eb3_nepa
07-18 02:17 PM
Did Amit(WaldenPond) get his GC , I have not seen any posts from him in recent past
I think we should remember and thank him for starting this effort.
Sorry for creating new thread for asking this question I tried asking in other thread which totally got lost and never answered.
His name is Aman not Amit.
I think we should remember and thank him for starting this effort.
Sorry for creating new thread for asking this question I tried asking in other thread which totally got lost and never answered.
His name is Aman not Amit.
wallpaper girls with guns and tattoos. girls with guns tattoos. hip
webm
10-29 04:06 PM
Based on the posts in this forum,during POE the I-94 will say AOS pending status if you enter using AP..So i dont think it matters with AP validity date.
HTH,
HTH,
praveen2008
08-17 05:05 PM
Hello All,
i applied my wife's H4 visa renewal on Feb 2008 but received the USCIS Ack as April 2008. when i see the processing times now looks like the processing time for the I 539(H4 Renewal) is October 2007
Does any body have any understanding on the processing times on when my H4 Visa petition would be processed with USCIS ack date as april 2008 . any suggestions would be apreciated
Thanks,
Praveen
i applied my wife's H4 visa renewal on Feb 2008 but received the USCIS Ack as April 2008. when i see the processing times now looks like the processing time for the I 539(H4 Renewal) is October 2007
Does any body have any understanding on the processing times on when my H4 Visa petition would be processed with USCIS ack date as april 2008 . any suggestions would be apreciated
Thanks,
Praveen
2011 girls with guns calendar.
validIV
04-21 11:25 AM
Looking for a lawyer that is somewhat familiar with the Child Status Protection Act to answer some questions. If you are in the NYC area and would prefer I pay a fee, please PM me. I have consulted a few lawyers already but none are familiar with the act nor have they filed for anyone that uses this act.
My father filed his Labor Cert. in Aug 1996. I was 19 at the time. He then filed his I-140 on July 2000, and his I-485 on Dec 2000. He received his Greencard in August 2001. I was 24.
According to this faq from Shusterman: http://www.shusterman.com/hr1209-faq.html
the new law provides that she would be automatically reclassfied to an appropriate category, presumably family-based 2B, and that she retain her father's original priority date. This would be the date that his employer submitted the labor certification application.
Does this apply to me? According to this, would I retain my father's Priority Date of Aug 1996? I currently have an approved I-130 with a priority date of Jan 2002 under F2B which my father filed after he got his greencard.
My father filed his Labor Cert. in Aug 1996. I was 19 at the time. He then filed his I-140 on July 2000, and his I-485 on Dec 2000. He received his Greencard in August 2001. I was 24.
According to this faq from Shusterman: http://www.shusterman.com/hr1209-faq.html
the new law provides that she would be automatically reclassfied to an appropriate category, presumably family-based 2B, and that she retain her father's original priority date. This would be the date that his employer submitted the labor certification application.
Does this apply to me? According to this, would I retain my father's Priority Date of Aug 1996? I currently have an approved I-130 with a priority date of Jan 2002 under F2B which my father filed after he got his greencard.
more...
sagittarian
04-17 07:32 PM
Thanks for the reply and just to make sure:
I MUST enroll for summer and fall, is that what you are saying?
I MUST enroll for summer and fall, is that what you are saying?
raysaikat
08-30 11:40 PM
If the H1-B came with I-94 attached to the I797 form, then your status would be H1-B from the day written on the I-94 form. From that day, you cannot work with the employer A without filing another H1-B with employer A.
more...
admirer
03-02 06:49 PM
Hi All
My wife changed her status from F2 to F1 and recently she went to India, so she had her visa stamping appointment on Feb 18. at the counter the visa officer told her that she hasnt paid the SEVIS fee so has to go outside and pay online and come back with the receipt. she did and went back and she was told that she has got the visa and the passport will be mailed to her. she hasnt received it yet (its about 8 working days now), and when i contacted the consulate they replied: "We have provided a pink sheet, which says that the SEVIS is not updated in the system. Once it gets updated the passport will be sent to the mailing address."
1. is this delay a normal occurance and how long it takes in such case?
