ilovestirfries
09-27 08:07 PM
Wowww...There were 34 views without a single reply.. :confused:
There isn't anybody who concurs/disagrees with my situation? Its amazing how these discussion boards work...:mad:
There isn't anybody who concurs/disagrees with my situation? Its amazing how these discussion boards work...:mad:
wallpaper *Believe it or not Arnold
trueguy
08-09 09:27 AM
^^^^^^^
bump
^^^^^^^
bump
^^^^^^^
GCwaitforever
08-15 11:04 AM
The special favorable treatment to Cubans is stemming from political needs than any lobbying. US wants to oppose the last remaining communist Government in Cuba and attract its citizens to establish a democratic government there. Please do not feel jealous of these special treatments.
To get a favorable treatement for Indians, wish for a communist revolution in India too. Then most of us would get the Greencard under Asylum quota or anti-communist quota. :D
To get a favorable treatement for Indians, wish for a communist revolution in India too. Then most of us would get the Greencard under Asylum quota or anti-communist quota. :D
2011 ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER DANNY
srinivas06
12-09 04:18 PM
Hello-
1) Is it possible to allow minimum ONE TIME contributions like $10?
2) Is it possible to allow minimum RECURRING contributions like $10?
When I am talking to my friends, we felt that the above things increase the
Contributions. We are also thinking that it is easy to ask friends to contribute if there are no limits on the contributions.
If I am correct there are more than 25,000 Members. If there are 10% of active members and each contribute $10 we get another $25000 that is required for the Bill.
My Contributions:
$50 Recurring Contributions from Nov 07.
Contributed $100 for the DC Rally.
$25 to the local Northern California Chapter in Oct 07.
Contributed to AILF $100 during the July visa bulletin time.
1) Is it possible to allow minimum ONE TIME contributions like $10?
2) Is it possible to allow minimum RECURRING contributions like $10?
When I am talking to my friends, we felt that the above things increase the
Contributions. We are also thinking that it is easy to ask friends to contribute if there are no limits on the contributions.
If I am correct there are more than 25,000 Members. If there are 10% of active members and each contribute $10 we get another $25000 that is required for the Bill.
My Contributions:
$50 Recurring Contributions from Nov 07.
Contributed $100 for the DC Rally.
$25 to the local Northern California Chapter in Oct 07.
Contributed to AILF $100 during the July visa bulletin time.
more...
indyanguy
01-13 10:39 AM
Sure, I will try to do that. But the lawyer has a mind of his own, a very adamant one who would not listen to anyones suggestions. Also, I am racing against time. I have very little time to get new EVLs and have my lawyer submit them. Thanks for the suggestion.
txh1b
08-27 10:35 PM
Unless there was clear USCIS error, No refunds. Details below.
DHS | USCIS Refunds: How is the Process Working for You?: Questions from CIS Ombudsman's Teleconference on January 31, 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1226610826777.shtm)
6. EAD Application, Green Card – A caller filed for a replacement work authorization card. The next month the caller received a green card approval letter. The work authorization application was never adjudicated, but USCIS did not return the fee. How can this applicant get a refund?
•USCIS Response on April 30, 2008: The applicant will not be entitled to a refund. When an applicant or petitioner pays a filing fee on an application, he or she is seeking a decision from USCIS regarding the applicant or beneficiary's eligibility for the benefit(s) being sought. In general, USCIS does not refund a fee or application regardless of the decision on the application.
The implementation of the new fee schedule, effective July 30, 2007, prevents situations like this from happening. If you filed Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, on or after July 30, 2007, then no fee is required to file a request for employment authorization on Form I-765.
DHS | USCIS Refunds: How is the Process Working for You?: Questions from CIS Ombudsman's Teleconference on January 31, 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1226610826777.shtm)
6. EAD Application, Green Card – A caller filed for a replacement work authorization card. The next month the caller received a green card approval letter. The work authorization application was never adjudicated, but USCIS did not return the fee. How can this applicant get a refund?
•USCIS Response on April 30, 2008: The applicant will not be entitled to a refund. When an applicant or petitioner pays a filing fee on an application, he or she is seeking a decision from USCIS regarding the applicant or beneficiary's eligibility for the benefit(s) being sought. In general, USCIS does not refund a fee or application regardless of the decision on the application.
The implementation of the new fee schedule, effective July 30, 2007, prevents situations like this from happening. If you filed Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, on or after July 30, 2007, then no fee is required to file a request for employment authorization on Form I-765.
more...
