sayantan76
01-24 03:26 PM
of all the smooth talk..cmon we all know the one time might power ruled the world.. so its not easy for them to get over with..well for those who dont like i always say..just boycott..but i know lots of them will still give in and take the pain...
the way i see..if indian airlines were upto the task.. we could have direct flights from all major cities in US..but then again how can I simply blame the British govt. for tormenting us..its the Indian govt. who can't sort this..either encourage big businesses to launch international flights with world class service..that's something which we have to wait!
how quick we are to blame the Indian Govt.......??
Continental has direct flights to Delhi and Mumbai from Newark, Jet flies from both JFK and Newark, Air India flies direct as well, American flies from Chicago direct.
Many Middle East airlines (Qatar, Emirates) fly from New York to their respective hubs in Middle East and then to multiple cities in India.
Aeroflot ( my parents had a great experience on the airline - good food, courteous service and good new boeing planes) flies to Moscow and then to India.
West Coast folks can fly via Singapore or HK or Malaysia........
With so many choices - why should we even bother to patronize the London airport - i have no idea.....
Though i have a GC and dont need a TV for london - i hate to patronize such unfriendly airport systems.
the way i see..if indian airlines were upto the task.. we could have direct flights from all major cities in US..but then again how can I simply blame the British govt. for tormenting us..its the Indian govt. who can't sort this..either encourage big businesses to launch international flights with world class service..that's something which we have to wait!
how quick we are to blame the Indian Govt.......??
Continental has direct flights to Delhi and Mumbai from Newark, Jet flies from both JFK and Newark, Air India flies direct as well, American flies from Chicago direct.
Many Middle East airlines (Qatar, Emirates) fly from New York to their respective hubs in Middle East and then to multiple cities in India.
Aeroflot ( my parents had a great experience on the airline - good food, courteous service and good new boeing planes) flies to Moscow and then to India.
West Coast folks can fly via Singapore or HK or Malaysia........
With so many choices - why should we even bother to patronize the London airport - i have no idea.....
Though i have a GC and dont need a TV for london - i hate to patronize such unfriendly airport systems.
wallpaper black rose wallpaper.
acecupid
06-12 05:51 PM
Hi,
I am currently working in Skilled visa through one of MNC company.I am working for this company for last 4 years and prior to this company i worked in another small company for two years.When I join my current company i provided all the legal document like exp,last two month pay stub and releiving letter and they did BG . They did not find anything wrong with prior employer in last 4 year. recently they found something wrong about my prior employer and asking me providing additional document and unfortunately company is closed or rename. I have told my current employer that i don't have any more evidance of my prior employer.Because of this reason they are asking me to come back india.
Is there any way that i can take legal action against this company in US because from last one week
they are harrassing my like anything.
Please let me know if anyone come across in this situation.
They are just giving you BS. They are trying to use a fake reason to send you back to India. They might be using this fake reason (BG check) to avoid any legal hassles. Keep track of how they are harassing you, keep a copy of all emails and documents used in correspondence in this matter and complain to DOL.
I am currently working in Skilled visa through one of MNC company.I am working for this company for last 4 years and prior to this company i worked in another small company for two years.When I join my current company i provided all the legal document like exp,last two month pay stub and releiving letter and they did BG . They did not find anything wrong with prior employer in last 4 year. recently they found something wrong about my prior employer and asking me providing additional document and unfortunately company is closed or rename. I have told my current employer that i don't have any more evidance of my prior employer.Because of this reason they are asking me to come back india.
Is there any way that i can take legal action against this company in US because from last one week
they are harrassing my like anything.
Please let me know if anyone come across in this situation.
