soni7007
08-07 01:24 PM
LOL...
This reminds me:
Car = $30,000
iPhone = $200
House = $450,000
Icecream = $2.50
TV = $500
There are some things money CAN buy, For everything else, there's GREEN CARD
(i don't know what everything else is though...LOL)
To add a few more conditions to the aforesaid situation...
This is 2008.. Both JE and MBA are thinking that they will get their GC in 2009...
Meanwhile they start arguing.. and many like them join their verbal-struggle..
Because of this, IV community is divided.. Earlier only 200 people used to respond to action items .. now because of the rift only 100 do... this weakens the momentum that the campaign had..
Meanwhile, NumbersUSA et all increased their efforts..
Anti-immigration forces are united and under their pressure all the EB relief bills fail...
Election is close USCIS shifts the focus to FB visas..
EB backlog, retrogression goes up..
JE and MBA still fighting their verbal fight... in same line.. still fighting with words... with few more years added to their wait-time.
This reminds me:
Car = $30,000
iPhone = $200
House = $450,000
Icecream = $2.50
TV = $500
There are some things money CAN buy, For everything else, there's GREEN CARD
(i don't know what everything else is though...LOL)
To add a few more conditions to the aforesaid situation...
This is 2008.. Both JE and MBA are thinking that they will get their GC in 2009...
Meanwhile they start arguing.. and many like them join their verbal-struggle..
Because of this, IV community is divided.. Earlier only 200 people used to respond to action items .. now because of the rift only 100 do... this weakens the momentum that the campaign had..
Meanwhile, NumbersUSA et all increased their efforts..
Anti-immigration forces are united and under their pressure all the EB relief bills fail...
Election is close USCIS shifts the focus to FB visas..
EB backlog, retrogression goes up..
JE and MBA still fighting their verbal fight... in same line.. still fighting with words... with few more years added to their wait-time.
wallpaper Image of Tiger Woods: My Swing
andy007
07-11 01:44 PM
I know it is hard to believe, but according to the tracking number below, Mr. Gonzalez signed for delivery of my flowers today.
See below:(click on view package progress)
http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/processInputRequest?HTMLVersion=5.0&sort_by=status&tracknums_displayed=5&TypeOfInquiryNumber=T&loc=en_US&AgreeToTermsAndConditions=yes&InquiryNumber1=1ZE19A16P204195432
G
No Process for you !!! Direct Green Card !!
Yahoooooooooooooooooooooooooo !!
See below:(click on view package progress)
http://wwwapps.ups.com/WebTracking/processInputRequest?HTMLVersion=5.0&sort_by=status&tracknums_displayed=5&TypeOfInquiryNumber=T&loc=en_US&AgreeToTermsAndConditions=yes&InquiryNumber1=1ZE19A16P204195432
G
No Process for you !!! Direct Green Card !!
Yahoooooooooooooooooooooooooo !!
CADude
09-14 01:53 PM
mine put salt in pain :)
no nothing... our attorneys are absolutely useless in addition to this situation.
no nothing... our attorneys are absolutely useless in addition to this situation.
2011 the game a la Tiger Woods.
DallasBlue
09-27 02:18 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_pa_chrono.shtml
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
more...
eb3_nepa
01-08 09:04 AM
Hello eb3_nepa
1) (copy 1)please send a separate letter to the President.
2) (copy 2)Send a copy of that letter to IV. After the letters are sent to the President, IV will have a meeting with senior administration officials. In that meeting we will carry the copies of the letters and deliver to them.
Thanks Pappu. Will definitely send in those letters. Dunno about the handwritten part (The white house may not be able to quite decipher them) but will send in those letters.
1) (copy 1)please send a separate letter to the President.
2) (copy 2)Send a copy of that letter to IV. After the letters are sent to the President, IV will have a meeting with senior administration officials. In that meeting we will carry the copies of the letters and deliver to them.
Thanks Pappu. Will definitely send in those letters. Dunno about the handwritten part (The white house may not be able to quite decipher them) but will send in those letters.
mdy_tvr
05-09 02:18 PM
Guys
I would appreciate if anyone could throw light on this.
thanks
Guys,
My current situation is that my wife and I applied for 485 separately.
my wife's PD is 2007 ( 485 applied in Aug 2007 )
I applied for 485 in Oct 2007, Since my PD is 2003 and is current as of now ( my 140 is pending ), I talked with our companys lawyer on what options do I have with regards to my wife's 485.
My lawyer suggested 2 options.
1. File 485 again for my wife as a spouse derivative. As per lawyer, this is very common and has experienced with these kind of situations.