Berkeleybee
04-10 01:49 PM
To Berkeleybee, i have recently noticed that you always ask the people directly or indirectly whether they know more than you. While It may be true that you guys know more than us, because u spend hours upon hours making it your business to know, but that does not mean you would want to curb free speech. We are grateful to each and every IV core member for their extrodinary efforts, but do not admonish us because somebody wishes to express their ideas. Who knows if people propose 100 theories there might be 1 out there that even you guys have not thought about.
Personally if i were a member of the core team, i would not even bother to respond back to the threads where the so called theory holds no water. There are enough people in this forum to speculate for you :-).
CCC,
Wonderful to hear from a contributing member and thanks for the warm words.
IV has no interest in curbing free speech. All we ask is that new members go through forum posts and resource docs to see what IV has said on a given subject, and also realize that we have done our homework. How about asking us if we have considered an issue rather than telling us what to do (without much research) -- which is the tone that some new member posts take.
As for not responding to theories -- well they just take on a life of their own if we don't respond. :) IV has no intention of letting its forums become a chaotic space with misinformation and assorted half-baked theories. :)
best,
Berkeleybee
Personally if i were a member of the core team, i would not even bother to respond back to the threads where the so called theory holds no water. There are enough people in this forum to speculate for you :-).
CCC,
Wonderful to hear from a contributing member and thanks for the warm words.
IV has no interest in curbing free speech. All we ask is that new members go through forum posts and resource docs to see what IV has said on a given subject, and also realize that we have done our homework. How about asking us if we have considered an issue rather than telling us what to do (without much research) -- which is the tone that some new member posts take.
As for not responding to theories -- well they just take on a life of their own if we don't respond. :) IV has no intention of letting its forums become a chaotic space with misinformation and assorted half-baked theories. :)
best,
Berkeleybee
2010 Well, twins like Danny DeVito
O'podu
07-17 04:13 PM
I luv to send flowers,cards n sweets to IV leads.
comeon, gimme a big hug guys!!:p
;) I dont mind even a kiss..cas am so happy!
comeon, gimme a big hug guys!!:p
;) I dont mind even a kiss..cas am so happy!
more...
nogc_noproblem
04-24 10:51 AM
Is there any formal announcement from IV for letter / flower campaign? We left with very short time.
Thanks Arnab221 for posting the schedule. April 30th is the hearing date, and we know the members of this committee:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Committee_on_the_Judiciary
and the members of the sub-committee:
http://judiciary.house.gov/committeestructure.aspx?committee=4
What are we waiting for guys, lets start a letter campaign (to express our problems) OR flower campaign (to convey our thanks for looking into this important matter).
Thanks Arnab221 for posting the schedule. April 30th is the hearing date, and we know the members of this committee:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Committee_on_the_Judiciary
and the members of the sub-committee:
http://judiciary.house.gov/committeestructure.aspx?committee=4
What are we waiting for guys, lets start a letter campaign (to express our problems) OR flower campaign (to convey our thanks for looking into this important matter).
hair and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
amitjoey
07-17 05:54 PM
The only big way to show appreciation and thanks is to make sure, that each one of us continues to participate in each and every action item.
Also, Contribute generously so IV can go out and fight bigger battles without worrying about funds.
Also, Contribute generously so IV can go out and fight bigger battles without worrying about funds.
more...
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
hot Arnold Schwarzenegger sequels
sugaur
12-23 12:17 AM
I dont recommend going into Juarez. Even Mexicans are fleeing and there are reports of shooting and murder at the border frequently.
more...
house Danny DeVito and Arnold
diptam
01-26 10:45 AM
If you want to track how fast are they processing - you have to go by "Notice Date" because that's the day they first saw your Application. If you want to charge AC21 or calculate iVisa Bulletion's Retrogression do by "Receipt Date" for calculating "180 days Portability" etc....
In the "Pre-July 2nd world" those 2 dates used to vary by 1 or 2 days so no one used to care.
Well - so NSC is doing I-140 for Apr 23rd and Texas is July 21st... I would have got my freedom by now if i had filed I-140 at Texas :) Another good thing in this Bulletin Vermont H1b extension processing have moved a lot - from Apr 23rd to Oct 1st 2007 - wow !!!
Good Luck folks!!
In terms of processing dates, which date is relevant?
USCIS Received Date: E.g., July 25, 2007
OR
USCIS Notice Date: E.g., Sept 12, 2007?
Thanks.
GG_007
In the "Pre-July 2nd world" those 2 dates used to vary by 1 or 2 days so no one used to care.
Well - so NSC is doing I-140 for Apr 23rd and Texas is July 21st... I would have got my freedom by now if i had filed I-140 at Texas :) Another good thing in this Bulletin Vermont H1b extension processing have moved a lot - from Apr 23rd to Oct 1st 2007 - wow !!!
Good Luck folks!!
