- Wedding Dress Gallery
- Neck Puffy Wedding Dresses
- Wedding dress online shop
- wedding dress 2011 pictures
- Wholesale - Puffy Wedding
- hot wedding dress WD-198
- Wedding Dresses / Puffy
- puffy ball gown skirt in
- big puffy wedding dresses
- new wedding dress WD-203
- images Short Puffy Wedding
- puffy skirt satin wedding
- puffy wedding dresses.
- HS8167 puffy wedding dress
- Strapless Swetheart Neck Puffy Wedding Dresses (BPW-004)
- puffy wedding dresses. up
- bodice and puffy ball gown
- up wedding dress WD-197
- Neck Puffy Wedding Dresses
images puffy ball gown skirt in 
wallpaper Wedding Dress Gallery
2011 Neck Puffy Wedding Dresses
more...
more...
2010 Wedding dress online shop
more...
hair wedding dress 2011 pictures
more...
hot Wholesale - Puffy Wedding
more...
house bodice and puffy ball gown
tattoo hot wedding dress WD-198
more...
pictures Wedding Dresses / Puffy
dresses puffy skirt satin wedding
more...
makeup big puffy wedding dresses
girlfriend HS8167 puffy wedding dress
hairstyles images Short Puffy Wedding
Source URL: http://cyclistatlarge.blogspot.com/2010/11/puffy-wedding-dresses.html
Visit amy winehouse for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
paskal
12-26 04:18 PM
london: needed
paris: needed if your visa is expired, check the web site they still have that requirement, i think they relaxed it to the extent that if US visa is valid, you don't need it. they refuse to consider any other documents/papers.
what i don't know specifically is: if i'm travelling TO India ie my home country- i have an Indian passport, why should they care? But i think checks are done prior to departure in the US.
the point is...it's becomeing ahuge pain in the rear ...more so everyday.
paris: needed if your visa is expired, check the web site they still have that requirement, i think they relaxed it to the extent that if US visa is valid, you don't need it. they refuse to consider any other documents/papers.
what i don't know specifically is: if i'm travelling TO India ie my home country- i have an Indian passport, why should they care? But i think checks are done prior to departure in the US.
the point is...it's becomeing ahuge pain in the rear ...more so everyday.
wallpaper Wedding Dress Gallery
va_labor2002
07-24 08:47 AM
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
I totally agree with you. USCIS can take a decision without any BILL from the congress. I already sent a letter to USCIS director. I think IV should contact USCIS director and ask help regarding retrogression. We ,5000 members, can send letters to USCIS director and WHitehouse. They will listen to us.
Good luck..
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
I totally agree with you. USCIS can take a decision without any BILL from the congress. I already sent a letter to USCIS director. I think IV should contact USCIS director and ask help regarding retrogression. We ,5000 members, can send letters to USCIS director and WHitehouse. They will listen to us.
Good luck..
sugaur
05-28 09:44 PM
I Wish the border patrol was doing its job more efficiently and doing more searches not less. This way !@#$% illegals would be kicked out and our immigration process wouldnt be held hostage by them.
I live near the Mexican border. There are border check points everywhere when you leave the city. They will stop you, ask you your status. First time I didnt have my passport or anything. He checked my drivers license and politely reminded me about the requirement to carry immigration documents. Since then, I always carry a copy of passport and H1B and have never had any problems.
I hate it when people cry and feel like they are being persecuted when asked to follow the law.
I live near the Mexican border. There are border check points everywhere when you leave the city. They will stop you, ask you your status. First time I didnt have my passport or anything. He checked my drivers license and politely reminded me about the requirement to carry immigration documents. Since then, I always carry a copy of passport and H1B and have never had any problems.
I hate it when people cry and feel like they are being persecuted when asked to follow the law.
