2ndJuly
09-17 02:21 PM
you mean LEGAL aliens...:)
well there is nothing like Illegal Aliens. Aliens need to have I-94 or paroled to land in US
well there is nothing like Illegal Aliens. Aliens need to have I-94 or paroled to land in US
wallpaper FIAT DUCATO 2.3 Ci CARIOCA 705
lonedesi
02-06 12:18 AM
I completely agree with Logiclife and the goals IV has setforth to solve our problems. There is only so much one can achieve with limited resources under which IV operates.
We need to have a set of priorities and work on that one step at time. Though I have not been to DC, I can understand what IV is going through to get us some relief. The least I can do is contribute for our cause and thats what I am doing right now.
I wish people had some common sense and better understanding of the bigger picture(& issues) before they get involved in finger pointing and asking for more.
Everyone, please be patient and support IV whole heartedly and financially so that we can atleast attempt to fix the broken immigration system. Though I am VERY optimistic that we will achieve our goals in the near future, but I would not regret even once, if we failed. It is better to try and fail than not give it a shot at all.
We need to have a set of priorities and work on that one step at time. Though I have not been to DC, I can understand what IV is going through to get us some relief. The least I can do is contribute for our cause and thats what I am doing right now.
I wish people had some common sense and better understanding of the bigger picture(& issues) before they get involved in finger pointing and asking for more.
Everyone, please be patient and support IV whole heartedly and financially so that we can atleast attempt to fix the broken immigration system. Though I am VERY optimistic that we will achieve our goals in the near future, but I would not regret even once, if we failed. It is better to try and fail than not give it a shot at all.
vasa
07-13 02:57 PM
Good Luck Guys...
Thank you for your efforts for the good of the entire community.
Thank you for your efforts for the good of the entire community.
2011 Inchiriere Fiat Ducat.
praky
08-10 11:23 AM
Thanks gimme_gc2006.
I know how it feels when guys out there with priority date later than you get approved and you're stuck in this black hole with no clue on what the current status is.
Usually, it takes atleast 7 days for the congressman staff to get any response. It's always better to call the staff casually after couple of days to make sure they have got all the paper work you've sent and they are working on it.
I'm sure your case will be approved soon - have hope.
I know how it feels when guys out there with priority date later than you get approved and you're stuck in this black hole with no clue on what the current status is.
Usually, it takes atleast 7 days for the congressman staff to get any response. It's always better to call the staff casually after couple of days to make sure they have got all the paper work you've sent and they are working on it.
I'm sure your case will be approved soon - have hope.
more...
chicago60607
09-17 11:33 AM
Lofgren is offering managers amendment (which includes a comprise with Mr.King and minorities). THIS IS for HR6020 NOT for HR5882. We are NEXT.
hpandey
06-13 12:59 PM
Pappu,
Thanks for the post and your time!
1. "PLEASE Put your real dates in your profile" There is no provision to put dates for CP filers!! All the dates are for 485 filers.
Though it is proven time and again that CP filers are the least needed people on this forum (next to EB3 I - going by this thread), it is unfair not reserving few columns on the profile for CP filers ... It doesn't cost VISA numbers for that...
2. I have told this before but would like to repeat now... I don't contribute because there is nothing for CP filers here. VISA recapturing is the only effort that would benefit CP filers but anyway the chances of that bill passing is close to 0.
In my opinion, the biggest sufferers are people in EB3 India or China and who have opted for CP (now guys, don't start lecturing on CP vs. 485. We have heard it enough).
Hi Will Win
We all are immigrants in some way or the other standing in some line or the other. We need to be together . What IV is trying is to fix the system. If something somewhere gets fixed it surely benefits the immigrants and brings hope for other things that need to be fixed. Don't you think if the EB system here was fixed, IV would have been able to focus on CP ?
We all need to stick together to help each other.
Thanks
Thanks for the post and your time!
1. "PLEASE Put your real dates in your profile" There is no provision to put dates for CP filers!! All the dates are for 485 filers.
Though it is proven time and again that CP filers are the least needed people on this forum (next to EB3 I - going by this thread), it is unfair not reserving few columns on the profile for CP filers ... It doesn't cost VISA numbers for that...
2. I have told this before but would like to repeat now... I don't contribute because there is nothing for CP filers here. VISA recapturing is the only effort that would benefit CP filers but anyway the chances of that bill passing is close to 0.