2. Instead of filing a second 485 for my wife, just write a request letter to move her pending 485 to my 485 as a derivative. If this porting is successful, she cannot move back to her own 485.
I know some of us have gone with option#(1), but since option(2) involves very less paper work, did any of you have used this option so far?
I am confused as to which one to choose. My lawyer spelled diplomatic when asked about which option is better/safer:-)
Thanks
mdy_tvr
I would appreciate if anyone could throw light on this.
thanks
Guys,
My current situation is that my wife and I applied for 485 separately.
my wife's PD is 2007 ( 485 applied in Aug 2007 )
I applied for 485 in Oct 2007, Since my PD is 2003 and is current as of now ( my 140 is pending ), I talked with our companys lawyer on what options do I have with regards to my wife's 485.
My lawyer suggested 2 options.
1. File 485 again for my wife as a spouse derivative. As per lawyer, this is very common and has experienced with these kind of situations.
2. Instead of filing a second 485 for my wife, just write a request letter to move her pending 485 to my 485 as a derivative. If this porting is successful, she cannot move back to her own 485.
I know some of us have gone with option#(1), but since option(2) involves very less paper work, did any of you have used this option so far?
I am confused as to which one to choose. My lawyer spelled diplomatic when asked about which option is better/safer:-)
Thanks
mdy_tvr
more...
reddog
06-16 02:38 PM
Do we need the Birth Certificate for secondary applicants(spouse).
None of the checklist(Employer based I-485) I have been thru say that I need the secondary applicants Birth certificate.
My spouses Birth certificate is in a regional language, and hence the question.
Moved this to the Birth Certificate thread.....
None of the checklist(Employer based I-485) I have been thru say that I need the secondary applicants Birth certificate.
My spouses Birth certificate is in a regional language, and hence the question.
Moved this to the Birth Certificate thread.....
2010 tiger woods swing analysis.
pani_6
09-23 07:26 PM
Is 28.6% india Quota??. out of the 140K
I thought each EB category could get upto 28.6% of 140000 = 40000 visas every fiscal year. So if EB1 uses up 5000 and EB2 takes the remaining 35000 and its annual allotment of 40000, EB3 does not get any spillover.
Thoughts?
I thought each EB category could get upto 28.6% of 140000 = 40000 visas every fiscal year. So if EB1 uses up 5000 and EB2 takes the remaining 35000 and its annual allotment of 40000, EB3 does not get any spillover.
Thoughts?
more...
mrsr
06-21 11:25 PM
In form G325A and 765 there is a question which ask all other name used , what should we write as our name is same as we have written in first and last name ( my maiden name and name after marriage is same )
also if there is no middle name should we leave the space blank or write N/A
in 485 in the Address C/O what should we write
please reply
also if there is no middle name should we leave the space blank or write N/A
in 485 in the Address C/O what should we write
please reply
hair Get The Perfect Golf Swing
mrsr
06-27 04:00 PM
yes enter till 2010 , if u can see on the left of yr 797 the i94 number might be same as yr white card ( provided u have not gone out of country ) .... that will mean that yr white card validity have been increased till 2010
Can somebody answer this....
Can somebody answer this....
more...
sammyb
01-03 10:37 AM
VO doesnt keep your passport if a via not issued at the time of the interview . He gives it back after the interview. Once you receive the email , you have to go the VFS office and then had in the passport.
I guess this is specific to Mumbai only .. for all other post in India, the consulate/embassy keeps the PP ...
Am planning to visit India during Apr-May time and wondering how to take care of the situation ... seems DHS/DOS/DOL/USCIS/Who ever implemented a process without having the proper infrastructure in place ... and again they take us for granted ... with limited number of vacation days in hand if we stuck because of the PIMS, this will be a difficult situation to handle ..
How the Kolkata consulate doing on this aspect ... can anyway share their experience there ...
Happy new year friends ...
I guess this is specific to Mumbai only .. for all other post in India, the consulate/embassy keeps the PP ...
Am planning to visit India during Apr-May time and wondering how to take care of the situation ... seems DHS/DOS/DOL/USCIS/Who ever implemented a process without having the proper infrastructure in place ... and again they take us for granted ... with limited number of vacation days in hand if we stuck because of the PIMS, this will be a difficult situation to handle ..
How the Kolkata consulate doing on this aspect ... can anyway share their experience there ...
Happy new year friends ...
hot your swing to Tiger Woods#39;
pappu
01-09 03:42 PM
banners and posters are here
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§ionid=4&id=13&Itemid=36
Maybe you or others can take a lead in this campaign and have everyone use IV posters and banners..