In terms of processing dates, which date is relevant?
USCIS Received Date: E.g., July 25, 2007
OR
USCIS Notice Date: E.g., Sept 12, 2007?
Thanks.
GG_007
tattoo Danny DeVito and Kelly
ssbaruah@yahoo.com
03-01 08:26 PM
Hi,
Unfortunately, I have recently been laid off by my employer on Jan 09. Still I could not transfer my H1B, but I am in process to doing that. One of friend told me told me that I need to transfer my H1B with 2 months. My H1B visa is valid till 2011.
I already requested my ex-employer not to revoke my H1B.
My questions are �
1. How much time I will get to transfer my H1B ?
2. What about my families H4 visa status ?
3. If it is out of status issue , then what should me my immediate action ?
Thanks in advance!
Unfortunately, I have recently been laid off by my employer on Jan 09. Still I could not transfer my H1B, but I am in process to doing that. One of friend told me told me that I need to transfer my H1B with 2 months. My H1B visa is valid till 2011.
I already requested my ex-employer not to revoke my H1B.
My questions are �
1. How much time I will get to transfer my H1B ?
2. What about my families H4 visa status ?
3. If it is out of status issue , then what should me my immediate action ?
Thanks in advance!
more...
pictures Starring:Arnold Schwarzenegger
AjP
July 27th, 2005, 11:43 AM
Freddy slow down, I can do anything at work, was thinking work on it after I get home and you................ LOL great work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dresses Danny Devito regresó a ¨Devito South Beach¨ para lanzar su
makemygc
07-26 01:59 PM
You can change the address of you I-485 application online at
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa
I have done this when i moved at the end of May. I also recieved a confirmation mail that the address on my application has changed.
Hope that helps!
Thanks. That is helpful. I did not know that USCIS has gone online for all the address change needs. This is the same AR-11 form which we used to send through snail mail.
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=coa
I have done this when i moved at the end of May. I also recieved a confirmation mail that the address on my application has changed.
Hope that helps!
Thanks. That is helpful. I did not know that USCIS has gone online for all the address change needs. This is the same AR-11 form which we used to send through snail mail.
more...
makeup 35 8708019 TWINS 1988 Arnold
sandy_anand
04-07 09:25 AM
I have seen few posts on , here is one of them http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/677347613/got-email-from-nvcattorney-state-gov-to-pay-794-spam
There two other cases on who have received similar notices from NVC to pay invoice fees.. Their priority dates are July 2007 and Nov 2007
Kate, do you personally know the two cases? Just curious. Thanks!
There two other cases on who have received similar notices from NVC to pay invoice fees.. Their priority dates are July 2007 and Nov 2007
Kate, do you personally know the two cases? Just curious. Thanks!
girlfriend Danny Devito News - MLive.com,
polapragada
09-04 12:36 AM
Jeez! This is a really deplorable situation. USCIS has all the information and they are asking AILA for help? Why not just ask the guys who have their AOS cases pending? It's so unfortunate that this needs to be done.
You are right
You are right
hairstyles Amazon.com: Arnold
help43
09-10 10:12 PM
H1-B amendment how many days it will take because my opt is going to expire in the month of december.
To get the h-1b appoval i have waited like 6 months.So how many days it will take for h1-b amendment?
If it got rejected while processing under h1-b amendment then what do i need to do to stay in the usa?
To get the h-1b appoval i have waited like 6 months.So how many days it will take for h1-b amendment?
If it got rejected while processing under h1-b amendment then what do i need to do to stay in the usa?
webm
06-09 02:50 PM
"Processing Date current with respect to Receipt Date" in May VB,even then IO not picked in my case atleast...so its all matter of luck!! back to U-turn..
guygeek007
08-06 11:08 AM
I have a EB2 - I140 (PERM) pending at Texas from 06/2006 and another EB3-I140 (RIR) pending from 06/2007. When my lawyer filed the EB2-I140, he filed it with a copy of labor from DOL (not original hard copy). He says he did not know it would cause such a delay. My EB3-I140 however was filed on labor approved from the Dallas BEC. It was filed with the original copy of labor. Are there any people like me, who have endured a long wait because they did not have the original labor ? Please post your experiences here .......
My i-140 premium processing application was filed on the 22nd of June,2007 as indicated in the information below. The package & check were returned in the first week of July. A letter indicating the reason for remittance and return was that the labor cert. attached was a photocopy and not the original.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
My i-140 premium processing application was filed on the 22nd of June,2007 as indicated in the information below. The package & check were returned in the first week of July. A letter indicating the reason for remittance and return was that the labor cert. attached was a photocopy and not the original.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
No comments:
Post a Comment