They are just giving you BS. They are trying to use a fake reason to send you back to India. They might be using this fake reason (BG check) to avoid any legal hassles. Keep track of how they are harassing you, keep a copy of all emails and documents used in correspondence in this matter and complain to DOL.
logiclife
01-07 03:07 PM
House Majority leader Tom Delay has resigned and will not seek the Majority post until next year. See here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/07/AR2006010700488.html
The house republicans will move to start working on electing a new house majority leader. Tom Delay was considered to be anti-immigration that tightened immigration laws according to anti-immigration organizations like www.numbersusa.com. He voted in favor of HR 4437 that is a nightmare for illegal immigration but does not address the ones already here illegally. And no, there is no mention of legal immigration facing backlogs in this bill either. Just enforcement to crackdown on illegal immigration. Voting "Yes" by any congressman on HR 4437 should not be construed as either supporting or opposing the legal immigration and/or retrogression relief.
There are 3 house members likely to seek the position and replace Tom Delay:
1. Roy Blunt (Missouri's 7th District). http://www.blunt.house.gov/
Roy Blunt has gotten poor grades from Anti-immigration orgs. However he voted to support HR 4437 that deals will illegal immigration. His views on legal immigration are unpredictable at best.
2. John Boehner (Ohio's 8th District). http://johnboehner.house.gov/
John Boehner has scored poor grades like Roy Blunt on immigration issues from Anti-immigration sites. However he too has voted to support HR 4437. His views on legal kind of immigration are again unknown at best.
3. Jeff Flake (Arizona's 6th District). http://www.house.gov/flake/
This is interesting. Jeff Flake is considered against immigration by Anti-immigration orgs. He got 100% marks by their grading system (God only knows how that grading system works on numbersusa.com, but whatever). He also voted to support HR 4437.
However he has co-sponsored a bill along with Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback, Jim Kolbe etc that deals comprehensively with immigration problem in this country, both the legal and the illegal variety. See that here: http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005512A04.html
Title VI describes proposals for retrogression relief.:) :)
Jeff Flake is one of the saner and more pragmatic voices in immigration debate. While he wants to crackdown on the illegal variety, he also understands the other reform need in other areas of immigration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/07/AR2006010700488.html
The house republicans will move to start working on electing a new house majority leader. Tom Delay was considered to be anti-immigration that tightened immigration laws according to anti-immigration organizations like www.numbersusa.com. He voted in favor of HR 4437 that is a nightmare for illegal immigration but does not address the ones already here illegally. And no, there is no mention of legal immigration facing backlogs in this bill either. Just enforcement to crackdown on illegal immigration. Voting "Yes" by any congressman on HR 4437 should not be construed as either supporting or opposing the legal immigration and/or retrogression relief.
There are 3 house members likely to seek the position and replace Tom Delay:
1. Roy Blunt (Missouri's 7th District). http://www.blunt.house.gov/
Roy Blunt has gotten poor grades from Anti-immigration orgs. However he voted to support HR 4437 that deals will illegal immigration. His views on legal immigration are unpredictable at best.
2. John Boehner (Ohio's 8th District). http://johnboehner.house.gov/
John Boehner has scored poor grades like Roy Blunt on immigration issues from Anti-immigration sites. However he too has voted to support HR 4437. His views on legal kind of immigration are again unknown at best.
3. Jeff Flake (Arizona's 6th District). http://www.house.gov/flake/
This is interesting. Jeff Flake is considered against immigration by Anti-immigration orgs. He got 100% marks by their grading system (God only knows how that grading system works on numbersusa.com, but whatever). He also voted to support HR 4437.
However he has co-sponsored a bill along with Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback, Jim Kolbe etc that deals comprehensively with immigration problem in this country, both the legal and the illegal variety. See that here: http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005512A04.html
Title VI describes proposals for retrogression relief.:) :)
Jeff Flake is one of the saner and more pragmatic voices in immigration debate. While he wants to crackdown on the illegal variety, he also understands the other reform need in other areas of immigration.
2011 ROSE amp; Flowers wallpapers
mhathi
01-10 11:43 AM
It is not popular to say so but I have this doubt too.
Currently at least there is no requirement to notify and you only need to prove you still have a similar job OFFER (not necessarily working) if and when there is an RFE.
Only good thing happened to us in last decade, as far as I can remember, is AC21 and concurrent filing.
