home Loan is taken from a a NON-US Bank, then it is not Tax deductible in the US. As they do not send out a 1040.
I am not sure thats correct.
Per IRS regulation Section 163 (C), as well as Publication 936, interest paid on primary and secondary residences up to an aggregate one million dollars in loan amount is tax deductible. The IRS regulation does not specify that the home must be located in the United States, and thus it seems logical that interest paid on a home loan on property in India is in fact deductible
(please consult your tax advisor for applicability to your specific tax situation).
gcisadawg
09-15 03:25 PM
There are people that used
1> Labor substitution
2> Worked in LC backlogged state like CA, NY, TX etc but filed in fast moving states like Maine, NH etc..
3> Applied in EB2 when their job requirements wasn't really EB2.
4> Made up five years of experience so as to apply for EB2.
5> Packaged NIIT diploma et al as masters..
Then there are others Who applied in EB2 because they had a masters or genuine experience AND their job demanded EB2. Also people, irrespective of their categories, toiled at BECs.
I would be a bit skeptical about folks that filed EB2 thru a body-shopper or a consulting company. It doesnt mean that EB3s are holier-than-thou and hasnt resorted to fraud.
My point is, the whole system is biased against people who follow the rules.
Unless you play the system ( using the points mentioned above), you have to wait and wait and wait..
At this point, its hard to find out who belonged to the former category and who belonged to the later. Do you think people would come forward and accept?
-Peace
G
1> Labor substitution
2> Worked in LC backlogged state like CA, NY, TX etc but filed in fast moving states like Maine, NH etc..
3> Applied in EB2 when their job requirements wasn't really EB2.
4> Made up five years of experience so as to apply for EB2.
5> Packaged NIIT diploma et al as masters..
Then there are others Who applied in EB2 because they had a masters or genuine experience AND their job demanded EB2. Also people, irrespective of their categories, toiled at BECs.
I would be a bit skeptical about folks that filed EB2 thru a body-shopper or a consulting company. It doesnt mean that EB3s are holier-than-thou and hasnt resorted to fraud.
My point is, the whole system is biased against people who follow the rules.
Unless you play the system ( using the points mentioned above), you have to wait and wait and wait..
At this point, its hard to find out who belonged to the former category and who belonged to the later. Do you think people would come forward and accept?
-Peace
G
more...
satyasaich
03-15 08:41 AM
Let's try after few more minutes
Did anyone else get through? I was trying www.capitolhearings.org Dirksen226!
Did anyone else get through? I was trying www.capitolhearings.org Dirksen226!
2010 Women Nike Court Force High
eastindia
09-27 12:52 PM
I am waiting for 14 yrs.
Arrival 1996 Jan
F1 1996
EB3
GC filed 2003 Aug.
HAVE MS in US. But employer filed in EB3. STUCK
STILL WAITING FOR GREEN.
You are only waiting for 7 years. Wait time is calculated from Priority date not the date you enter the country.
Arrival 1996 Jan
F1 1996
EB3
GC filed 2003 Aug.
HAVE MS in US. But employer filed in EB3. STUCK
STILL WAITING FOR GREEN.
You are only waiting for 7 years. Wait time is calculated from Priority date not the date you enter the country.
more...
rsamudrala
07-13 01:35 PM
Simi Valley
hair These are the Nike RT1 high
gcisadawg
02-09 10:05 AM
This, effectively, means that if the girl stops earning for any reason such as pregnancy or is unable to earn, she immediately forfeits the right to send money to her parents. This is the most illogical statement I have ever heard.
And it also means that for any reason, if a girl remains a house wife, she has no right to send any money to the parents like you, as the earning member, do.
This is the very strange attitude that may get a marriage in trouble.
Did I even say husband shouldn't send money to his parents from his earnings?
But shouldn't that be also need-based? How come it is the right of the husband to send any amount of money he wants to his parents without the wife complaining and how come it becomes a case of "taking for granted" when a non-earning wife wants to send money to her folks in need? This is a hypothetical situation and nothing to do with OP's case.
And then how is it we, husbands, are the first ones to start complaining when our wives don't get a share of our in-laws property following their demise?
And tell me then, following a divorce why are there laws which require you to split your net worth evenly with your non-working ex-wife? Is that acceptable to you then or you want to put forth an argument that "hey, we don't have a child and she is no longer my wife and so I am not obligated to give her a dime"
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
And it also means that for any reason, if a girl remains a house wife, she has no right to send any money to the parents like you, as the earning member, do.
This is the very strange attitude that may get a marriage in trouble.
Did I even say husband shouldn't send money to his parents from his earnings?
But shouldn't that be also need-based? How come it is the right of the husband to send any amount of money he wants to his parents without the wife complaining and how come it becomes a case of "taking for granted" when a non-earning wife wants to send money to her folks in need? This is a hypothetical situation and nothing to do with OP's case.
And then how is it we, husbands, are the first ones to start complaining when our wives don't get a share of our in-laws property following their demise?
And tell me then, following a divorce why are there laws which require you to split your net worth evenly with your non-working ex-wife? Is that acceptable to you then or you want to put forth an argument that "hey, we don't have a child and she is no longer my wife and so I am not obligated to give her a dime"
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
more...
needhelp!
09-11 11:27 AM
coopheal,
Thank you for you generosity!
Thank you for you generosity!
hot 2010 Nike Blaze high top shoes
spbpsg
05-02 10:05 AM
Today I see $1200/- deposited by IRS in my checking account. It is stimulas package for me and my spouse (both with SSN) but no package for my son who still has TIN.
more...
house nike high tops gold dunk nike
minimalist
08-18 02:20 PM
Please continue to post your comments on the letter - the sooner we can all agree upon the content, the sooner we can start sending these out.
Also, is there a possibility of having a common meeting (all retrogressed EB3 candidates) with Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren expressing our situation - just a thought.
Can't we request this info under Freedom of Information Act?
Also, is there a possibility of having a common meeting (all retrogressed EB3 candidates) with Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren expressing our situation - just a thought.
Can't we request this info under Freedom of Information Act?
tattoo Nike Shoes High Tops For Boys.
gc_chahiye
07-23 04:02 PM
this is a 2004 EB3 approval! This is the first one I am seeing from 2004. So looks like they have really cleaned the pipes here, and things should be better going forward.
The nicest thing of this whole fiasco is that they seem to have ignored country-limits and approved as many as possible. Last year they did only 9.8K EB Indians (teh final count was 17k, but that was due to ScheduleA). THis year (2007) if they have gotten 20-30K India applications out, the dates should move better in the future.
Eagerly awaiting 2 USCIS stats:
1. per-country per-category EB approvals in 2007
2. number of 485 applications received by August 17th
The nicest thing of this whole fiasco is that they seem to have ignored country-limits and approved as many as possible. Last year they did only 9.8K EB Indians (teh final count was 17k, but that was due to ScheduleA). THis year (2007) if they have gotten 20-30K India applications out, the dates should move better in the future.
Eagerly awaiting 2 USCIS stats:
1. per-country per-category EB approvals in 2007
2. number of 485 applications received by August 17th
more...
pictures Nike Blaze high top shoes
vayumahesh
10-22 12:30 PM
spicy_guy,
Please read my previous message regarding date filed etc.,
Please read my previous message regarding date filed etc.,
dresses nike high tops white and
wellwishergc
07-06 10:47 AM
Cool down, nixstor! you made your point! Take a deep breath, relax and post with a rational thought process. You are not helping by continuing to post negatively.
Personally, I think we can utilize this issue for the following:
1) Urging our congressmen/senators to pass some short-term benefits like recapture of visas (Obudsman report indicates that around 180,000 visas were not used in the past years). This is a golden opprountinity for us to urge congressmen/senators to pass a bill to release those unused numbers for getting immediate relief.
2) FBI name-check process needs to be made faster; so additional funding could help. (Obama Bill)
If we leverage this issue on the above and focus all the efforts on the above two points, we will be better off. I hope the core group is already working towards the above two objectives.
Yeah, tell me the same thing when all of us will wait for 6 or 7 years if they dont fix the system and continue to do security check on us. We know that we are NOT bad people. Its difficult to prove that in existing conditions. People are paranoid about every thing right now.
Personally, I think we can utilize this issue for the following:
1) Urging our congressmen/senators to pass some short-term benefits like recapture of visas (Obudsman report indicates that around 180,000 visas were not used in the past years). This is a golden opprountinity for us to urge congressmen/senators to pass a bill to release those unused numbers for getting immediate relief.
2) FBI name-check process needs to be made faster; so additional funding could help. (Obama Bill)
If we leverage this issue on the above and focus all the efforts on the above two points, we will be better off. I hope the core group is already working towards the above two objectives.
Yeah, tell me the same thing when all of us will wait for 6 or 7 years if they dont fix the system and continue to do security check on us. We know that we are NOT bad people. Its difficult to prove that in existing conditions. People are paranoid about every thing right now.
more...
makeup Nike snow boot - Nike high top
andy007
07-05 11:08 AM
I will go and meet couple of them today ... From Oakland (CA) to Stockton (CA) my selft and meet them .. will show all the papers .. Please give me the Links what we need to show.. thanks and we will work hard this week & get media attenion.... and also .. if posible we will do rally also ..
girlfriend Nike SB Dunk High Top#39;s.
rex
09-24 12:59 PM
Ok. Now lets say I have EAD cards for me (primary applicant) and my wife. I can now have my wife start a company and have a job position similar to where I work. Now after 180 days, can I work for my wife's company invoking AC21 with my EAD??:D
and so when an RFE comes from USCIS , can this be shown as the similar job offer?