2011 Neck Puffy Wedding Dresses
Almond
07-05 02:38 PM
I am neither taking shots at you nor pointing fingers at you. Its not about old timers or new comers. I hope it will not take for ever for you to be convinced that your favorite website needs contributions from every one
OK, I understand what you're telling me. In an earlier post I mentioned that I can understand how someone who's been here a while and has a certain tie to this place can justify spending money on it and perhaps at a certain point I will as well-just not right now on my second day of posting, and yes I understand now that it does more than just provide a venue for us to communicate. Please don't use "forever" when I am waiting for my GC, :( say "a little bit longer":)
OK, I understand what you're telling me. In an earlier post I mentioned that I can understand how someone who's been here a while and has a certain tie to this place can justify spending money on it and perhaps at a certain point I will as well-just not right now on my second day of posting, and yes I understand now that it does more than just provide a venue for us to communicate. Please don't use "forever" when I am waiting for my GC, :( say "a little bit longer":)
more...
ksvreg
06-30 10:55 PM
Can I handover my I-485 application personally on Monday at Nebraska?
sanju
02-07 01:25 PM
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
If country quotas are removed in employment based category, skilled immigrants from other countries will get EQUAL chance just as skilled immigrants from India and China.
Here is a problem arising as the result of country quotas -
1.) Huge backlogs in EB green card categories
2.) Consulting companies apply for H1 for more and more people from backlogged countries because it will take 6-12 years for people from countries that are backlogged in EB green card category. This causes more backlogged EB green card categories, and more incentive for consulting companies to hire from backlogged countries. So less people from other countries are hired on H1.
As someone said on this forum, I took resume and my qualifications for the job interview, I did not take my birth certificate for the job interview. So why should the EB green card, which is a direct benefit of my employment, be judged based on where my birth certificate was issued?
Country quota system is WRONG at every level. Its only a matter of time that it will be removed. Sorry, if your application is not approved before the removal of country quota system.
.
If country quotas are removed in employment based category, skilled immigrants from other countries will get EQUAL chance just as skilled immigrants from India and China.
Here is a problem arising as the result of country quotas -
1.) Huge backlogs in EB green card categories
2.) Consulting companies apply for H1 for more and more people from backlogged countries because it will take 6-12 years for people from countries that are backlogged in EB green card category. This causes more backlogged EB green card categories, and more incentive for consulting companies to hire from backlogged countries. So less people from other countries are hired on H1.
As someone said on this forum, I took resume and my qualifications for the job interview, I did not take my birth certificate for the job interview. So why should the EB green card, which is a direct benefit of my employment, be judged based on where my birth certificate was issued?
Country quota system is WRONG at every level. Its only a matter of time that it will be removed. Sorry, if your application is not approved before the removal of country quota system.
.
more...
pappu
12-18 09:27 AM
Hello Everyone,
Can we have the conference call again on Wednesday, 12/20/2006 at 9.00 PM EDT. Also, let me know if you think its a good idea to create an NJ yahoo group so we can all get notified instead of checking back in here every now and then.
Thanks,
Varsha
Hello Varsha,
Pls organize the conf call and PM everyone in the group. If you like you can start a thread on the main forum to announce this call so that memebers can attend. We need members to actively participate in state chapters. It is very easy to feel frustrated with retrogression and complain but in order to fix the problem we all need to work on it.
Can we have the conference call again on Wednesday, 12/20/2006 at 9.00 PM EDT. Also, let me know if you think its a good idea to create an NJ yahoo group so we can all get notified instead of checking back in here every now and then.
Thanks,
Varsha
Hello Varsha,
Pls organize the conf call and PM everyone in the group. If you like you can start a thread on the main forum to announce this call so that memebers can attend. We need members to actively participate in state chapters. It is very easy to feel frustrated with retrogression and complain but in order to fix the problem we all need to work on it.