Hello Pappu,
I feel we should have some banners up in different Indian stores, specially targeting some selfish EAD holders, who already feel they got their green cards irrespective of the current visa bulletin
1. Setting up banners will not only attract new members, but will make these EAD holders think from a rational perspective.
2.Also IV administration should send out a personal email to all it members, informing them about the importance of coming together, this way the EAD members who have stopped coming to IV will get the message.
3. We should contact the Indian newspaper editors, to print about our rally on March1st 2009, I believe more awareness we spread a better result we get.
Thank you
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§ionid=4&id=13&Itemid=36
Maybe you or others can take a lead in this campaign and have everyone use IV posters and banners..
Hello Pappu,
I feel we should have some banners up in different Indian stores, specially targeting some selfish EAD holders, who already feel they got their green cards irrespective of the current visa bulletin
1. Setting up banners will not only attract new members, but will make these EAD holders think from a rational perspective.
2.Also IV administration should send out a personal email to all it members, informing them about the importance of coming together, this way the EAD members who have stopped coming to IV will get the message.
3. We should contact the Indian newspaper editors, to print about our rally on March1st 2009, I believe more awareness we spread a better result we get.
Thank you
more...
house makeup Tiger Woods golf swing
garamchai2go
12-18 08:52 AM
Dec 6 1400 hrs, Passport rcvd - NO(as of Dec 17), H1-B, Chennai
With telephone conversation with consulate staff , I came to know that sometime tomorrow vfs will have my passport. Will let you know once I hear from vfs.
Dec 6 1400 hrs, Passport sent to vfs - Yes(on Dec 18), H1-B, Chennai
With telephone conversation with consulate staff , I came to know that sometime tomorrow vfs will have my passport. Will let you know once I hear from vfs.
Dec 6 1400 hrs, Passport sent to vfs - Yes(on Dec 18), H1-B, Chennai
tattoo tiger woods swing analysis
apb
07-10 05:35 PM
Not all things done are perfect!!. But the point is that something is getting done. In retrospective everything is 20/20. Criticized are those who attempt something and who do not do anything never gets criticized.
IV is doing something which could benefit you. Atleast please do not complain if you do not agree. I will be with you without complaining if you try to do something.
IV is doing something which could benefit you. Atleast please do not complain if you do not agree. I will be with you without complaining if you try to do something.
more...
pictures Tiger#39;s New Swing: An Analysis
pkpalta
01-24 01:06 PM
I always travel by Asia route. China, Japan, Thailand, Singapore or Korea. For people on the pacific route this is the best option. The customer service is pretty good and they do not harass you for every petty things.
Fying from UK and France in particular feels like you are doing a favor to them. In this age of consumerism just stay away from British, Virgin, Air France and others and they will learn the lesson quickly. Iam very surprised why people take those routes. Just avoid them at all costs!
Fying from UK and France in particular feels like you are doing a favor to them. In this age of consumerism just stay away from British, Virgin, Air France and others and they will learn the lesson quickly. Iam very surprised why people take those routes. Just avoid them at all costs!
dresses C swing Video Analysis Image
bestin
04-01 11:23 AM
Guys do not feed the freeloaders by telling anything you are reading in the donor forum. Let these people help themselves by signing up for recurring contributions if they want helpful nformation about their EB2 PD movemement. We are still not meeting of our advocacy day amount. It is all because most people want free lunches. This needs to stop. The 200 people going to DC tomorrow are going to speak for you and me for yours and mine greencard. They are taking time off and spending own money for you and me. Nothing is free in this world. IV is also doing this for you and me and we are taking it for granted. Let people do some good deed today if they want to know good information
I am not sure if u were born as an idiot or became an idiot after being turning a so called "donor".
To be frank I stopped contributing as and when IV started having donor forums.
There are thousands of websites and forums througout the internet to get info and what VKBris posted may not even come close to what Q and Teddy and so many others used to share as a group.
Now coming on to freebies,What benefit does IV provide to past contributors.I have contributed in the past, have been active at the initial stages,have spent my own money and booked airtickets to meet senators.Been a leader in a state chapter.But later realised that it was not worth for this forum which has partitions among so called donors.
Why the heck does any one want to see in a home page about posts on a donor forum.Just hide it and keep it among yourself and discuss .
Now red may follow,and a possible ban.
I am not sure if u were born as an idiot or became an idiot after being turning a so called "donor".
To be frank I stopped contributing as and when IV started having donor forums.
There are thousands of websites and forums througout the internet to get info and what VKBris posted may not even come close to what Q and Teddy and so many others used to share as a group.
