GC2COME
02-16 04:44 PM
Hi all,
My ETA case in online status shows "DATA REVIEW" for the past 5 months, my PD Aug 04/RIR/EB2 is with Dallas BPEC.Initially the status was closed, and then opened. After 5 months of reopening it still says 'Data review' .Is there some thing wrong or should I talk to my lawyer.
Some of my friends who applied that time have their status 'in process' or even 'certified' .Any experience like this or will that go to certified from here directly or to "in process" first. How long it can be in each of these statuses.
Any ideas appreciated please!
Thanks,
gc2com
My ETA case in online status shows "DATA REVIEW" for the past 5 months, my PD Aug 04/RIR/EB2 is with Dallas BPEC.Initially the status was closed, and then opened. After 5 months of reopening it still says 'Data review' .Is there some thing wrong or should I talk to my lawyer.
Some of my friends who applied that time have their status 'in process' or even 'certified' .Any experience like this or will that go to certified from here directly or to "in process" first. How long it can be in each of these statuses.
Any ideas appreciated please!
Thanks,
gc2com
wallpaper Back Short Curly Hairstyle
Blog Feeds
08-11 10:10 AM
H1B Visa Lawyer Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Processing Times were released with processing dates as of August 1, 2010.
If you filed an appeal, please review the links below to determine the applicable processing time associated with your particular case.
Administrative Appeals Office (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=32830)
The current processing time for an I-129 H-1B Appeal is 13 months. The current processing time for an I-140 EB2 Appeal for an Advanced Degree Professional is 24 months; for an I-140EB3 Appeal for a Skilled or Professional Worker is 25 months.
Most other cases are within USCIS's processing time goal of 6 months or less.
More... (http://www.h1bvisalawyerblog.com/2010/08/administrative_appeals_office_6.html)
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) Processing Times were released with processing dates as of August 1, 2010.
If you filed an appeal, please review the links below to determine the applicable processing time associated with your particular case.
Administrative Appeals Office (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=32830)
The current processing time for an I-129 H-1B Appeal is 13 months. The current processing time for an I-140 EB2 Appeal for an Advanced Degree Professional is 24 months; for an I-140EB3 Appeal for a Skilled or Professional Worker is 25 months.
Most other cases are within USCIS's processing time goal of 6 months or less.
More... (http://www.h1bvisalawyerblog.com/2010/08/administrative_appeals_office_6.html)
PIXELTRON
03-28 02:34 PM
I also wanted to include this sketch
2011 A Hairstyle thats short in the
Blog Feeds
03-21 09:30 AM
The Highway Patrol officer pulls over a speeder on the freeway. It's a young woman in a Red Camaro. "Do you know how fast you were going?", he questions her. "I don't know, officer", she stammers. "I'm late for a job interview, and I wasn't paying a lot of attention. I'm really sorry." "Not as sorry as I am" replies the officer, who takes out his pistol, and shoots each of her tires. "If I ever catch you speeding again, I'll shoot you!" Then he arrests her and takes her to jail. Did this really happen? Of course not! In...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/they-shoot-speeders-dont-they.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/03/they-shoot-speeders-dont-they.html)
more...
glosrfc
02-28 02:40 PM
...via the Declaration of Independence.
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2573/liberty2.jpg
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2573/liberty2.jpg
devamanohar
08-14 09:06 PM
I filed for my self, wife and two daughters I-485 and EAD with all documents but without I-140 recipt notice instead I enclosed evidences of the cashed check, INS online status print out and cover letter with reciept number.
My application reached on July 2 at 11:34am. No reciept yet. I called INS and representative explained my case will not be denied. If at all, INS will ask for the reciept notice.
I have my reciept notice for I-140 now.
At this point shall I wait or apply one more today with the reciept notice.
My application reached on July 2 at 11:34am. No reciept yet. I called INS and representative explained my case will not be denied. If at all, INS will ask for the reciept notice.
I have my reciept notice for I-140 now.
At this point shall I wait or apply one more today with the reciept notice.
more...