In my opinion, the biggest sufferers are people in EB3 India or China and who have opted for CP (now guys, don't start lecturing on CP vs. 485. We have heard it enough).
Hi Will Win
We all are immigrants in some way or the other standing in some line or the other. We need to be together . What IV is trying is to fix the system. If something somewhere gets fixed it surely benefits the immigrants and brings hope for other things that need to be fixed. Don't you think if the EB system here was fixed, IV would have been able to focus on CP ?
We all need to stick together to help each other.
Thanks
more...
jnraajan
03-13 11:43 AM
jnraajan,
Allow me to respond to your message. But before I do that, will request you to please remove the advertisement to your website - which in my opinion is divisive. IV is not just for Indians or for people from any one country/geographical location. Hope you would agree and do the necessary at your earliest convenience.
Thanks,
Sure. It has been done
Allow me to respond to your message. But before I do that, will request you to please remove the advertisement to your website - which in my opinion is divisive. IV is not just for Indians or for people from any one country/geographical location. Hope you would agree and do the necessary at your earliest convenience.
Thanks,
Sure. It has been done
2010 fiat camper. fiat ducato jpg
legalVoice
04-29 06:01 PM
How much has been collected so far?
more...
vin13
09-17 10:40 AM
i hope they dont do that this time :(...i mean take a break at 11:30
hair Fiat Ducato
never_giveup
09-17 11:01 AM
The proceedings have not started yet. I see people moving in and out.
Reminds me of the Govt Offices in India. Doesnt look much different here !!!
And they are probably gonna take a break at 12 for lunch .. lets c!!!
Reminds me of the Govt Offices in India. Doesnt look much different here !!!
And they are probably gonna take a break at 12 for lunch .. lets c!!!
more...
ilikekilo
05-26 05:01 PM
Salient features of Bill: S.1085
After analyzing this bill, I found the following:
1. This bill will recapture all those unused employment based visas (gcs) from 1997 till 2008 and it will add those recaptured visas to this year's employment based quota.
2. After the passage of this bill, any unused visas will rollover to the next year. So, no more wastage of visas as we go forward.
3. Per country limit will be increased from 7% to 10%, so more folks from over subscribed countries would be able to come under the normal yearly quota.
4. We will be able to avail the benefits of the recapture after 60 days of the passage of the bill. That means, if they are able to recapture 220,000 (approx) employment based visas, the employment based category will be able to use all those after 60 days of the passage of this bill. USCIS is pre-adjudicating all I485s pending and if this bill gets passed in say for eg by October 30, almost all (80%) in this community (who filed 485) would be able get their GCs in Jan and Feb of 2010.
What makes this bill much more interesting is:
1. This is not a bill targetting the issues of Employment based category - So there won't be a huge backlash against this in the name of the economy and recession. The provisions for the employment category are just one item in this bill.
2. Family based immigration reform has a wider range of support from all kinds of groups unlike Employment based immigration reform. Just search for this bill "Reuniting Families Act" in google news and you can identify all those organizations supporting this bill (they all have a news release).
Complete Text of this Bill:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.1085:
per this senators site it is 400K approx....
http://gillibrand.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=CC4C8961-BF60-4182-A3EC-E96BC338EE30
After analyzing this bill, I found the following:
1. This bill will recapture all those unused employment based visas (gcs) from 1997 till 2008 and it will add those recaptured visas to this year's employment based quota.
2. After the passage of this bill, any unused visas will rollover to the next year. So, no more wastage of visas as we go forward.
3. Per country limit will be increased from 7% to 10%, so more folks from over subscribed countries would be able to come under the normal yearly quota.
4. We will be able to avail the benefits of the recapture after 60 days of the passage of the bill. That means, if they are able to recapture 220,000 (approx) employment based visas, the employment based category will be able to use all those after 60 days of the passage of this bill. USCIS is pre-adjudicating all I485s pending and if this bill gets passed in say for eg by October 30, almost all (80%) in this community (who filed 485) would be able get their GCs in Jan and Feb of 2010.
What makes this bill much more interesting is:
1. This is not a bill targetting the issues of Employment based category - So there won't be a huge backlash against this in the name of the economy and recession. The provisions for the employment category are just one item in this bill.
2. Family based immigration reform has a wider range of support from all kinds of groups unlike Employment based immigration reform. Just search for this bill "Reuniting Families Act" in google news and you can identify all those organizations supporting this bill (they all have a news release).
Complete Text of this Bill:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.1085:
per this senators site it is 400K approx....
http://gillibrand.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=CC4C8961-BF60-4182-A3EC-E96BC338EE30
hot Fiat Ducato side load
BharatPremi
03-13 12:23 PM
I seriously hope that this is correct even though it doesn't apply to me : (
Anyway, IIRC, in past there have been incidences where VB posted in mumbai Consulate's website actually did not turn out to be true. Couple of years back - after the retrogression - it predicted huge forward movement which 2 days later turned out to be false hope...
so keep your fingers crossed...
: )
That is exactly I was thinking. My first confusion was why the hell people want to check CP dates and create the false thread but then I realize they must not be around/ in the process to realize that CP dates != AOS dates. Some times CP ones equals but not always. Let's hope those equals to AOS dats this time.
Anyway, IIRC, in past there have been incidences where VB posted in mumbai Consulate's website actually did not turn out to be true. Couple of years back - after the retrogression - it predicted huge forward movement which 2 days later turned out to be false hope...
so keep your fingers crossed...
: )
That is exactly I was thinking. My first confusion was why the hell people want to check CP dates and create the false thread but then I realize they must not be around/ in the process to realize that CP dates != AOS dates. Some times CP ones equals but not always. Let's hope those equals to AOS dats this time.
more...
house 2001 Fiat Ducato Bessacarr
deepakshah
07-15 09:16 PM
signed today
tattoo The blue Fiat Ducato was
sobers
02-22 12:31 PM
Whether it is logical or not, whether we like it or not, the issues of illegal and legal immigration are intrinsically tied up (to the disadvantage of skilled workers, of course:-()
Anyhow, this appeared in today's Wall Street Journal...it may forbode a taste of things to come..or not come..this one focusses on the DREAM Act which is geared to provide in-state tuition to illegal immigrants..
---------------
Should Illegal Immigrants Get Tuition Help?
States' Varying Stances on College-Education Benefit Illustrate Congress's Overhaul Task
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
February 22, 2006; Page A4
WASHINGTON -- An emotional state-level dispute over college tuition shows how tough it will be for Congress to overhaul immigration laws and extend citizenship benefits to the country's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.
Four years ago, California passed a law granting in-state tuition to students who were in the U.S. illegally but had graduated from a California high school. Eight other states followed, allowing illegal immigrants to attend public colleges for in-state student fees -- usually less than half what out-of-state students pay.
DiAnna Schimek, a Democrat who heads the Nebraska Senate's education committee, says she has pushed for an in-state tuition bill for illegal immigrants as a matter of compassion and economic calculation. "These children didn't bring themselves" but were brought by their parents, she says. "It's only a good investment on our part to make certain they are productive citizens."
But attitudes have been hardening as an estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants flood in yearly. "That's an alarm to the people here ... it's a drain on the economy," says Rep. Glenn Donnelson, a Utah Republican who heads an education committee in his state.
So while some legislators want to extend tuition benefits to illegal immigrants in their states, others are calling for laws to deny the benefit -- or take it back.
Lawmakers in Utah, Kansas and New Mexico -- which passed in-state tuition benefits only two or three years ago -- now are waging uphill fights to repeal them. Massachusetts legislators last month rejected a bill to offer in-state tuition benefits to illegal immigrants.
Six states are considering measures that would deny in-state tuition, tuition waivers or state scholarships to illegal immigrants. In New York, which offers in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, and Virginia, which recently passed a law offering benefits to some, bills have been introduced to bar illegal immigrants from attending public colleges.
Meanwhile, lawsuits challenging in-state tuition for illegal immigrants have been filed in California and in Kansas. "There's something wrong with giving a benefit to an illegal that we don't even give to citizens of other states," says state Rep. Becky Hutchins, a Kansas Republican leading a repeal effort there.
The tuition laws generally require illegal immigrants to have attended a local high school for three years, to have graduated or earned a high-school equivalency and to sign an affidavit promising to legalize their immigration status as soon as they are eligible.
Promoters expect few students to actually take up the benefit. Dropout rates are high and academic scores generally are low among Hispanics, who account for the majority of illegal aliens. And even in-state tuition, which averages about $5,500 this year, may be out of reach for children whose parents typically hold minimum-wage jobs.
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri law professor who brought a federal suit against the Kansas program, says 221 illegal immigrants are enrolled in Kansas public colleges this year, and that even when the benefit becomes widely known, the number probably wouldn't exceed 2,700.
Even so, in-state tuition laws have become flashpoint among some voters who feel they haven't any other way to protest illegal immigration. Federal laws allow illegal immigrants to use emergency medical services, and a 1982 Supreme Court decision entitles their children to public education through high school.
Rod Adair, a New Mexico state senator who introduced unsuccessful legislation to repeal his state's immigrant-tuition benefit, says he was acting "in response to my constituents. They're frustrated."
Prof. Kobach's suit contends Kansas's in-state tuition benefit violates a federal law that prohibits states from giving any benefit to an illegal alien that they don't also extend to all U.S. citizens.
Among his plaintiffs, Heidi Hydeman, an Iowa native, says she was charged out-of-state tuition by the University of Kansas, though she lived in Kansas for six years and paid Kansas income tax for three years while attending the school. "I thought it was unfair," says Ms. Hydeman.
Mr. Donnelson, the Utah legislator, says Utah would face a $34 million bill if a similar suit were filed there, and current out-of-state students were refunded the difference between in-state tuition and the nonresident tuition they pay.
But legislators' doubts go beyond that. Although illegal immigrants who get the tuition benefit pledge to legalize their status, there is almost no way they can do that under current laws. And even with a college degree, there is almost no way for illegal immigrants to legally get a job.
For years, congressional supporters have promoted a measure, called the Dream Act, that would clear up those problems. States would be allowed to offer in-state tuition to illegal-immigrant students who, in turn, could become citizens.
In 2003, almost half the Senate cosponsored the Dream Act. But the Dream Act's prospects have faded, and this year its pivotal supporter, Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, withdrew as a sponsor. "Realistically, the Dream Act will not pass" and should be included in an overhaul of immigration laws, he said.
But the tensions fueling opposition to in-state tuition laws are the same ones making it hard for Congress to pass immigration overhaul. A coalition of pro-business Republicans, Democrats, immigrant-rights groups and labor unions wants new federal laws that would let illegal immigrants eventually become citizens.
They are being stymied, however, by social conservatives, who worry about being culturally overwhelmed by immigrants, and by Republican national-security hawks, who are demanding that Washington cut off illegal immigration first. The tension prevented the U.S. House from taking up immigration overhaul last year, and is complicating the Senate's efforts to pass it this year.
Write to June Kronholz at june.kronholz@wsj.com
Anyhow, this appeared in today's Wall Street Journal...it may forbode a taste of things to come..or not come..this one focusses on the DREAM Act which is geared to provide in-state tuition to illegal immigrants..
---------------
Should Illegal Immigrants Get Tuition Help?
States' Varying Stances on College-Education Benefit Illustrate Congress's Overhaul Task
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
February 22, 2006; Page A4
WASHINGTON -- An emotional state-level dispute over college tuition shows how tough it will be for Congress to overhaul immigration laws and extend citizenship benefits to the country's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.
Four years ago, California passed a law granting in-state tuition to students who were in the U.S. illegally but had graduated from a California high school. Eight other states followed, allowing illegal immigrants to attend public colleges for in-state student fees -- usually less than half what out-of-state students pay.
DiAnna Schimek, a Democrat who heads the Nebraska Senate's education committee, says she has pushed for an in-state tuition bill for illegal immigrants as a matter of compassion and economic calculation. "These children didn't bring themselves" but were brought by their parents, she says. "It's only a good investment on our part to make certain they are productive citizens."
But attitudes have been hardening as an estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants flood in yearly. "That's an alarm to the people here ... it's a drain on the economy," says Rep. Glenn Donnelson, a Utah Republican who heads an education committee in his state.
So while some legislators want to extend tuition benefits to illegal immigrants in their states, others are calling for laws to deny the benefit -- or take it back.
Lawmakers in Utah, Kansas and New Mexico -- which passed in-state tuition benefits only two or three years ago -- now are waging uphill fights to repeal them. Massachusetts legislators last month rejected a bill to offer in-state tuition benefits to illegal immigrants.
Six states are considering measures that would deny in-state tuition, tuition waivers or state scholarships to illegal immigrants. In New York, which offers in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, and Virginia, which recently passed a law offering benefits to some, bills have been introduced to bar illegal immigrants from attending public colleges.
Meanwhile, lawsuits challenging in-state tuition for illegal immigrants have been filed in California and in Kansas. "There's something wrong with giving a benefit to an illegal that we don't even give to citizens of other states," says state Rep. Becky Hutchins, a Kansas Republican leading a repeal effort there.
The tuition laws generally require illegal immigrants to have attended a local high school for three years, to have graduated or earned a high-school equivalency and to sign an affidavit promising to legalize their immigration status as soon as they are eligible.
Promoters expect few students to actually take up the benefit. Dropout rates are high and academic scores generally are low among Hispanics, who account for the majority of illegal aliens. And even in-state tuition, which averages about $5,500 this year, may be out of reach for children whose parents typically hold minimum-wage jobs.
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri law professor who brought a federal suit against the Kansas program, says 221 illegal immigrants are enrolled in Kansas public colleges this year, and that even when the benefit becomes widely known, the number probably wouldn't exceed 2,700.
Even so, in-state tuition laws have become flashpoint among some voters who feel they haven't any other way to protest illegal immigration. Federal laws allow illegal immigrants to use emergency medical services, and a 1982 Supreme Court decision entitles their children to public education through high school.
Rod Adair, a New Mexico state senator who introduced unsuccessful legislation to repeal his state's immigrant-tuition benefit, says he was acting "in response to my constituents. They're frustrated."
Prof. Kobach's suit contends Kansas's in-state tuition benefit violates a federal law that prohibits states from giving any benefit to an illegal alien that they don't also extend to all U.S. citizens.
Among his plaintiffs, Heidi Hydeman, an Iowa native, says she was charged out-of-state tuition by the University of Kansas, though she lived in Kansas for six years and paid Kansas income tax for three years while attending the school. "I thought it was unfair," says Ms. Hydeman.
Mr. Donnelson, the Utah legislator, says Utah would face a $34 million bill if a similar suit were filed there, and current out-of-state students were refunded the difference between in-state tuition and the nonresident tuition they pay.
But legislators' doubts go beyond that. Although illegal immigrants who get the tuition benefit pledge to legalize their status, there is almost no way they can do that under current laws. And even with a college degree, there is almost no way for illegal immigrants to legally get a job.
For years, congressional supporters have promoted a measure, called the Dream Act, that would clear up those problems. States would be allowed to offer in-state tuition to illegal-immigrant students who, in turn, could become citizens.
In 2003, almost half the Senate cosponsored the Dream Act. But the Dream Act's prospects have faded, and this year its pivotal supporter, Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, withdrew as a sponsor. "Realistically, the Dream Act will not pass" and should be included in an overhaul of immigration laws, he said.
But the tensions fueling opposition to in-state tuition laws are the same ones making it hard for Congress to pass immigration overhaul. A coalition of pro-business Republicans, Democrats, immigrant-rights groups and labor unions wants new federal laws that would let illegal immigrants eventually become citizens.
They are being stymied, however, by social conservatives, who worry about being culturally overwhelmed by immigrants, and by Republican national-security hawks, who are demanding that Washington cut off illegal immigration first. The tension prevented the U.S. House from taking up immigration overhaul last year, and is complicating the Senate's efforts to pass it this year.
Write to June Kronholz at june.kronholz@wsj.com
more...
pictures Fiat Ducato 2002-2006
anjs
01-31 12:04 PM
Done
anjs
anjs
dresses FIAT DUCATO 2.0 JTD McLOUIS
mnkaushik
04-18 02:38 PM
My M.C.A was 3 years. this will help?
-vga
I agree with PlainSpeak, it is better to get it evaluated. Also, sorry i did not read your earlier post cleary. Both my friends did a MBA and not a MCA. I know of a collegaue who is in the process of applying under EB2 and she has 3 year MCA degree in addition to her 3 year Bachelors.
-vga
I agree with PlainSpeak, it is better to get it evaluated. Also, sorry i did not read your earlier post cleary. Both my friends did a MBA and not a MCA. I know of a collegaue who is in the process of applying under EB2 and she has 3 year MCA degree in addition to her 3 year Bachelors.
more...
makeup camper fiat ducato
Maverick1
11-13 12:18 PM
Although we cite the cost savings (from renewal of EAD) most people if not all who prefer to keep H1 status will definitely renew their EAD/AP just to be safe. On the AP case, I got 3 copies of multiple entry APs. My attorney told me to make copies of it and give only copies at the POE and point out that it is a multiple entry document if the officer wants to keep the original, so that the original stays with you.
This is interesting. I am trying to understand the reason why we should give copies. If you have three copies, and at POE they take one and return two, how does that harm you. I mean what is the point of keeping all three if there eligibility is 1 year and you don't expect to go out of the country a second time.
I think the advise is based on the following :
1) You need more (original copies - if you keep giving originals at POE) if you travel quite often.
2) Not every one got 3 copies. Some only got two.
3) Some officers may insist on taking the original and some may understand and accept the copy. So it is always useful to keep more originals.
4) It is ALWAYS safe to keep ATLEAST one original copy even if you think you won't travel within the validity for emergencies.
5) Although the originals after expiry may not be useful but that strategy to keep originals wont hurt. Why give the original when you CAN give a copy.
I thought on the same lines as you did when I first saw that letter from attorney, but I am going to follow the advise.
This is interesting. I am trying to understand the reason why we should give copies. If you have three copies, and at POE they take one and return two, how does that harm you. I mean what is the point of keeping all three if there eligibility is 1 year and you don't expect to go out of the country a second time.
I think the advise is based on the following :
1) You need more (original copies - if you keep giving originals at POE) if you travel quite often.
2) Not every one got 3 copies. Some only got two.
3) Some officers may insist on taking the original and some may understand and accept the copy. So it is always useful to keep more originals.
4) It is ALWAYS safe to keep ATLEAST one original copy even if you think you won't travel within the validity for emergencies.
5) Although the originals after expiry may not be useful but that strategy to keep originals wont hurt. Why give the original when you CAN give a copy.
I thought on the same lines as you did when I first saw that letter from attorney, but I am going to follow the advise.
girlfriend Kip Camper. Fiat Ducato
Bradman
11-05 08:50 AM
Write to Mr. Bush (no kidding). They will send an inquiry to FBI and you will get something from FBI NNCP (name check division). If that does not help, file a lawsuit against USCIS/FBI. Or you can file a lawsuit first and then write a letter to save some time. The lawsuit will get things moving. The do-it-yourself guide is located here:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
It worked man !!!
Gotta the Card production mail this morning after writing to the presidents office
Thanks a ton for your valuable advise !!!
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
It worked man !!!
Gotta the Card production mail this morning after writing to the presidents office
Thanks a ton for your valuable advise !!!
hairstyles Fiat Ducato Camper Van.
ilikekilo
04-25 12:43 PM
High time this bill is passed. Too much fraud in L1s and H1s.Existing H1s dont have jobs and our green cards pending and no hope when it will come. They should really make L1 very very hard because I work in a huge wireless company where they get L1s from companies like TCS and they work 15 hours a day with $25 billing rate, because of which all contractors and permenant workes (on H1, GC, EAD etc) are being laid off
I wish this bill passes with full effect
Your emotions are understood as we are all in the same boat towards a common goal. Please refrain from making comments that give a perception to people who read it as if the whole system is rotten, it doesnt help yours and our cause..thanks for your understanding.:).. and lastly please dont name companies either. Its just doesnt help.
I wish this bill passes with full effect
Your emotions are understood as we are all in the same boat towards a common goal. Please refrain from making comments that give a perception to people who read it as if the whole system is rotten, it doesnt help yours and our cause..thanks for your understanding.:).. and lastly please dont name companies either. Its just doesnt help.
widad2020
03-13 04:40 PM
Keep the good work IV Core.Don't mind Slave comments.We are thankful for your work.
s_r_e_e
03-18 05:50 PM
I found this only today.. I do not work for this employer since Jan 2008. On EAD now.. 46 days passed since the date mentioned.. not sure what is this about..
Current Status: Case reopened or reconsidered based on USCIS determination, and the case is now pending.
We reopened this I129 PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER on January 30, 2008, ...
I found out from prev employer that it was due to the H1 withdrawel petition..
Current Status: Case reopened or reconsidered based on USCIS determination, and the case is now pending.
We reopened this I129 PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER on January 30, 2008, ...
I found out from prev employer that it was due to the H1 withdrawel petition..
No comments:
Post a Comment