Now coming on to freebies,What benefit does IV provide to past contributors.I have contributed in the past, have been active at the initial stages,have spent my own money and booked airtickets to meet senators.Been a leader in a state chapter.But later realised that it was not worth for this forum which has partitions among so called donors.
Why the heck does any one want to see in a home page about posts on a donor forum.Just hide it and keep it among yourself and discuss .
Now red may follow,and a possible ban.
more...
makeup hairstyles tiger woods swing
Macaca
12-05 05:17 PM
AMY GOODMAN: Another guest that you�ve had on the show�now, this is a very important point, and this is one that you would agree that you�ve covered, and that is Arizona�this is very important�the Protect Arizona Now referendum. In late 2004, it was revealed that the new head of the national advisory board to Protect Arizona Now, an anti-immigration organization, was a longtime white supremacist who was also an editorial advisor to the racist Council of Conservative Citizens. Although Virginia Abernethy�s controversial selection was reported prominently in virtually every Arizona paper, and despite the fact that Lou Dobbs heavily cover the anti-immigration referendum that Protect Arizona Now was advocating, you never mentioned the affair at all, her controversial selection as head of this group.
LOU DOBBS: And she was featured in how many reports?
AMY GOODMAN: The point is, you covered Protect Arizona Now extensively, and this is certainly significant, when it turns out that the head of the board of Protect Arizona Now is�
LOU DOBBS: And when was the last time she was on the show?
AMY GOODMAN: No, the important point is, you didn�t report the news of this very controversial�
LOU DOBBS: Is it possible�
AMY GOODMAN: �racist woman who headed Protect Arizona Now, which was virtually in every Arizona paper. The question is�
LOU DOBBS: Concurrent with our reporting?
AMY GOODMAN: �what you report and what you don�t.
LOU DOBBS: Concurrent with our reporting?
AMY GOODMAN: Of course. This is in 2004. The point is, what you report, Lou, and what you don�t report.
LOU DOBBS: Well, you know, Amy, I don�t know what to tell you, because, you know, based on your focus here today, you have focused on probably three or four reports, as best I can figure, out of more than five years of reporting on the issue. If that smacks at all to you of reasonable proportionate journalism on your part, I mean, God bless you. If that�s what you believe, God bless you. But I think you�re coming from an ideological position that has just absolutely skewed that perception and that perspective.
AMY GOODMAN: I admit my ideological position, which is that I think that the Council of Conservative Citizens is a racist group, and it�s problematic�
LOU DOBBS: OK. And I think that you are a wonderful, pure and absolute infallible human being.
AMY GOODMAN: �not to identify guests that you have on your show that are connected with this group.
LOU DOBBS: Unfortunately, I am a fallible, and I am a man who has made some mistakes. But the reality is, the body of work stands for itself, and you know that. And the reality is, the facts are irresistible. Illegal immigration into this country is absolutely not in the American interest. And that is a reality you�re going to have to contend with.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Lou, no, that fact is not clear. You know, first of all�
LOU DOBBS: Not to you.
LOU DOBBS: And she was featured in how many reports?
AMY GOODMAN: The point is, you covered Protect Arizona Now extensively, and this is certainly significant, when it turns out that the head of the board of Protect Arizona Now is�
LOU DOBBS: And when was the last time she was on the show?
AMY GOODMAN: No, the important point is, you didn�t report the news of this very controversial�
LOU DOBBS: Is it possible�
AMY GOODMAN: �racist woman who headed Protect Arizona Now, which was virtually in every Arizona paper. The question is�
LOU DOBBS: Concurrent with our reporting?
AMY GOODMAN: �what you report and what you don�t.
LOU DOBBS: Concurrent with our reporting?
AMY GOODMAN: Of course. This is in 2004. The point is, what you report, Lou, and what you don�t report.
LOU DOBBS: Well, you know, Amy, I don�t know what to tell you, because, you know, based on your focus here today, you have focused on probably three or four reports, as best I can figure, out of more than five years of reporting on the issue. If that smacks at all to you of reasonable proportionate journalism on your part, I mean, God bless you. If that�s what you believe, God bless you. But I think you�re coming from an ideological position that has just absolutely skewed that perception and that perspective.
AMY GOODMAN: I admit my ideological position, which is that I think that the Council of Conservative Citizens is a racist group, and it�s problematic�
LOU DOBBS: OK. And I think that you are a wonderful, pure and absolute infallible human being.
AMY GOODMAN: �not to identify guests that you have on your show that are connected with this group.