KapHn8d
December 12th, 2003, 04:55 PM
It doesn't go far as a photo, but I have to tell ya... I really dig the texture of this little fella's skin. This is my first post on Dphoto. Unfortunately, between work and the weather, I've had a hard go at getting some new shots recently. LOL. I hope everyone has a great weekend!
http://thispageintentionallyleftblank.net/images/misl/howdy.jpg
-Clayton
http://thispageintentionallyleftblank.net/images/misl/howdy.jpg
-Clayton
2010 rihanna short hairstyles back.
fuzzy logic
07-19 10:07 AM
Hey guys,
If any one is a client of Cohen and Grisby and looking to appliy AOS now, have you heard anything from them asking for forms and docuements or when they will start submitting the applications.
I looked at their website and they haven't posted a thing, nor have they sent an e-mail, like they sent after the first July bulletin came out in June.
I was wondering if any one is in same situation as I am. By the way I already tried to reach them, but could not get through.
Thanks!!
If any one is a client of Cohen and Grisby and looking to appliy AOS now, have you heard anything from them asking for forms and docuements or when they will start submitting the applications.
I looked at their website and they haven't posted a thing, nor have they sent an e-mail, like they sent after the first July bulletin came out in June.
I was wondering if any one is in same situation as I am. By the way I already tried to reach them, but could not get through.
Thanks!!
more...
KKtexas
12-08 11:28 AM
Hi All,
I have already moved to AC21 with one of the big firm and now I am planning to move to Small Company. My job duties will remain same and salary will be greater than my labor filled wages. Questions I have are,
1.Does it matter size of new company in terms of money or number employee for continuing my GC process ?.
2. In case of RFE, Will there be question on Ability to Pay on new small company?
Thanks for your time.
Thanks,
KKTexas
I have already moved to AC21 with one of the big firm and now I am planning to move to Small Company. My job duties will remain same and salary will be greater than my labor filled wages. Questions I have are,
1.Does it matter size of new company in terms of money or number employee for continuing my GC process ?.
2. In case of RFE, Will there be question on Ability to Pay on new small company?
Thanks for your time.
Thanks,
KKTexas
hair short curly haircut
amindarshana
12-03 08:27 AM
Hi
I have filed 140 /485 concurrent on Aug 3rd and haven't received any receipt. Have opened SR , Sent FAX ..but no updates.
As per the nrew rule implemented on July 16th , All the previously approved labor will expire on Jan 12 2008.
If for any reason we don;t receive receipt , what happens to labor.. Are we back to square one ..
If anybody in simiar situation... Please reply.
I have filed 140 /485 concurrent on Aug 3rd and haven't received any receipt. Have opened SR , Sent FAX ..but no updates.
As per the nrew rule implemented on July 16th , All the previously approved labor will expire on Jan 12 2008.
If for any reason we don;t receive receipt , what happens to labor.. Are we back to square one ..
If anybody in simiar situation... Please reply.
more...
Lisap
03-19 04:59 PM
There are instructions on your original letter from the IRS telling you that your application for an ITIN number was granted. I believe you need a copy of that letter and a copy of your ssn to send back to them. If you cant find instructions send me a private message and I will pull my letter out for you.
hot of Short HairStyles
485Mbe4001
08-11 01:54 PM
nice article :o
more...
house Cute Chic Short Hairstyles for
Aishusiva
02-12 03:39 PM
Hi,
I Lost my I797A (but having photo copy) . I want to go to my Home country on emergency for 2 weeks and return to US.
Will I get visa stamping with
1. Copy of I797A and Employee's related documents ?
2. Copy of I797A and Employee's related documents + Proof of Duplication Request ?
3. Whether Duplication form (I-824) Should be separately filed for L1 & L2 ?
Please guide me Immediately.
Thanks in Advanced
Aishwarya Sivaraj
I Lost my I797A (but having photo copy) . I want to go to my Home country on emergency for 2 weeks and return to US.