All these immigration laws are designed to keep us indebted/bonded to the employer. They might see this as a liberating provision and try to chain us back. This may or may not happen, but just my paranoid reaction,.
Hope AC21 don't go away like labor substitution has. :(
That is naive... AC21 is not an administrative decision of USCIS... It is a law... AC21 = American Competitiveness in the 21st Century act!! It was passed by congress and the only body that can revoke it is congress.
USCIS cannot revoke AC21.. only congress can. Please dont be paranoid. The most USCIS can do is refuse to change their current stance on same/similar job.
Gurus, correct me if I am wrong.
Currently at least there is no requirement to notify and you only need to prove you still have a similar job OFFER (not necessarily working) if and when there is an RFE.
Only good thing happened to us in last decade, as far as I can remember, is AC21 and concurrent filing.
All these immigration laws are designed to keep us indebted/bonded to the employer. They might see this as a liberating provision and try to chain us back. This may or may not happen, but just my paranoid reaction,.
Hope AC21 don't go away like labor substitution has. :(
That is naive... AC21 is not an administrative decision of USCIS... It is a law... AC21 = American Competitiveness in the 21st Century act!! It was passed by congress and the only body that can revoke it is congress.
USCIS cannot revoke AC21.. only congress can. Please dont be paranoid. The most USCIS can do is refuse to change their current stance on same/similar job.
Gurus, correct me if I am wrong.
more...
ganguteli
06-09 11:51 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/LVisa_12_9_2004.pdf
Please refer this document and it will answer your doubt. To be specific L1B resources cannot be deployed in client premises on projects managed and controlled by client (known consulting assignments in technology world). This is just part of the violation. Second... L1B resources cannot be used for general technical skills (java/.net/oracle/production support etc) BUT can only be used for their speciality skills (while processing the L1 visa outsourcing companies shows some internal tools to prove this point). Hope this cleared your doubt, I am pretty sure that now you will be able to find a lot of violations in using L1B resources. L1B resource usage is so common that most of us who are aware of immigrations statuses even doesnt know about this .. forget others including our clients and their managers.
Thank you losers guild member.
Please refer this document and it will answer your doubt. To be specific L1B resources cannot be deployed in client premises on projects managed and controlled by client (known consulting assignments in technology world). This is just part of the violation. Second... L1B resources cannot be used for general technical skills (java/.net/oracle/production support etc) BUT can only be used for their speciality skills (while processing the L1 visa outsourcing companies shows some internal tools to prove this point). Hope this cleared your doubt, I am pretty sure that now you will be able to find a lot of violations in using L1B resources. L1B resource usage is so common that most of us who are aware of immigrations statuses even doesnt know about this .. forget others including our clients and their managers.
Thank you losers guild member.
PD_Dec2002
06-29 08:11 PM
If you were current for June and if the USCIS received your application in June, then you are 100% fine. USCIS stamps the "received date" on the package. So when they open it for processing (1,2,3 weeks later), they will see that your PD was current when they received it.
Of course, if your PD is not current when they open it, then of course, your 485 won't be approved. But you will get your EAD and AP.
Thanks,
Jayant
P.S.: Note that there is some disagreement about whether the USCIS looks at the date they received the package or the date your package is post-marked.
Of course, if your PD is not current when they open it, then of course, your 485 won't be approved. But you will get your EAD and AP.
Thanks,
Jayant
P.S.: Note that there is some disagreement about whether the USCIS looks at the date they received the package or the date your package is post-marked.
more...
Hunter
05-09 02:02 PM
You want to talk about skills .. Huh?
Lets start with Madoff ...... :D:D:D:D
You can take him and keep him in a cell with Satyam Raju. I don't care.
How pathetic, you don't even have a response for the "skills" practiced by H1/L1/Indian offshroe companies/fly-by-night operators!!
Lets start with Madoff ...... :D:D:D:D
You can take him and keep him in a cell with Satyam Raju. I don't care.
How pathetic, you don't even have a response for the "skills" practiced by H1/L1/Indian offshroe companies/fly-by-night operators!!