2. do you guys see any problem in this case?
please advice..
regards
Raj
My wife changed her status from F2 to F1 and recently she went to India, so she had her visa stamping appointment on Feb 18. at the counter the visa officer told her that she hasnt paid the SEVIS fee so has to go outside and pay online and come back with the receipt. she did and went back and she was told that she has got the visa and the passport will be mailed to her. she hasnt received it yet (its about 8 working days now), and when i contacted the consulate they replied: "We have provided a pink sheet, which says that the SEVIS is not updated in the system. Once it gets updated the passport will be sent to the mailing address."
1. is this delay a normal occurance and how long it takes in such case?
2. do you guys see any problem in this case?
please advice..
regards
Raj
2010 hair 2011 Girls and guns
coolfun
01-27 11:10 PM
Hi,
Gurus - I have few questions and I need your help:
1. My EAD/AP expires in June/July '08. Can I apply for their renewal now?
2. Will there be a finger-printing requirement for the renewal? We had finger print in June 2007 when we applied 485/765/131 together?
3. Is it better to efile or paper file?
4. I will be in India from April to June this year. I have an AP valid till end June. Can I file for EAD/AP renewal and leave for India in April. Is there any risk? I can still use my current AP to enter when I come in early June, right?
Thanks so much.
Gurus - I have few questions and I need your help:
1. My EAD/AP expires in June/July '08. Can I apply for their renewal now?
2. Will there be a finger-printing requirement for the renewal? We had finger print in June 2007 when we applied 485/765/131 together?
3. Is it better to efile or paper file?
4. I will be in India from April to June this year. I have an AP valid till end June. Can I file for EAD/AP renewal and leave for India in April. Is there any risk? I can still use my current AP to enter when I come in early June, right?
Thanks so much.
more...
Blog Feeds
06-15 03:00 AM
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that a new version of the Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card (Form I-90), is available on the USCIS website. The new version of the form is dated 8/10/09 and contains more user-friendly features.
Applicants may file Form I-90 electronically (through e-filing), or through the mail to the USCIS Phoenix Lockbox facility.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/06/new_form_i90_application_to_re.html)
Applicants may file Form I-90 electronically (through e-filing), or through the mail to the USCIS Phoenix Lockbox facility.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/06/new_form_i90_application_to_re.html)
hair crayon drawings of guns
orphean
02-17 09:43 AM
Hi,
I"m currently working for a TARP company and my I-94 date is Aug 2009. I still have 3 years left on my H1B.
I've got an offer from another bank (non-TARP) and they have filed for my H1 transfer.
a) Any idea what the wait times are these days?
b) Anybody seen problems with H1B transfers these days?
c) There might be a 1 week overlap (pay) between my current company and my future company. is that OK? e.g. My join date in the new company will be Feb 23rd and my notice date will be Feb 28th in my current company.
cheers
I"m currently working for a TARP company and my I-94 date is Aug 2009. I still have 3 years left on my H1B.
I've got an offer from another bank (non-TARP) and they have filed for my H1 transfer.
a) Any idea what the wait times are these days?
b) Anybody seen problems with H1B transfers these days?
c) There might be a 1 week overlap (pay) between my current company and my future company. is that OK? e.g. My join date in the new company will be Feb 23rd and my notice date will be Feb 28th in my current company.
cheers
more...
justice4all
12-02 01:20 PM
Hello
My EB3 I140 got approved in June2008. I am planning to convert EB3 to EB2 and preparing to apply labor through EB2. If EB2 labor got denied, is my EB3 I140 still valid? Do i get a RFE if apply for I485 using EB3 I140? Any Lawyers please..
thank you
My EB3 I140 got approved in June2008. I am planning to convert EB3 to EB2 and preparing to apply labor through EB2. If EB2 labor got denied, is my EB3 I140 still valid? Do i get a RFE if apply for I485 using EB3 I140? Any Lawyers please..
thank you
hot images girls with guns and
fasterthanlight�
05-12 11:43 PM
I feel violated :crying:! But its a nice stamp nonetheless
more...
house Pictures:
Tech Writer
04-07 06:18 AM
Hi,
My company is planning to build a software using Silverlight technology. As a writer, I have created CHMs for desktop applications and web helps for web applications.