2010 Wedding dress online shop
tawlibann
03-18 11:00 PM
:D
I agree. Let's forget about this misunderstanding. As to the current topic, here is also Greg Siskind's opinion (his blog) which I just found:
On the Visa Bulletin, DOS' Charles Oppenheim has the difficult job of trying to move the priority dates exactly enough to get the maximum number of visas issued in the fiscal year. In years past, hundreds of thousands of visas were wasted because of forecasting problems. It's one of the reasons behind last summer's mess. There is no grand conspiracy on Mr. Oppenheim's part to try and disadvantage any group or deliberately shortchange the immigrant community. So I'm going to assume that the moving around of the numbers was done with the goal of squeezing out every last visa of the 140,000 available.
There probably really isn't any conspiracy or wrongdoing on DOS's part with regard to the last bulletin, and I do hope they do their best to use visas efficiently so that everyone becomes Current sooner rather than later. Maybe they should just do a better job at explaining information and educating people, so that one group doesn't think they're becoming disadvantaged and start doing foolish things.
I agree. Let's forget about this misunderstanding. As to the current topic, here is also Greg Siskind's opinion (his blog) which I just found:
On the Visa Bulletin, DOS' Charles Oppenheim has the difficult job of trying to move the priority dates exactly enough to get the maximum number of visas issued in the fiscal year. In years past, hundreds of thousands of visas were wasted because of forecasting problems. It's one of the reasons behind last summer's mess. There is no grand conspiracy on Mr. Oppenheim's part to try and disadvantage any group or deliberately shortchange the immigrant community. So I'm going to assume that the moving around of the numbers was done with the goal of squeezing out every last visa of the 140,000 available.
There probably really isn't any conspiracy or wrongdoing on DOS's part with regard to the last bulletin, and I do hope they do their best to use visas efficiently so that everyone becomes Current sooner rather than later. Maybe they should just do a better job at explaining information and educating people, so that one group doesn't think they're becoming disadvantaged and start doing foolish things.
more...
nojoke
03-01 04:06 AM
Unfortunately, Obama is not changing much. The mortgage bailout is just a show. Almost irrelevant.
They are throwing good money into a black hole.:mad:
They are throwing good money into a black hole.:mad:
hair wedding dress 2011 pictures
deepakjain
06-08 06:33 PM
My labour cleared in 2009, i guess i need to wait for 10 yrs more !!!, not good , not good at all :eek:
You might get your GC while you are at the retirement home....
You might get your GC while you are at the retirement home....
more...
dagabaaj
02-12 04:23 PM
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/12/change-immigration-policy-in-light-of-job-losses/
hot Wholesale - Puffy Wedding
praveenuppaluri
03-11 11:20 PM
after all the hype and tensions running high among IVans....
EB2 no change and EB3 moved by 3 months - so much for spillovers..
and the article in the OP message starts as "We are pleased to announce the April 2010 cut-off dates ...." damnn.. sure they are pleased with themselves.. :mad:
EB2 no change and EB3 moved by 3 months - so much for spillovers..
and the article in the OP message starts as "We are pleased to announce the April 2010 cut-off dates ...." damnn.. sure they are pleased with themselves.. :mad:
more...
house bodice and puffy ball gown
bkarnik
07-25 06:46 PM
Thanks a lot, please keep us posted about the outcome, even if we have one percent of hope, there is no harm trying that.
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
tattoo hot wedding dress WD-198
rc0878
03-19 03:24 PM
Let's hope the following happens....coz EB3 seekers like me are also waiting for a long time.
May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved, or incase the dates move back, then he/she is stuck again?
RC
Not only EB2, EB3 India also will move to April 2005, atleast for couple of months before this FY ends, to use the 140K numbers.
May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved, or incase the dates move back, then he/she is stuck again?
RC
Not only EB2, EB3 India also will move to April 2005, atleast for couple of months before this FY ends, to use the 140K numbers.
more...
pictures Wedding Dresses / Puffy
kumarc123
06-11 10:31 AM
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
Sent.
Thank you for your hard work.
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
Sent.
