senthil1
07-05 01:31 PM
Still some Senators does not understand difference between H1b issue and GC backlog and how can they understand the Administrative issue like this. But Congress women Lofgren will get reply for her letter from DOS and USCIS.
I called the congresswomen and senator from our constituencies. They do not have any idea what I am talking about. I think I made them more confused than ever.
We need to come up with a letter format, which can be printed and send it to them by mail as well as we need to have web fax with a clear message.
I called the congresswomen and senator from our constituencies. They do not have any idea what I am talking about. I think I made them more confused than ever.
We need to come up with a letter format, which can be printed and send it to them by mail as well as we need to have web fax with a clear message.
wallpaper Letterhead Sample 13
pappu
08-15 12:43 PM
more op-eds
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1442
alterego, could you send me your contact email id and name
===
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1442
alterego, could you send me your contact email id and name
===
lonedesi
08-05 11:18 AM
LoneDesi:
What changes are needed when sending a letter from an EB3-I point of view?
The processing dates you have mentioned correspond only to EB2.
Thanks.
Just EB2 to EB3 and mention that processing of I-140's has nothing to do with the category you are in. Only at I-485 stage the category is important to obtain a immigrant visa from DOS. So make appropriate changes and feel free to modify the letter to suit your situation.
What changes are needed when sending a letter from an EB3-I point of view?
The processing dates you have mentioned correspond only to EB2.
Thanks.
Just EB2 to EB3 and mention that processing of I-140's has nothing to do with the category you are in. Only at I-485 stage the category is important to obtain a immigrant visa from DOS. So make appropriate changes and feel free to modify the letter to suit your situation.
2011 own letterhead. SAMPLE
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...
mrdelhiite
06-21 12:50 PM
search "Cohen & Grisby PERM " in youtube :(
-M
-M
dipmay2002
11-05 02:14 PM
If my Wife's employer starts GC for her on EB2, can my case be ported / interfile to her's? She is dependent on my GC application. :eek:
more...
malaGCPahije
10-17 10:07 AM
Everyone who contributed to this have done a great job. Hopefully USCIS takes a note of this and rectifies their process in the future. I will send the letters soon. Thanks to each one of you for the efforts.
2010 Cleaning Company Letterhead
snathan
08-23 02:33 PM
There is a difference, my friend. Porting to EB2 means you have to spend LOTS of $$$ and time and effort to get masters degree.
No matter how you look at it, it is not wise to hack away at any door that's open to all. We should look at expanding our vistas, not shrink it. What if I tell you I am thinking of starting up a co in India, so some day I can make it here using the EB1 route? Why do you want to prevent me from availing this opportunity and making my sacrifices -- just because you feel it will help YOU move forward by ONE INCH?
How about people are using it as a loop hole and smack you down. Just because you have the option, it does not mean the right thing.
No matter how you look at it, it is not wise to hack away at any door that's open to all. We should look at expanding our vistas, not shrink it. What if I tell you I am thinking of starting up a co in India, so some day I can make it here using the EB1 route? Why do you want to prevent me from availing this opportunity and making my sacrifices -- just because you feel it will help YOU move forward by ONE INCH?
How about people are using it as a loop hole and smack you down. Just because you have the option, it does not mean the right thing.
more...
willigetgc?
04-30 01:52 PM
TIER I: LIST OF KEY SENATORS FOR CIR
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
All the numbers listed by Pappu are correct, and no changes need to be made.
I called both sets of Senators, and gave our stand on this immigration reform issue to each Sen. office, and here is the feedback from them:
Sen Brown: Will review the bill and will let his position known in a weeks time.
Sen Gregg: He has no position currently
Sen Lugar: Since the bill has no language yet, he would like to wait before he gives an opinion. He has previously supported immigration reform. He is continuing to meet with Sen. Schumer
Sen. Enzi: Does not support amnesty and he will let us know what his position on high skilled immigrant provisions in a week
Sen. Graham: Left message
Sen. Ensign: Has no comments, asked for NV address
Sen. Hatch: Staff read the press release regarding yesterday's framework, which states that this is partisan politics, and border enforcement has to be done first. Told him our position and asked for support
Sen. Cornyn: Could not leave message as there was high volume. will call back again. However, the message said that local offices need to be contacted.