Really speaking, The USCIS only wants a promise of employment when they are adjudicating form 485 saying that I will be given a job after I get my green card:). So can I literally work anywhere for any job using my EAD until green card gets fully approved as long as I have a promise of employment (by my wife's company)? :p
Ofcourse i am risking the chance of being out of status if my 485 gets denied. i just want to make sure it wont get denied because the "similar job" offer is from my relatives (wife's) company.
any thoughts??:confused:
Rex
and so when an RFE comes from USCIS , can this be shown as the similar job offer?
Really speaking, The USCIS only wants a promise of employment when they are adjudicating form 485 saying that I will be given a job after I get my green card:). So can I literally work anywhere for any job using my EAD until green card gets fully approved as long as I have a promise of employment (by my wife's company)? :p
Ofcourse i am risking the chance of being out of status if my 485 gets denied. i just want to make sure it wont get denied because the "similar job" offer is from my relatives (wife's) company.
any thoughts??:confused:
Rex
hairstyles Nike Dunk High Tops White
rustamehind
07-18 07:12 PM
Lets say your PD is/was current in March, April, June and July. You decided not to apply in the previous months and you finally submitted at the end of July. On the other hand i had my PD current on July and i applied. After i applied and before you applied there could be 10k(for example) applications. Now when its time to process application which one they should process yours or mine?. Obviously they will process the one that they got first. They not going to look for the PD and pull out your's from the pile of applications. Its your fault that you have not applied early enough even though your PD was current.
What if out of all 10000 , 9999 don't have priority date current.Do you think they will still not look at the 1 in the pile which has a current PD.They will look at it , Even if it is number 10000 in the list.Actually there will be no pile because 9999 people won't even be in contention.
Why do you think labour substitution was so HOT?Just because by getting an earlier PD , you were going to steam roll everybody who filed before you , just because you got an earlier PD..
What if out of all 10000 , 9999 don't have priority date current.Do you think they will still not look at the 1 in the pile which has a current PD.They will look at it , Even if it is number 10000 in the list.Actually there will be no pile because 9999 people won't even be in contention.
Why do you think labour substitution was so HOT?Just because by getting an earlier PD , you were going to steam roll everybody who filed before you , just because you got an earlier PD..
Vsach
03-13 09:05 PM
:confused:Dear All,
I am still on H1 (not utilized EAD), the visa on my passport expired last year. Planning to visit India next week, should I be getting a visa stamped or use AP?
APPRECIATE INPUTS FROM THE EXPERIENCED/SIMILAR SITUATION. Any USCIS link will also help.
Regards
I am still on H1 (not utilized EAD), the visa on my passport expired last year. Planning to visit India next week, should I be getting a visa stamped or use AP?
APPRECIATE INPUTS FROM THE EXPERIENCED/SIMILAR SITUATION. Any USCIS link will also help.
Regards
chanduv23
11-26 10:29 AM
Thank you, I'll keep everyone posted if anything changes.
I called USCIS customer service to ask for the attorney name on file and they said that they didn't have access to that information and I would have to get an Infopass appointment for that. Given the crap that ChanduV had to deal with (for changing jobs on AC21) during his infopass appointment, it is probably best I just wait to ask that question until my second biometric appointment is due in a few months.
Thanks,
Well - not every officer will deal with you in the same manner. It was my bad luck. I am sure, I might find someone helpful if I go again. So don't get intimidated and discouraged.
Usually at infopass they do not want to answer questions like 'Who is my Attorney on file etc... " The questions they answer are - name check pending, further review etc..... So you may get an answer "If your Attorney has filed for G 28 - then you don't have to worry". But you never know and can always give a try.
I called USCIS customer service to ask for the attorney name on file and they said that they didn't have access to that information and I would have to get an Infopass appointment for that. Given the crap that ChanduV had to deal with (for changing jobs on AC21) during his infopass appointment, it is probably best I just wait to ask that question until my second biometric appointment is due in a few months.
Thanks,
Well - not every officer will deal with you in the same manner. It was my bad luck. I am sure, I might find someone helpful if I go again. So don't get intimidated and discouraged.
Usually at infopass they do not want to answer questions like 'Who is my Attorney on file etc... " The questions they answer are - name check pending, further review etc..... So you may get an answer "If your Attorney has filed for G 28 - then you don't have to worry". But you never know and can always give a try.
No comments:
Post a Comment