gc_perm2k6
03-11 07:50 PM
They have a petition to be signed. Should we sign? IV Core members, please advice.
wallpaper Bethenny, Jill and LuAnn
ishakapoor
02-25 10:55 AM
fdxh
franklin
08-13 02:12 AM
Me too
AP approved on 6/13, LUD on 8/12 (a Sunday)
I assume to was a system update only and nothing more than that
There a re quite a few other affected in the same way http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4856&page=151
AP approved on 6/13, LUD on 8/12 (a Sunday)
I assume to was a system update only and nothing more than that
There a re quite a few other affected in the same way http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4856&page=151
2011 Bravolebrity Bethenny Frankel
lkapildev
02-26 03:59 PM
No one from EB3 category posting their success story of geting a GC recently. What does that mean, VB PD is just foolling us and making you to go crazy.
Its like Titanic ship, everyone wants to get a boat. Unless you fight to get a boat you will not get. We are treated the way how Titanic treated to its 3rd class passengers.
Bring a chair on your back, talk to your wife,freinds, relativs, parents and child. "Whether sending a letter for good cause will harm you". Everyone will say no. Then why are you waiting.
Support IV. IV is just you. You donot help IV's dreame to die. IV is me and you.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16506
Its like Titanic ship, everyone wants to get a boat. Unless you fight to get a boat you will not get. We are treated the way how Titanic treated to its 3rd class passengers.
Bring a chair on your back, talk to your wife,freinds, relativs, parents and child. "Whether sending a letter for good cause will harm you". Everyone will say no. Then why are you waiting.
Support IV. IV is just you. You donot help IV's dreame to die. IV is me and you.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16506
more...
waiting4gc02
02-28 04:33 PM
Anywhere between 7-14 days..!!!
Macaca
07-22 05:33 PM
For Real Drama, Senate Should Engage In a True Filibuster (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_8/ornstein/19415-1.html) By Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at American Enterprise Institute, July 18, 2007
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
more...
martinvisalaw
07-31 12:24 PM
You may be eligible. CIS usually requires 4 years of university-level education for a degree, or 3 years experience for every one year missing from a 4-year degree. An educational evaluator could say for certain if you have the equivalent of a US bachelor's degree.
2010 ethenny frankel mother
arch_118
06-23 07:41 PM
Is it possible to obtain a Greencard from L1B status? If yes, how long does this process typically take? My understanding is it is possible and definitely easier/shorter than being on H1?
more...
rkumar18
06-03 07:07 PM
Can someone please advise if I can believe this story?
hair on ethenny frankel mother
BECsufferer
09-25 07:53 PM
Hello All;
I would like to share our expereience during finger printing apointment at said center. We arrived an hour and half earlier, so asked the security guard if that was OK. She told us it's fine and we should go to lady officer at next door to take application forms. We took for each one of us, filled them while watching "Baby's day out" movie being shown. Returned the applications and were asked to go to assigned waiting seats. Here we were further escorted by an officer to finger printing machine. Did finger printing and had the notice form stamped, and were out of center in less than 30 minutes. No problems, no delays nothing to worry at all. So go and have fun!:D
P.S : Don't drop off your wife at center ... wait for few minutes. Otherwise she would be begging for phone to call you ( as they won't allow her to keep phone). I helped out one such fine lady earlier today!
I would like to share our expereience during finger printing apointment at said center. We arrived an hour and half earlier, so asked the security guard if that was OK. She told us it's fine and we should go to lady officer at next door to take application forms. We took for each one of us, filled them while watching "Baby's day out" movie being shown. Returned the applications and were asked to go to assigned waiting seats. Here we were further escorted by an officer to finger printing machine. Did finger printing and had the notice form stamped, and were out of center in less than 30 minutes. No problems, no delays nothing to worry at all. So go and have fun!:D
P.S : Don't drop off your wife at center ... wait for few minutes. Otherwise she would be begging for phone to call you ( as they won't allow her to keep phone). I helped out one such fine lady earlier today!
more...
fromnaija
01-13 02:34 PM
Because you already filed I-485 before she turned 21, your daughter is protected by CSPA and she will get her GC as long as your case is approved even if she turned 30 before your AOS is approved (I sincerely hope you are approved before she turns 30 as she must remain unmarried until she gets GC).
By the way, my son is in the same boat as he turned 21 in 2008 too.
By the way, my son is in the same boat as he turned 21 in 2008 too.
hot pictures BETHENNY FRANKEL
r1r1r1
06-09 05:34 PM
Hi,
I just want to know where is my "H1B Visa Extension Application" needs to apply by my employer.
Following are the details,
1. My Employer located in Virginia.
2. My current work location is Minnesota (and applying the H1extension with this Client's letter).
3. This is my second extension; i.e First H1b is for 2 years; and second H1b(i.e extension) for 3 years . all(5years) with the same employer.
4. I have approved I-140 also.
So 1) which will be the Service Center of mine to apply my H1B Extension
2) I heard Approved I-140 will be an advantage for a 3 year H1 extension application, but do this really matter if I have 3 months Purchase order or Contract with the client.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Pad.