Will I get visa stamping with
1. Copy of I797A and Employee's related documents ?
2. Copy of I797A and Employee's related documents + Proof of Duplication Request ?
3. Whether Duplication form (I-824) Should be separately filed for L1 & L2 ?
Please guide me Immediately.
Thanks in Advanced
Aishwarya Sivaraj
tattoo hot Great Short Hairstyles for
SlowRoasted
05-22 10:22 PM
nice job, i like it.
more...
pictures short hairstyles for
rkdnc9
09-15 02:06 AM
Hello,
Please guide me in my situation.
I am on OPT right now which is valid thru May 2008. I have already applied for H1 through Company A in April this year. I got a job offer from Company B recently. I would like to join Company B and start working for it on my OPT. Company A failed to provide job for me so I wish to transfer my H1 (once after it is approved) to Company B. Now I have the following questions:
1. What happens to my OPT after I get approved for H1 through Company A?
2. Do I have to stop working for Company B as soon as I get my H1?
3. Can I transfer the H1 I get for Company A to Company B without any paystubs?
4. Can I refuse the H1 and continue to work for Company B on my OPT and then apply for fresh H1 in 2008?
5. Is there any possibility for Company A to cancel my status and make me go back to India?
Please help. I am totally lost and confused.....:confused:
Thanks in advance for any help..
Raj.
Please guide me in my situation.
I am on OPT right now which is valid thru May 2008. I have already applied for H1 through Company A in April this year. I got a job offer from Company B recently. I would like to join Company B and start working for it on my OPT. Company A failed to provide job for me so I wish to transfer my H1 (once after it is approved) to Company B. Now I have the following questions:
1. What happens to my OPT after I get approved for H1 through Company A?
2. Do I have to stop working for Company B as soon as I get my H1?
3. Can I transfer the H1 I get for Company A to Company B without any paystubs?
4. Can I refuse the H1 and continue to work for Company B on my OPT and then apply for fresh H1 in 2008?
5. Is there any possibility for Company A to cancel my status and make me go back to India?
Please help. I am totally lost and confused.....:confused:
Thanks in advance for any help..
Raj.
dresses short hairstyles from the ack
iol_joh
06-13 10:44 PM
Since the priority dates advanced during the month of June, has anyone received approvals on their 485.
PD: Sep 2001.
485 filed: Feb 2004.
Category: EB3
I could not find any discussion related to this issue and hence started this thread. I apologize if I have started a duplicate thread.
PD: Sep 2001.
485 filed: Feb 2004.
Category: EB3
I could not find any discussion related to this issue and hence started this thread. I apologize if I have started a duplicate thread.
more...
makeup Rihanna#39;s short high sculpted
dcrtrv27
08-21 01:17 PM
Oh yes there are many like you check this thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20734
Good Luck
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20734
Good Luck
girlfriend cute short hairstyle
Blog Feeds
05-16 07:40 AM
Opponents of comprehensive immigration reform often point to the 1986 legalization bill as a great failure that should not be repeated. What they don't want to talk about are the great number of success stories for people who were able to become legal. One story that is making the news 25 years later is that of Ana Hernandez Luna who gave an extraordinary speech on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives where she told her own story of her life as a young undocumented immigrant in the 1980s. The Texas Observer reported on her remarks: Tuesday, after it...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/immigrant-of-the-day-ana-hernandez-luna-legislator.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/05/immigrant-of-the-day-ana-hernandez-luna-legislator.html)
hairstyles bob hairstyles back view.
Blog Feeds
04-05 09:40 AM
Notorious Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio deserves some credit for creativity. After losing much of his ability to enforce immigration laws when the Administration grew frustrated over civil rights complaints being filed against the Phoenix area law enforcement chief, Sheriff Joe has found a loophole. He's targeting illegal immigration through criminal laws rather than immigration laws. From the Arizona Daily Star: A raid targeting illegal immigration led to the arrests of 21 Phoenix-area McDonald's workers Friday, and authorities were still seeking 30 other employees. Those arrested during the raid of four McDonald's in Scottsdale, Tempe and Mesa were being held...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/sheriff-joe-conducts-immigration-raid-against-phoenix-area-mcdonalds.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/sheriff-joe-conducts-immigration-raid-against-phoenix-area-mcdonalds.html)
Digitalosophy
10-30 12:00 PM
Change the wording of your title and thread or it will be removed, job seekers is a serious forum for people looking for work, not for jokes.