Thank you for your hard work.
dresses puffy skirt satin wedding
jsb
08-15 04:26 PM
What do EB cutoff dates in Sept VB mean? All eligible for filing AOS did in July/Aug. Does it mean that USCIS will be giving visa (approving GC) to those within the new cutoff dates?
more...
makeup big puffy wedding dresses
rongch60
07-13 03:56 PM
All the data shows that we have 20K EB2 I/C with PD before 6/1/2006, and it is comparable with the unused 20K quota from EB1 and EB2-ROW. As stated by Openhemer, the 2 year jump is due to the spillover of 20K to EB2 instead of EB3-ROW and there will NOT be any significant retrogression in Oct. However, a petition is being organized in this forum to stopping this spillover. Only if the petition succeed, we will see EB2 date goes back to 2004.
girlfriend HS8167 puffy wedding dress
bigboy007
06-10 09:06 PM
It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. Pandering to the client base will not help the clients, it will only help the service provider.
rightly said. This is not first time this came up on radar. with success of TARP this comes up everytime we fix the system.
rightly said. This is not first time this came up on radar. with success of TARP this comes up everytime we fix the system.
hairstyles images Short Puffy Wedding
optimystic
03-17 03:36 PM
What I am saying is spill over from ROW goes to EB2 first. It does not split to EB2 and EB3 evenly. So more people from EB2 gets visa granted and thus people who joined EB2 bandwagon from EB3 and had earlier PD, they get Visa quickly. Now generally this spillover does not go to EB3 from EB2 having high demand from EB2 and thus EB3 get stuck with conventional numbers with 7% country limit and thus EB3 numbers move slowly. But if that spillover happens for both EB3 and 2 equally than EB3 can also move little bit quickly which is not the case. Thus shortening the queue by switching over to EB2 does not give full advantage to remained lot of EB3.
Bottom line, people moving away from EB3 to EB2 queue does provide relief to people remaining in the EB3 queue. Since now there's 'x' less number of people competing for the 7% visa numbers.
Its a different matter that the spillover from ROW is going to benefit EB2 queue more than it does EB3. But that's a different point. And in fact, if EB2 starts moving faster because of this spill over, hopefully more Eb3 people jump ship to Eb2 queue . In that case the ROW spillover is indirectly going to help people who stay back in Eb3 queue.
As for myself, I have Eb3 India PD of May 2001, which is very close to the front of the queue. So none of this queue jumping or spillover will affect my status much :) . On the other hand the USCIS' ability to sanely act in a FIFO order does ! But thats impervious to any external factors :)
Bottom line, people moving away from EB3 to EB2 queue does provide relief to people remaining in the EB3 queue. Since now there's 'x' less number of people competing for the 7% visa numbers.
Its a different matter that the spillover from ROW is going to benefit EB2 queue more than it does EB3. But that's a different point. And in fact, if EB2 starts moving faster because of this spill over, hopefully more Eb3 people jump ship to Eb2 queue . In that case the ROW spillover is indirectly going to help people who stay back in Eb3 queue.
As for myself, I have Eb3 India PD of May 2001, which is very close to the front of the queue. So none of this queue jumping or spillover will affect my status much :) . On the other hand the USCIS' ability to sanely act in a FIFO order does ! But thats impervious to any external factors :)
vin13
11-11 04:12 PM
Pappu has already informed that with the limited resources they are not currently considering to actively persue regarding Quarterly Spillover.
So for now, we need to do what we can by ourselves.
So for now, we need to do what we can by ourselves.
dpp
06-13 10:40 AM
I have seen this same footage months ago and to it don't look real, its cooked. Some facts there are just un-digestible like the gora guy will take job of a waiter immediately after working as senior exec. cmon market is not that bad unless he don't know anything else and don't have ability to get other similar job, then he should be fired anyways. and then that carlos guy, his dress up don't seems convincing that other execs will give me good response after presentation. its all cooked... showing 600k+ numbers are all bogus.
Yes, it doesn't look real. it is definitely cooked.
Yes, it doesn't look real. it is definitely cooked.
Source URL: http://cyclistatlarge.blogspot.com/2010/11/puffy-wedding-dresses.html
Visit amy winehouse for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