2010 Nature Mobile Wallpaper. Rose
gc_buddy
10-28 02:48 PM
I will send the letters.
Request to core/web site admin: can you please add a link to this thread on the IV main page to get better coverage to this campaign - thanks.
Request to core/web site admin: can you please add a link to this thread on the IV main page to get better coverage to this campaign - thanks.
more...
msp1976
06-29 08:11 PM
And I was hoping that my labor stuck at the BEC's will *hopefully* arrive just in time (before september - per what's embedded in BLACK LETTERS on the July VB and DOL) to give me enough to file 140/485... what an awful pathetic joke
My labor is also stuck in PBEC...
My labor is also stuck in PBEC...
hair wallpaper desktop rose.
alterego
06-15 02:32 PM
Hi,
My wife and kid are outside india. Can i file for 485 and include them...Do they have to be in india for that. Also can i file for my wife's ead
NO They have to be in the US for AOS filing.
My wife and kid are outside india. Can i file for 485 and include them...Do they have to be in india for that. Also can i file for my wife's ead
NO They have to be in the US for AOS filing.
more...
eb2waiter
05-17 03:20 PM
is it not part of labor and I-140. Please explain.
hot Rank: 60 in Wallpaper
royus77
06-29 07:45 PM
Allowing to file on July 02 or July 03 depends on visa numbers available which in turn depends usage the preceding month. If all the numbers are used up (meaning Immigration Officers have requested visas from DOS in the process of approving pending I-485) they cannot allow anyone to file on July 02 or July 03 and so on.
I guess currently race is on from USCIS to consume Visa numbers (40,000 or so) from DOS at unprecedented pace. That's why bulletin hasn't changed as yet. USCIS on its part is possibly trying to avoid flood of application at all cost, even if it requires working extra hours (and approving as many cases as possible) if it can save them later. DOS will NOT move the date back until the numbers are used up or near used up. I guess race is on....we will know on Monday. One way to know how true this is will be watching I-485 approvals from now till Monday. We are caught in the tug of war between USCIS and DOS. CIRCus isn't over yesterday....it is back in town again !!!
Can they reject applications that received on 2 july ....logically if the application was received when the Visa date is current it should be accepted. Have to see the timing of the DOS bulletin as they may make it unavailble effective "Now" rather than effective from :" yesterday " if we didnt see any revision to VB today, people whose application received on Monday may be safe ..lets hope
I guess currently race is on from USCIS to consume Visa numbers (40,000 or so) from DOS at unprecedented pace. That's why bulletin hasn't changed as yet. USCIS on its part is possibly trying to avoid flood of application at all cost, even if it requires working extra hours (and approving as many cases as possible) if it can save them later. DOS will NOT move the date back until the numbers are used up or near used up. I guess race is on....we will know on Monday. One way to know how true this is will be watching I-485 approvals from now till Monday. We are caught in the tug of war between USCIS and DOS. CIRCus isn't over yesterday....it is back in town again !!!
Can they reject applications that received on 2 july ....logically if the application was received when the Visa date is current it should be accepted. Have to see the timing of the DOS bulletin as they may make it unavailble effective "Now" rather than effective from :" yesterday " if we didnt see any revision to VB today, people whose application received on Monday may be safe ..lets hope
more...
house rose wallpaper. wallpapers of
sanju
08-07 09:23 AM
There is another thread on the issue and some of us think that we do have a case. Initial response from a certain lawyer has been positive.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20669
The affected parties (i.e. us) need to show damage in certain way and I do have some points that can be used.
Any lawyer will tell you that you have a case because he wants to make more money. Its like going to Walmart and Walmart telling you that the product does provide value for your family. You take any case to any lawyer, 99.9% lawyers will tell you that you have a case. You go with an idea that you should be the President of the country, they will tell you "Ya I can clearly see why you feel like that and I totally agree, so you may have a case there". My suggestion is, please do not waste your money if some lawyer is saying you that "you have a case". They know that is what you - the potential client, wants to hear.