LOU DOBBS: Unfortunately, I am a fallible, and I am a man who has made some mistakes. But the reality is, the body of work stands for itself, and you know that. And the reality is, the facts are irresistible. Illegal immigration into this country is absolutely not in the American interest. And that is a reality you�re going to have to contend with.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Lou, no, that fact is not clear. You know, first of all�
LOU DOBBS: Not to you.
girlfriend Finally he shows where Tiger
vivek_ut
06-21 11:43 PM
Hi,
I have an approved I-140 (EB2 PD Jun-06) for a 'software engineering' related position. I recently moved to a 'product marketing' role within my company and was told that we would need to refile my PERM since this move constitutes a material change. Is this true?
1). Will I be able to retain my original PD of Jun-06 if we were to file for a 'marketing position'? Or would this be only possible if I needed to refile for a 'software engineering' or similar role?
2). Is there any way I can benefit from EB2 becoming current in July given that I have an approved engineering I-140 despite the fact that I have moved to marketing? (By the time I refile a new marketing PERM, I suspect retrogression will be back in effect)
3). My H1B was recently extended by 3 years (I complete 6 years in a few days) based on my 'engineering' approved I-140. They also filed an adjustment of my job duties to reflect my marketing role. I will visit Calgary, Canada next week (June) to renew my H1B stamp. Any chance that I might have problems during my interview since my 'engineering' I-140 is really not any more use since I moved to marketing? I'm just concerned that there might be problems since the 3 year extension is approved based on an 'engineering' I-140 and now I am no longer in an engineering role? Am I being paranoid :)
Thanks!
I have an approved I-140 (EB2 PD Jun-06) for a 'software engineering' related position. I recently moved to a 'product marketing' role within my company and was told that we would need to refile my PERM since this move constitutes a material change. Is this true?
1). Will I be able to retain my original PD of Jun-06 if we were to file for a 'marketing position'? Or would this be only possible if I needed to refile for a 'software engineering' or similar role?
2). Is there any way I can benefit from EB2 becoming current in July given that I have an approved engineering I-140 despite the fact that I have moved to marketing? (By the time I refile a new marketing PERM, I suspect retrogression will be back in effect)
3). My H1B was recently extended by 3 years (I complete 6 years in a few days) based on my 'engineering' approved I-140. They also filed an adjustment of my job duties to reflect my marketing role. I will visit Calgary, Canada next week (June) to renew my H1B stamp. Any chance that I might have problems during my interview since my 'engineering' I-140 is really not any more use since I moved to marketing? I'm just concerned that there might be problems since the 3 year extension is approved based on an 'engineering' I-140 and now I am no longer in an engineering role? Am I being paranoid :)
Thanks!
hairstyles tiger woods swing analysis.
Kushal
11-24 07:23 PM
I am sure you must have thought a lot before the 'foreclosure' came into your mind. Here is an advice. If there is not too much that you will have to put out from your own pocket, then it is better to take the hit and move on.
If you do foreclose, it might not be the best for credit history as well as in some random cases, job search. Jobs usually do a background check and that includes credit check in some cases as well. I hope it has no bearing but in some cases can. I don't think it will have any impact on your GC. Even if you don't have plans to buy a house, there are far more things that can impact. None of us want to live on credit but in US it is almost a necessary evil. Car, credit cards and the other nine yards that come with it also become scarce for the next few years. So, tread carefully.
Have you discussed with your bank? Foreclosure is a huge hit for the bank and they may be able to work with you on what you owe.
All the best.
Why do you have to live on credit?....you can go cash rich!!
If you do foreclose, it might not be the best for credit history as well as in some random cases, job search. Jobs usually do a background check and that includes credit check in some cases as well. I hope it has no bearing but in some cases can. I don't think it will have any impact on your GC. Even if you don't have plans to buy a house, there are far more things that can impact. None of us want to live on credit but in US it is almost a necessary evil. Car, credit cards and the other nine yards that come with it also become scarce for the next few years. So, tread carefully.
Have you discussed with your bank? Foreclosure is a huge hit for the bank and they may be able to work with you on what you owe.
All the best.
Why do you have to live on credit?....you can go cash rich!!
ivar
08-20 11:21 AM
Dude, Are you joking.... Is there a link or something u can pass on... Dont be a DH....
BR,
Karthik
Karthik,
what is DH....? means
go to www.vonage.com and click on plans
BR,
Karthik
Karthik,
what is DH....? means
go to www.vonage.com and click on plans
amitjoey
07-11 01:27 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/topics/Walter+Reed+Hospital
No comments:
Post a Comment