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Sen. McConnell: He just wanted our comments and the sen himself did not have any comment regarding immigration.
Sen. Klobucher: Has not fully reviewed what was in the frame work, took our opinion on the matter, and the staff asked for the zipcode irrespective of where you were from.
Sen. McCaskill: Their office has no opinion on the bill. She is in general support of legal immigrants. However, she wanted to see how things progress in the senate.
Sen. Tester: He opposes amnesty. took our opinion but did not want to take a stand on high skilled immigrants issue
Sen. Webb: left a message
Sen. Whitehouse: has not reviewed the framework. took my opinion.
Called Sens. Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein, Menendez and Cardin's offices and thanked them for their support and leadership.
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts)
(202) 224-4543
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire)
(202) 224-3324
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana)
(202) 224-4814
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming)
(202) 224-3424
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina)
(202) 224-5972
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada)
(202) 224-6244
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah)
(202) 224-5251
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas)
(202) 224-2934
Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona)
(202) 224-4521
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky)
(202) 224-2541
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)
(202) 224-3244
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri)
(202) 224-6154
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana)
(202) 224-2644
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia)
(202) 224-4024
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island)
(202) 224-2921
TIER II: LIST OF KEY SENATORS SPONSORING OR CO-SPONSORING CIR BILL
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada)
(202) 224-3542
Senator Dick Durbin (Illinois)
(202) 224-2152
Senator Chuck Schumer (New York)
(202) 224-6542
Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
(202) 224-4242
Senator Dianne Feinstein (California)
(202) 224-3841
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)
(202) 224-4744
Sen. Ben Cardin (Maryland)
(202) 224-4524
All the numbers listed by Pappu are correct, and no changes need to be made.
I called both sets of Senators, and gave our stand on this immigration reform issue to each Sen. office, and here is the feedback from them:
Sen Brown: Will review the bill and will let his position known in a weeks time.
Sen Gregg: He has no position currently
Sen Lugar: Since the bill has no language yet, he would like to wait before he gives an opinion. He has previously supported immigration reform. He is continuing to meet with Sen. Schumer
Sen. Enzi: Does not support amnesty and he will let us know what his position on high skilled immigrant provisions in a week
Sen. Graham: Left message
Sen. Ensign: Has no comments, asked for NV address
Sen. Hatch: Staff read the press release regarding yesterday's framework, which states that this is partisan politics, and border enforcement has to be done first. Told him our position and asked for support
Sen. Cornyn: Could not leave message as there was high volume. will call back again. However, the message said that local offices need to be contacted.
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Sen. McConnell: He just wanted our comments and the sen himself did not have any comment regarding immigration.
Sen. Klobucher: Has not fully reviewed what was in the frame work, took our opinion on the matter, and the staff asked for the zipcode irrespective of where you were from.
Sen. McCaskill: Their office has no opinion on the bill. She is in general support of legal immigrants. However, she wanted to see how things progress in the senate.
Sen. Tester: He opposes amnesty. took our opinion but did not want to take a stand on high skilled immigrants issue
Sen. Webb: left a message
Sen. Whitehouse: has not reviewed the framework. took my opinion.
Called Sens. Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein, Menendez and Cardin's offices and thanked them for their support and leadership.
hair Letterhead layout sample
GCWhru
03-18 08:57 AM
Here is the link to the page where you can calculate your stimulus amount.
apparently, No SSN (even for one) No Stimulus package...
linkhttp://www.irs.gov/app/espc/
apparently, No SSN (even for one) No Stimulus package...
linkhttp://www.irs.gov/app/espc/
more...
santb1975
06-02 09:51 PM
We need 2194$ to reach 20K
hot Company Letterhead Printing
kumarc123
09-10 04:10 PM
I agree 100% too. Just feel so helpless.
After reading all your comments, I reached to a conclusion
We all are being fooled and frusturated by USCIS.
Now the question is, what are we going to do about it, keep complaining and whinning about it, or do something constructive.
Well I believe when we are all so knowledgabel about USCIS efficiency, what do we do next?
Well lets give out a big shout to something big, get some media attention and put pressure on USCIS. Unless we still choose to visit IV to express our frusturations and then logg of this webiste and continue to our daily cores.