Macaca
05-25 08:10 PM
Making History, Reluctantly (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052402069.html) In a Hill Anomaly, Pelosi Shepherds Iraq Bill She Opposes, By Jonathan Weisman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jonathan+weisman/) Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, May 25, 2007
In public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had done nothing to suppress her frustration as she assented to funding the Iraq war without a deadline to end it. But behind closed doors Wednesday night, she was all business.
With its members gathered in her office, she told the House's "Progressive Caucus" that she would vote against the war funding bill, but that she also had no choice but to facilitate its passage. Funds were running out for the troops, and she had promised to protect them. The Memorial Day break loomed, and without the money President Bush would have a week to hammer her party for taking a vacation while the Pentagon scrambled to keep its soldiers fed.
Was she agonized over the situation? Sure, said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), who attended the meeting. But "we all feel that way," he added. "I feel that way, too. Are we going to just walk away now, or are we going to continue this process, to keep the pressure on?"
Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party.
Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature.
Over his objections and the opposition of most Republicans, Hastert did allow passage of campaign finance reform in 2002, but only because a petition drive was about to force the bill to the floor. The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton.
In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law.
"We don't relish bringing a package to the floor that we're not going to vote for," Obey conceded before last night's vote.
Pelosi's agonized decision put her in the company of Foley, who in 1991 brought to the floor the resolution authorizing the Persian Gulf War and then voted against it, and Thomas Brackett Reed, a speaker in the 1890s who voted against the annexation of Hawaii, and then against the Spanish-American War, but allowed both to go forward.
"To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it," Hastert said.
But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions.
Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about. A parliamentary vote to bring the Iraq funding legislation to the floor included language demanding a showdown vote in September over further funding. A second vote allowed Democrats to vote in favor of funds for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, agricultural drought relief and children's health insurance. Finally, the House got around to funding the war.
Republicans cried foul over what they saw as an abuse of the legislative system, but Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats.
"It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker," said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), who is personally close to Pelosi. "You can't just walk away."
In public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had done nothing to suppress her frustration as she assented to funding the Iraq war without a deadline to end it. But behind closed doors Wednesday night, she was all business.
With its members gathered in her office, she told the House's "Progressive Caucus" that she would vote against the war funding bill, but that she also had no choice but to facilitate its passage. Funds were running out for the troops, and she had promised to protect them. The Memorial Day break loomed, and without the money President Bush would have a week to hammer her party for taking a vacation while the Pentagon scrambled to keep its soldiers fed.
Was she agonized over the situation? Sure, said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), who attended the meeting. But "we all feel that way," he added. "I feel that way, too. Are we going to just walk away now, or are we going to continue this process, to keep the pressure on?"
Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party.
Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature.
Over his objections and the opposition of most Republicans, Hastert did allow passage of campaign finance reform in 2002, but only because a petition drive was about to force the bill to the floor. The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton.
In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law.
"We don't relish bringing a package to the floor that we're not going to vote for," Obey conceded before last night's vote.
Pelosi's agonized decision put her in the company of Foley, who in 1991 brought to the floor the resolution authorizing the Persian Gulf War and then voted against it, and Thomas Brackett Reed, a speaker in the 1890s who voted against the annexation of Hawaii, and then against the Spanish-American War, but allowed both to go forward.
"To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it," Hastert said.
But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions.
Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about. A parliamentary vote to bring the Iraq funding legislation to the floor included language demanding a showdown vote in September over further funding. A second vote allowed Democrats to vote in favor of funds for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, agricultural drought relief and children's health insurance. Finally, the House got around to funding the war.
Republicans cried foul over what they saw as an abuse of the legislative system, but Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats.
"It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker," said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), who is personally close to Pelosi. "You can't just walk away."
No comments:
Post a Comment