Our primary point is that the spirit of law has not been upheld.
I bet this is what your lawyer told you. Do you realize how vague this term "spirit of the law" is. But, as long as you are ok to put you money in fire, who cares. Go right ahead, knock yourself, I am right behind you and best of luck, you sure need a lot of it. :p
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20669
The affected parties (i.e. us) need to show damage in certain way and I do have some points that can be used.
Any lawyer will tell you that you have a case because he wants to make more money. Its like going to Walmart and Walmart telling you that the product does provide value for your family. You take any case to any lawyer, 99.9% lawyers will tell you that you have a case. You go with an idea that you should be the President of the country, they will tell you "Ya I can clearly see why you feel like that and I totally agree, so you may have a case there". My suggestion is, please do not waste your money if some lawyer is saying you that "you have a case". They know that is what you - the potential client, wants to hear.
Our primary point is that the spirit of law has not been upheld.
I bet this is what your lawyer told you. Do you realize how vague this term "spirit of the law" is. But, as long as you are ok to put you money in fire, who cares. Go right ahead, knock yourself, I am right behind you and best of luck, you sure need a lot of it. :p
tattoo Rose Wallpapers. Download
CADude
11-06 03:40 PM
Wow.. Applicants are waiting since 2002 and Govt Agency know it but don't do anything. Shame on you FBI NNCP :mad:
Check this:
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. The
executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its
statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those
duties have been met.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
Check this:
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. The
executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its
statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those
duties have been met.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
more...
pictures My heart the rose – wallpaper
rajuram
01-10 01:51 AM
Campaigns are good. But to solve this problem we have to go back to the basics of human nature, specifically how or what motivates politicians -
1. Votes
2. Money, Fame, Power
3. Good publicity or fear of bad publicity
We can not give #1 or #2 to the politicians. So our only option is #3. This was the reason why the flower campaign had worked, they feared bad pubilicity.
Again, they will not move even a single inch unless there is some motivation and as I said above our only option is #3.
1. Votes
2. Money, Fame, Power
3. Good publicity or fear of bad publicity
We can not give #1 or #2 to the politicians. So our only option is #3. This was the reason why the flower campaign had worked, they feared bad pubilicity.
Again, they will not move even a single inch unless there is some motivation and as I said above our only option is #3.
dresses Rose
SunnySurya
08-07 10:40 AM
Zindagi hai to khwab hai
Khwab hai to manzile hain
Manzile hai to hosla hai
Hosla hai to vishwas hai
(If there is life there is a dream
If there is a dream there are milestones
If there are mileston there is enthusasm
If there is enthusasm there is a confidence )
May be you will fall from your bed!
Wake up dude, enough of day dreaming.
Khwab hai to manzile hain
Manzile hai to hosla hai
Hosla hai to vishwas hai
(If there is life there is a dream
If there is a dream there are milestones
If there are mileston there is enthusasm
If there is enthusasm there is a confidence )
May be you will fall from your bed!
Wake up dude, enough of day dreaming.
more...
makeup (black rose - Wallpaper)
gcForV
07-11 01:56 PM
No disrespect to Al-Jazeera. But putting our story on that channel is not a good idea. People view anything on it with lot of suspicion, and Fox news interprets everybody Al-Jazeera sympathizes with as you know what.
Don't come after me for saying this, its not my opinion. But general opinion that I have observed from people who are not well informed(read majority of people). Lets focus on the main stream media in US, outside coverage is not that significant anyway.
Come on guys. I dont sympathize with Al-Jazeera nor do I read and nor do I like them. But we shouldnt be making statements like this.
Dont underestimate backhome news media like rediff/deccan/TOI/hindu.
Me violating my own stmt ;-)
Don't come after me for saying this, its not my opinion. But general opinion that I have observed from people who are not well informed(read majority of people). Lets focus on the main stream media in US, outside coverage is not that significant anyway.
Come on guys. I dont sympathize with Al-Jazeera nor do I read and nor do I like them. But we shouldnt be making statements like this.