Lets just wake up for one more time, and do something big, phone calls, faxes does not give us a public exposure, what we need now is public exposure, I have have been saying this for a while but no one seems to give an important consideration. Right now media attantion is in DC, and we can use that in our own advantage.
Thanks
After reading all your comments, I reached to a conclusion
We all are being fooled and frusturated by USCIS.
Now the question is, what are we going to do about it, keep complaining and whinning about it, or do something constructive.
Well I believe when we are all so knowledgabel about USCIS efficiency, what do we do next?
Well lets give out a big shout to something big, get some media attention and put pressure on USCIS. Unless we still choose to visit IV to express our frusturations and then logg of this webiste and continue to our daily cores.
Lets just wake up for one more time, and do something big, phone calls, faxes does not give us a public exposure, what we need now is public exposure, I have have been saying this for a while but no one seems to give an important consideration. Right now media attantion is in DC, and we can use that in our own advantage.
Thanks
more...
house General Business Letterhead
immigrant-in-law
01-10 01:19 PM
NSC
congrats! can you please post which service center approved it? Thanks.
congrats! can you please post which service center approved it? Thanks.
tattoo Brand your company by
dvrao4
09-15 06:44 PM
hi! i just contributed $100.00 via paypal transaction id is : 1GE522823P5726434
more...
pictures Business Identity Portfolio
conchshell
09-30 11:26 PM
Guys don't you think that once again flooding USCIS with flowers/shame-card as a protest is a good idea ??
dresses contemporary letterhead
JunRN
08-13 09:13 PM
I think everything will normalize in October. From RN, EAD may take three to four months.
more...
makeup Letterhead design amp; printing
WeldonSprings
05-02 03:27 PM
That comment was made for Family Visas, since everyone who applies on Family Visa, might not eventually get it. I read here that King said that everyon on EAD and AP is getting a free ride even thought here green card might get rejected. What does he mean by that. I tahught every process goes thorugha security check. such as I 140, H1b, AP and even EAD.
girlfriend Logomark and Letterhead
rajarao
09-10 07:28 AM
Data available in Mumbai consulate website
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 15 April 2002 15 April 2002
FX 1 May 2001 1 May 2001
F2A 1 January 2004 1 January 2004
F2B 15 December 1999 15 December 1999
F3 22 June 2000 22 June 2000
F4 22 May 1997 22 October 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 April 2003 Current
E3 1 July 2001 1 January 2005
EW 1 Janurary 2003 1 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Great Job TSC/NSC and DOS.
One day 2006 applications are approved and next month you go into stone ages. What a wonderful system....
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 15 April 2002 15 April 2002
FX 1 May 2001 1 May 2001
F2A 1 January 2004 1 January 2004
F2B 15 December 1999 15 December 1999
F3 22 June 2000 22 June 2000
F4 22 May 1997 22 October 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 April 2003 Current
E3 1 July 2001 1 January 2005
EW 1 Janurary 2003 1 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Great Job TSC/NSC and DOS.
One day 2006 applications are approved and next month you go into stone ages. What a wonderful system....
hairstyles Free Sample Business Card
yabadaba
07-11 12:04 PM
I am guessing that this is a move to allocate more numbers to China-EB2 applicants since both India/China EB2 may move together.They want to get as much diversity as possible.
I agree with nixtor that EB2 India will retrogress soon before oct-08.
eb2 china was at jan2006 for a while. this will be the first time that they will be moving beyond jan 2006.
I agree with nixtor that EB2 India will retrogress soon before oct-08.
eb2 china was at jan2006 for a while. this will be the first time that they will be moving beyond jan 2006.
snathan
02-13 10:14 PM
Why are you not posting other messages from me, kiddo. MS + 1 yr. LOL. What an experienced and talented guy :)
I dont need your certificate junk...IV could not achive anything because of free loaders like you. what a piece of junk.
Every one in this forum knows your talent. Are you working in form
I dont need your certificate junk...IV could not achive anything because of free loaders like you. what a piece of junk.
Every one in this forum knows your talent. Are you working in form
andycool
04-12 11:59 AM
How long it takes to get 140 approved in premium?
15 days if no REF ...
If they cant approve i think they will pay you back the 1200 $:rolleyes:
15 days if no REF ...
If they cant approve i think they will pay you back the 1200 $:rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment