Mike Tyson Tattoos

Since they got transferred to CSC, they start with WAC.

Hope that helps..

You are talking about 2004, 05. What about 2001, 2002 and 2003? There are so many people with 2002 priority dates still waiting just like me. Mine is 02/2002

What a unfair/unethical/inhuman system. I curse everyone who is causing this delay. They will all land up in hell.

>> You are talking about 2004, 05
SunnySurya is taking about 2004, 2005 because his PD is Oct 2005. Its that simple. Just self-interest.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm interested in as well: Landed and returned using AP. A first hand account would be great, so far people have only pointed to indirect references, which I'm not saying is useless, but like I said, first hand details would be the best...

PD: 03 '05
ND: Jun 26 '08
Card production ordered on August 18, 2008
what's ur EB category? i see a lot approvals for EB2 folks who filed EAD in july, but few EB3s.

Kennedy, McCain, 2 congressmen meet
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE

December 9, 2006

WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.


Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.

The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.

Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.

�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.


Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�

Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.

Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.

The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.


Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.

Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�

But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.

While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�


Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.

Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.

While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.

At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.

�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.

He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.

But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.

Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�

Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�

�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�

President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.

Dear Mehul,

I am extremely sorry to hear about your situation. I guess you shd directly contact USCIS authority who can guide
you properly instead of going thru' multiple lawyers . Write a letter to the state senator an explain your situation.Last but not least remain positive. God is there with you and your family.

Atleast we agree on one point that the law is absurd.

Nope. Vast majority including EB-2s do not disagree with porting, even though they might not be very vocal about it.

Gandhiri is not for this Country - all they listen to is Money......
Those who follow Gandhi are treated as if they were Hitlers allies...like MLK Jr. They are SHOT!!!
If you can weild a good $ bat, then they will listen to you..!!

Use web based contact forms provided on each senator's website.

You can find senator's contact info from this page.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Hi,
Can someone copy paste the email ids of senators. I have limited access to internet at my work place.

Thanks and Regards,
Krish

Could some one please tell me on how to contribute for this issue ?

I am ready to contribute a little.

I hope everybody will contribute a little, so that AMAN will come out of this issue.

--Balakishore

( Contributed $100 till today )

Quick question...how can we check LUD wihtout receipt notices...is there any way? please suggest.



Did you noticed any LUD before check cashing as you got receipt from california. I filed on July 20 and no news yet.

I
....
My question to you was if no H1B is "permanent" (as you opine), then how can you prove that the AC20 job on H1B is or isn't "permanent?" So if that job is not "permanent," how do you convince/mention that in as RVE-EVL?

Because Future GC job could be same job on H-1B, only difference being on H-1B your job has fixed end date (noted by I-94), and GC job has no fixed end date, hence permanent. It does not make that current job on H-1B permanent.

Temp Job and Permannet Job can have same job title and job duties. Just like contract job and full-time job can have same job title and job duties, but one is employee of the company and other one is not.


.

Ragz thanks for removing the unnecessary quotes :)

I got the e-mail saying that they have mailed my 485 approval notice on August 4 - but nothing after that - will the notice come to me at home or will it go to the lawyer - also how long before the card production e-mail gets here - not that I am in a tearing hurry - I have waited several years so what is another month ?
Thanks

I can tell you - based on my observation from folks who have received the card before, within 7-10 days your card should be on its way to your HOME not LAWYER.

Hello Sir,

While opinions are good and welcome. My requirement is to see the exact INA language.

I have read the INA Sec 203 multiple times, I could not find the link between ebquota and ebdependents. May be I am missing it. Can some one show the exact lines in INA ?

Think about this "5 year old derivative kid" is counted in ebquota. How did the kid qualify for ebquota ? The law clearly says "to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs" and then goes on to say the exact qualification.

Don't take me out of context. I do want the kid to get greencard, however I am against the kid being counted in ebquota.

I am yet to get the access to ( I am a recent donor ) donor thread that refers the exact INA language. Can some other donor post the exact INA language in this thread ?

Thanks

I spoke with our attorney
He said
INA Sec 203 talks only about the eligibility to apply the I-485. But the visa number is derived from a relationship to Principal applicant of green card. This is true for all categories Including investor, asylum, Employment categories. Please note that It is Dept of State that is responsible for this allocation not USCIS.

Do you have Pritority Date written on your I-485's notice of action? It's blank for me.

Problem with that argument once you own more than 5% of the company you will have file as investor. If your wife owns the company then you will have file under relative category. There were denials based on this.

Total BS. Do you have any reference link for case denials?

You are confusing filing new I-140 with employer (where beneficiary has >5% share) with AC-21 job change.


.

So far I have abq_gc, Johnamit , Singhsa3 , SunnySurya and pamposh(5 and counting ) . I need more..

Sure, I will join the tomorrows march organized by fightnow.

I am impressed with the Chinese!

Ask the Chinese (and everyone else) to stay tuned (and join) your meet whenever it takes place!

BTW, thanks for getting rid of msyedy! What a relief without the spectre of msyedy!

Moderators,
Please merge this thread with the other depression thread. Don't let collective wealth on depression therapy advice get lost.

thanks ub27, gc_on_demand


Agreed. $5000 is about the same amount a single student paid to TVU, the diploma mill. This used to be the price 1 employee paid a fraud DCC for processing a Green card.
What more can I say....
.

What is the difference between the two? IMO, two words "Effective Marketing". Come on, where are the MBA's among us who can offer strategy? Actually I feel we are so backward that we don't even need MBA's to improve from here, just any simple ideas