Dont underestimate backhome news media like rediff/deccan/TOI/hindu.
Me violating my own stmt ;-)
girlfriend Deep Pink Rose. Wallpapers:
nkavjs
09-25 02:29 PM
Good idea.. Can we come up with Joint signed E-letter with info and mail it to these guys doing nothing with our 2nd July applications.
They shd all be flown to Bermuda triangle (ony after they clear our pending applications)
They shd all be flown to Bermuda triangle (ony after they clear our pending applications)
hairstyles rose wallpaper. derrick
desi3933
08-25 11:24 AM
>> Guys, I am also not going anywhere, . I am here for 10 years now and its my life and I like it.
Thats sum it nicely. Nobody wants to go back.
Though you are sending "I am going back unless you fix it" cards, you are actually not serious about it. Great. Just Great.
And you think, that will fix the system.
To the "brave" person who gave me red dot with this comment
u r a sicko...even after getting citizenship u r here and that says a lot...looks like you've no friends and family. Feel sorry for u - Loner.
Hope you are feeling better after venting out your frustration. It was so nice of you to leave "anonymous" comments.
Good Luck to you.
Wishing the very best for you!
Thats sum it nicely. Nobody wants to go back.
Though you are sending "I am going back unless you fix it" cards, you are actually not serious about it. Great. Just Great.
And you think, that will fix the system.
To the "brave" person who gave me red dot with this comment
u r a sicko...even after getting citizenship u r here and that says a lot...looks like you've no friends and family. Feel sorry for u - Loner.
Hope you are feeling better after venting out your frustration. It was so nice of you to leave "anonymous" comments.
Good Luck to you.
Wishing the very best for you!
Pineapple
07-10 02:18 PM
Isnt this a duplicate thread?? There is another thread with the exact same topic..
gc4me
11-06 04:30 PM
Sorry to hear that. Hope that will not effect your I-485 application processing.
For me, I have not seen any status change to my 140. After a series of LUDs to both 485 and 140 at last today I see my 485 status has changed. It says RFE sent. Good that I have not received any NOID or Denial. This is the best case scenario that I was hoping for. I have yet to receive the RFE to see the actual cause. But hoping this is due to 140 withdrawal. I thank the IO who is working on my case as he/she is quite knowledgeable and issued a RFE not NOID or denial.
So people please keep sending letters.
Folks,
I sent the letters and also invoked the AC21 through a lawyer a month ago. However, inspite of all this, I see a new update for my 140 petition today -
Application Type: I140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: Withdrawal Acknowledgment Notice Sent
On November 5, 2008, we mailed a notice acknowledging withdrawal of this application or petition I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER. If you have not received the notice within 30 days of November 5, 2008, contact our customer service at 1-800-375-5283. If at some point in the future you wish to pursue the benefits provided by this application or petition, you must file a new application along with all applicable fees and evidence.
I am not sure if this means that my 485 will be denied shortly...
For me, I have not seen any status change to my 140. After a series of LUDs to both 485 and 140 at last today I see my 485 status has changed. It says RFE sent. Good that I have not received any NOID or Denial. This is the best case scenario that I was hoping for. I have yet to receive the RFE to see the actual cause. But hoping this is due to 140 withdrawal. I thank the IO who is working on my case as he/she is quite knowledgeable and issued a RFE not NOID or denial.
So people please keep sending letters.
Folks,
I sent the letters and also invoked the AC21 through a lawyer a month ago. However, inspite of all this, I see a new update for my 140 petition today -
Application Type: I140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: Withdrawal Acknowledgment Notice Sent
On November 5, 2008, we mailed a notice acknowledging withdrawal of this application or petition I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER. If you have not received the notice within 30 days of November 5, 2008, contact our customer service at 1-800-375-5283. If at some point in the future you wish to pursue the benefits provided by this application or petition, you must file a new application along with all applicable fees and evidence.
I am not sure if this means that my 485 will be denied shortly...
No comments:
Post a Comment