I just want to know where is my "H1B Visa Extension Application" needs to apply by my employer.
Following are the details,
1. My Employer located in Virginia.
2. My current work location is Minnesota (and applying the H1extension with this Client's letter).
3. This is my second extension; i.e First H1b is for 2 years; and second H1b(i.e extension) for 3 years . all(5years) with the same employer.
4. I have approved I-140 also.
So 1) which will be the Service Center of mine to apply my H1B Extension
2) I heard Approved I-140 will be an advantage for a 3 year H1 extension application, but do this really matter if I have 3 months Purchase order or Contract with the client.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Pad.
more...
house ethenny frankel mother
ita
10-29 03:18 PM
I understand that when we re-enter the country using AP we will be given I-94 with the validity period just like that of AP.
So when we renew AP will they even renew the I-94?
Thank you.
So when we renew AP will they even renew the I-94?
Thank you.
tattoo pictures Bethenny Frankel
njdude26
07-07 08:19 AM
please...
more...
pictures ethenny frankel mother and
Prashanthi
06-25 05:59 PM
As long as you are in status it is fine, what you need is a valid I-94 or a receipt showing that you applied for a timely extension. You only submit documents that are asked by the officer.
dresses Bethenny Frankel speaks out.
kirupa
06-05 04:17 PM
Added it up :)
more...
makeup Bethenny Frankel has spent the
GCLONGWAIT
10-06 11:57 PM
Would appreciate the right info on the above
girlfriend ethenny frankel mother. hairstyles  Bethenny Frankel is known ethenny
inalimbo
08-12 02:22 PM
Hello,
My priority date is October 2007. I got my I-140 denied , based on EB2, on the basis that the 5 years of education does not equate to the 6 years the USCIS believes is required for a Masters degree.
My lawyer got an education evaluation done and filed an appeal withing 30 days , in January 2008. The appeal has been pending since then.
I need advise on what to do next? Should I apply for another I-140? Can I somehow get the appeal decision expedited?
My priority date is October 2007. I got my I-140 denied , based on EB2, on the basis that the 5 years of education does not equate to the 6 years the USCIS believes is required for a Masters degree.
My lawyer got an education evaluation done and filed an appeal withing 30 days , in January 2008. The appeal has been pending since then.
I need advise on what to do next? Should I apply for another I-140? Can I somehow get the appeal decision expedited?
hairstyles hair ethenny frankel mother bethenny frankel mother bernadette birk.
immigvoic
06-16 07:33 AM
Hi,
My current status is
I currently work for Company A (on H1B) and Company B is processing my GC (EB2, I140 approved; I485 in process) .
This month, I found a new job with Company C which I have to join on EAD (they don't do H1Bs). Also, in this month's bulletin, my PD became current. I had a few concerns/questions
1) Could the change in employment trigger any flags since I am changing companies and this is a future employment GC case (though its almost 3 years since the I-485 was filed)
2) What do you suggest I do since its so close? I waited all this time just not to complicate things (and remain on H1) but then as soon as have to start work on EAD, the date also becomes current (which I am definitely very happy about ) but now since both these events are so close, I am not sure what to do.
3) What other things are there to keep in mind in case of a future employment case?
Thanks for all the help,
My current status is
I currently work for Company A (on H1B) and Company B is processing my GC (EB2, I140 approved; I485 in process) .
This month, I found a new job with Company C which I have to join on EAD (they don't do H1Bs). Also, in this month's bulletin, my PD became current. I had a few concerns/questions
1) Could the change in employment trigger any flags since I am changing companies and this is a future employment GC case (though its almost 3 years since the I-485 was filed)
2) What do you suggest I do since its so close? I waited all this time just not to complicate things (and remain on H1) but then as soon as have to start work on EAD, the date also becomes current (which I am definitely very happy about ) but now since both these events are so close, I am not sure what to do.
3) What other things are there to keep in mind in case of a future employment case?
Thanks for all the help,
maverick_joe
01-08 12:58 PM
If the Given name and the surname on the passport are swapped does this need to be notified to USCIS?I am a July 2007 485 filer./\/
nogc_noproblem
08-16 10:49 AM
Labor, I140 approved and I-485 filed during July-07. Have EAD and AP but never used it. Still on H1B, extended for 3 years based on approved I140 and valid until Dec 2011. With my GC employer all along, employer is applying for LCA now as my new client is located in different state. My questions are:
� Whether there will be any impact on my ongoing GC process if the job description on this new LCA is different?
� If anything goes wrong with this LCA, whether there will be any impact on my existing H1 and eventually on GC process?
� If something wrong happens to my H1, can I still switch to EAD after that?
� What is the process to move from H1B to EAD within the same company, is filing new I-9 with EAD detail is suffice?
Thanks
� Whether there will be any impact on my ongoing GC process if the job description on this new LCA is different?
� If anything goes wrong with this LCA, whether there will be any impact on my existing H1 and eventually on GC process?
� If something wrong happens to my H1, can I still switch to EAD after that?
� What is the process to move from H1B to EAD within the same company, is filing new I-9 with EAD detail is suffice?
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment