jungalee43
04-29 06:50 PM
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts) - left voice mail
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) - left voice mail
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) -left voice mail
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming) - left voice mail
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) - it was not on my print out. But would call right away.
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada) - Spoke with staff. Could not escape noticing her "sigh" when I mentioned CIR. She asked if I was from Nevada. I said no. But still she patientely took my message. She said there was no official statement yet from the senator and would not tell his position.
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah) - engage. Nothing happened.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) - You must call during office hours. Cannot leave voice mail.
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas) - left voice mail
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky) - engage
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) - Voice mail
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) - Mail box full !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) - left voice mail
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) - left voice mail
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) - left voice mail. Here you hear prompt both in English as well as Spanish before you get the beep of the voice mail.
In every message I mentioned my name, address and phone numbers. Will call the Sen. Graham and sponsoring dems now. I will make another round of calls during office hours tomorrow.
And please the Fax link for guests. They should not be able to edit the mesasge. But must enter name and address. I can have at least 100 faxes sent.
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) - left voice mail
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) -left voice mail
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming) - left voice mail
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) - it was not on my print out. But would call right away.
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada) - Spoke with staff. Could not escape noticing her "sigh" when I mentioned CIR. She asked if I was from Nevada. I said no. But still she patientely took my message. She said there was no official statement yet from the senator and would not tell his position.
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah) - engage. Nothing happened.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) - You must call during office hours. Cannot leave voice mail.
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas) - left voice mail
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky) - engage
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) - Voice mail
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) - Mail box full !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) - left voice mail
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) - left voice mail
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) - left voice mail. Here you hear prompt both in English as well as Spanish before you get the beep of the voice mail.
In every message I mentioned my name, address and phone numbers. Will call the Sen. Graham and sponsoring dems now. I will make another round of calls during office hours tomorrow.
And please the Fax link for guests. They should not be able to edit the mesasge. But must enter name and address. I can have at least 100 faxes sent.
wallpaper hot Cobra Snake Tattoo Art
GCBy3000
04-25 05:09 PM
I agree with this little bit but to implement will be tough. There are people coming into US on h1 and leaving every year from big indian consulting companies. It should be like below.
1. Priority date should be date when the person enters the country.
2. The person should have paid taxes consecutively for n years(n=3.4.5...)
3. This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories.
If the above is not possible, then
1. Labor substiution should be allowed only for the person who is in US continiously for n years(n=3.4.5...) and paid taxes. With this approach, a new comer cannot get the exisitng labor. Win Win to all.
1. Priority date should be date when the person enters the country.
2. The person should have paid taxes consecutively for n years(n=3.4.5...)
3. This should be applicable only for H1 and not for any other visa categories.
If the above is not possible, then
1. Labor substiution should be allowed only for the person who is in US continiously for n years(n=3.4.5...) and paid taxes. With this approach, a new comer cannot get the exisitng labor. Win Win to all.
axp817
11-25 04:30 PM
g 28 does produce soft LUds so it is normal.
Sir,
Thank you for your response. Is it normal to see an LUD on the 140 (approved) as well, when the G-28N is sent in?
Thanks,
Sir,
Thank you for your response. Is it normal to see an LUD on the 140 (approved) as well, when the G-28N is sent in?
Thanks,
2011 Tribal Cross back Tattoos by
singhsa3
09-12 10:51 AM
It is a good idea, can please register your vote against "simple letter"
In my opinion, we should do this:
Just send two information to USCIS, DOS, President, VP, First Lady and all Congress person of the following:
1. 1st info should have a photocopy of our degree certificate(s). On the same page, print your expereince in years and total tax paid till date to the US government.
2. On a fresh page, type in all the H1B/L VISA approval information and type in bold, we were wanted/invited here legally (and admitted via H1/L).
And, mention that our I140 is approved which means the immigration department has validated our eligibility to become PR.
Ask a question (larger font) on the same page, why keep us on limbo?
This would keep the whole thing short and sweet. We are explicitly saying that we are legals. And we were invited here - legally. We are approved by immigration team to be a PR.
If we could send couple of thousands of letters, I am sure it would have impact as much as any other letter we have in mind.
We are not humiliating them, we are just expressing our frustrations but in mass. May be we can say something like, "Legal Techie slaves in the land of liberty" or "Immigration process that enslave Legal Techies". But, we should keep it short.
As always, ignore this idea if you guys dont like it.
In my opinion, we should do this:
Just send two information to USCIS, DOS, President, VP, First Lady and all Congress person of the following:
1. 1st info should have a photocopy of our degree certificate(s). On the same page, print your expereince in years and total tax paid till date to the US government.
2. On a fresh page, type in all the H1B/L VISA approval information and type in bold, we were wanted/invited here legally (and admitted via H1/L).
And, mention that our I140 is approved which means the immigration department has validated our eligibility to become PR.
Ask a question (larger font) on the same page, why keep us on limbo?
This would keep the whole thing short and sweet. We are explicitly saying that we are legals. And we were invited here - legally. We are approved by immigration team to be a PR.
If we could send couple of thousands of letters, I am sure it would have impact as much as any other letter we have in mind.
We are not humiliating them, we are just expressing our frustrations but in mass. May be we can say something like, "Legal Techie slaves in the land of liberty" or "Immigration process that enslave Legal Techies". But, we should keep it short.
As always, ignore this idea if you guys dont like it.
more...
JunRN
05-29 12:59 PM
I don't want to argue either.
In my case, I saved $400 per month as I got mine on 4.5% interest rate. If I got mine on 6% interest rate, I would have paid $144,000 more in the entire duration of my loan. I can't say enough on the value of my house because it is the lowest compared to all my neighbors with same model. The location has the best school district in the city and the elementary school is 3 blocks away.
Refinancing is a tricky part of this game. Refinancing is not always good because most of the time, you will start at month 1 again where the interest part is higher than the principal. It also has closing cost. One should only refinance if the difference is greater than 1%. 1% is only break even.
I am not saying all others should buy now. What I am saying is that we cannot say it's not a good time to buy either. It depends on where you're buying.
In my case, I saved $400 per month as I got mine on 4.5% interest rate. If I got mine on 6% interest rate, I would have paid $144,000 more in the entire duration of my loan. I can't say enough on the value of my house because it is the lowest compared to all my neighbors with same model. The location has the best school district in the city and the elementary school is 3 blocks away.
Refinancing is a tricky part of this game. Refinancing is not always good because most of the time, you will start at month 1 again where the interest part is higher than the principal. It also has closing cost. One should only refinance if the difference is greater than 1%. 1% is only break even.
I am not saying all others should buy now. What I am saying is that we cannot say it's not a good time to buy either. It depends on where you're buying.
Macaca
10-01 12:21 PM
In 2002 all the EB visas were issued (174,968). However, there were 31,532 unused family preference visas, so the limit for 2003 was 171,532 (140,000 + 31,532).
Guess what, in 2003 they only approved 82,137 EB visas, so they ended up with 88,482 unused EB visas
From where did you get 174,968?
Is there any case where unused FP #'s were captured for EB?
Guess what, in 2003 they only approved 82,137 EB visas, so they ended up with 88,482 unused EB visas
From where did you get 174,968?
Is there any case where unused FP #'s were captured for EB?
more...
needhelp!
03-12 02:58 PM
reddog, please explain how you have supported IV in the past in non-monetary ways. For lobbying, there is not much you can do other than support monetarily,or make trips to DC yourself.
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
2010 The Electric Cobra Tattoo Club
Macaca
09-12 04:13 PM
JoAnne Allen: joanne.allen@reuters.com *
Eric Auchard
Luke Baker
Matthew Bigg
Mike Conlon
Richard Cowan
Bernd Debusmann
Allan Dowd
Paul Eckert
Robin Emmott
Stephen Farber
Jim Finkle
Dana Ford
Jim Forsyth
Adriana Garcia
Tim Gaynor
Daniel Gilbert
Steve Gorman
Steve Holland steve.holland@reuters.com
Jon Hurdle
Emily Kaiser
Glenn Kessler
Bappa Majumdar
Lucy Nalpathanchil
Michelle Nichols
Claudia Parsons
Jeremy Pelofsky jeremy.pelofsky@reuters.com
Kemp Powers
Simon Rabinovitch
Missy Ryan
David Schwartz
Jill Serjeant
Donna Smith donna.smith@reuters.com
Matt Spetalnick
Ed Stoddard
Andy Sullivan
Daisuke Wakabayashi: Daisuke.Wakabayashi@reuters.com
Dan Whitcomb
Tabassum Zakaria
Email pattern: firstName.lastName@reuters.com
Eric Auchard
Luke Baker
Matthew Bigg
Mike Conlon
Richard Cowan
Bernd Debusmann
Allan Dowd
Paul Eckert
Robin Emmott
Stephen Farber
Jim Finkle
Dana Ford
Jim Forsyth
Adriana Garcia
Tim Gaynor
Daniel Gilbert
Steve Gorman
Steve Holland steve.holland@reuters.com
Jon Hurdle
Emily Kaiser
Glenn Kessler
Bappa Majumdar
Lucy Nalpathanchil
Michelle Nichols
Claudia Parsons
Jeremy Pelofsky jeremy.pelofsky@reuters.com
Kemp Powers
Simon Rabinovitch
Missy Ryan
David Schwartz
Jill Serjeant
Donna Smith donna.smith@reuters.com
Matt Spetalnick
Ed Stoddard
Andy Sullivan
Daisuke Wakabayashi: Daisuke.Wakabayashi@reuters.com
Dan Whitcomb
Tabassum Zakaria
Email pattern: firstName.lastName@reuters.com
more...
gc_on_demand
12-10 04:38 PM
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
hair King Cobra Tattoo amp; Outfit
ashutrip
06-18 12:57 PM
I emailed them not as me but as my employer( point of contact mentioned in the labor petition) and it works they send me a copy of the labor approval to my house along with a copy to my employer and one to my attroney. It really works.
what is your pd?
what is your pd?
more...
nlssubbu
07-24 07:41 PM
I keep reading people getting emails from USCIS. I don't remember providing my lawyer with my email address? When/where do you provide the email address? Tx
Please create an user id for you and add all the case numbers associated with you here:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp
Whenever there is an update regarding the cases related to you, USCIS will send you an automatic mail.
Thanks
Please create an user id for you and add all the case numbers associated with you here:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp
Whenever there is an update regarding the cases related to you, USCIS will send you an automatic mail.
Thanks
hot USMC Emblem Tattoo
Libra
09-12 02:13 PM
thank you imm_pro, let's go to DC.
Thanks IV...way to go.
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Thanks IV...way to go.
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
more...
house Cobra Tattoo · Lotus Flower
add78
05-22 04:03 PM
You are right, Ramesh, sadly people have time to check for Bill updates and get their spirits down with amendment removal news but no time to get more friends to join or contribute. Please wake up people and contribute, and persuade your friends / colleagues at work you know to join IV. I got a weird response (chat) from a close friend saying she would rather donate to Myanmar/ China victim that her own Immigration cause, but I haven't given up, I will try to persuade such friends even though that raised my B.P. Please, people who seek advice and answers, consider contributing first. Bump.
tattoo his intense cobra tattoo
sri1309
03-12 11:50 AM
Not true. Anybody donates will get Donor status. This is started for last few days, so people who donated in last few days get this. Pappu mentioned that he is planning to cross reference this with old donations but not sure whats happening there.
Pappu,
In that case I have sent $100 about an year back, and the memo section does say my account name as "sri1309". It was sent by Money order. Can you please change my status as Donor. I like that.
Also I posted one thread just now "lets start writing to Zoe".. Can you please let me know if there is some moderation step which is taking time. Earlier it used to be instantly posted.
ItsFunny,
Thanks,
Pappu,
In that case I have sent $100 about an year back, and the memo section does say my account name as "sri1309". It was sent by Money order. Can you please change my status as Donor. I like that.
Also I posted one thread just now "lets start writing to Zoe".. Can you please let me know if there is some moderation step which is taking time. Earlier it used to be instantly posted.
ItsFunny,
Thanks,
more...
pictures How to Draw a Cobra Tattoo
ssprof
09-10 05:10 PM
Contributed $100
dresses cobra tattoo, devil tattoo
john2255
07-20 12:20 PM
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
more...
makeup Full Arm Cobra Tattoo
RN_Usa
07-31 11:39 AM
i m Nurse on h4 and waiting to finish my Nclex exam fast. Lack of nclex certificate make us loss the chance for applying for imigration petition..
girlfriend cobra snake tattoo.
eb3_nepa
04-25 01:04 PM
So what happens to people who already have a PD based on the labor(LC) date?
I dont want to go a step back in the line just cuz someone who had been lethargic all his life just woke up on his last day of his 6th year and goes "Ohh you know what I think I might be interested in a GC" ,when I had planned or had the *intent* to apply for a GC a few years before by applying for LC.
I agree. Also it will be a MONUMENTAL fiasco at the UCSIS and DOL. How do we forsee changing existing applicants' PDs. That will be atleast a 4-6 month backlog and i am being optimistic here.
I dont want to go a step back in the line just cuz someone who had been lethargic all his life just woke up on his last day of his 6th year and goes "Ohh you know what I think I might be interested in a GC" ,when I had planned or had the *intent* to apply for a GC a few years before by applying for LC.
I agree. Also it will be a MONUMENTAL fiasco at the UCSIS and DOL. How do we forsee changing existing applicants' PDs. That will be atleast a 4-6 month backlog and i am being optimistic here.
hairstyles tattoo 3d, 3d tattoo tiger,
GeetaRam
12-01 09:33 AM
Thanks a lot for your reply 9 years...
485Mbe4001
02-01 04:19 PM
Do we have a meeting scheduled today? if yes at what time?
thanks,
thanks,
santb1975
06-10 12:16 AM
Reflects my thoughts
�I am not judged by the number of times I fail, but by the number of times I succeed: and the number of times I succeed is in direct proportion to the number of times I fail and keep trying.�
For those who believe in this, please contribute to the cause...
�I am not judged by the number of times I fail, but by the number of times I succeed: and the number of times I succeed is in direct proportion to the number of times I fail and keep trying.�
For those who believe in this, please contribute to the cause...
0 comments:
Post a Comment