Is there a different or new approach available to create online helps for Silverlight applications?
Looking for some great samples/links/pointers on how to handle online help for Silverlight based applications.
Thanks
George
My company is planning to build a software using Silverlight technology. As a writer, I have created CHMs for desktop applications and web helps for web applications.
Is there a different or new approach available to create online helps for Silverlight applications?
Looking for some great samples/links/pointers on how to handle online help for Silverlight based applications.
Thanks
George
tattoo girls with guns and tattoos. guns and roses tattoos for
CRAZYMONK
07-20 03:36 PM
If you can wait for AP to get approved that would be a better choice. When did you applied for AP? I know couple of my friends whose AP got approved with in a month. It all depends on case to case. Don't take it granted as 2-3 month.
more...
pictures girls with guns poster.
crystal
08-15 12:39 PM
Some info here
http://www.hooyou.com/news/news062307faq.html
http://www.hooyou.com/news/news062307faq.html
dresses makeup (NSFW) Girls and Guns
kisana
11-03 12:05 AM
This is urgent please advise,
I was planning to join new empolyer with my EAD. I gave my Labor certificate to my manager, some how things are now going well with my new employer manager. Somehow I am in double mind whether to join or not join this new employer, I was just worrried since he has my labor certificate he can negatively affect me , if I do not join this new employer. Please advise if he can negatively affect me any way, or what precation I need to take in case I do not join him.
I was planning to join new empolyer with my EAD. I gave my Labor certificate to my manager, some how things are now going well with my new employer manager. Somehow I am in double mind whether to join or not join this new employer, I was just worrried since he has my labor certificate he can negatively affect me , if I do not join this new employer. Please advise if he can negatively affect me any way, or what precation I need to take in case I do not join him.
more...
makeup ArtContest: Girls with Guns. Rated M
anitawham
07-07 11:34 AM
I have a problem
I have a H1 B which is expiring on Sep 6 2010
I'm currently in India.
Question:
Can I travel on H4 to US, and then once in US transfer my H1 to an employer after my H1 expires?
I have a H1 B which is expiring on Sep 6 2010
I'm currently in India.
Question:
Can I travel on H4 to US, and then once in US transfer my H1 to an employer after my H1 expires?
girlfriend Girls and guns commission by
pappu
08-09 01:44 PM
check my old posts on this subject.
hairstyles girls with guns. Girls N Guns; Girls N Guns. THX1139. Nov 11, 04:45 PM
Dhundhun
07-12 08:20 PM
I got grey dot for above response. Can't make out, what the person giving feedback wants to say.
Macaca
06-22 06:55 AM
Senate Passes Energy Bill (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101026.html?hpid=topnews) Democrats Prevail; Mileage Standard Would Be Raised By Sholnn Freeman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/sholnn+freeman/) Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, June 22, 2007
The Senate passed a sweeping energy legislation package last night that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters.
After three days of intense debate and complex maneuvering, Democratic leaders won passage of the bill shortly before midnight by a 65 to 27 vote.
The package, which still must pass the House, would also require that the use of biofuels climb to 36 billion gallons by 2022, would set penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing. It would provide federal grants and loan guarantees to promote research into fuel-efficient vehicles and would support test projects to capture carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants to be stored underground.
Democratic leaders said they hoped the legislation will be a rallying point for voters concerned about national security, climate change and near-record gasoline prices.
"This bill starts America on a path toward reducing our reliance on oil by increasing the nation's use of renewable fuels and for the first time in decades significantly improving the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks," said Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader.
Final passage of the bill capped an otherwise rancorous week in which senators grappled over energy policy. Early yesterday, Democrats accused Republicans of obstruction after a $32 billion package of energy tax cuts was blocked on a procedural vote. But late in the day, a bipartisan group of senators came together to break an impasse on vehicle fuel-efficiency standards that would require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicle to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected additions to the bill that would have pumped billions of federal dollars into efforts to ramp up production of a coal-based fuel for cars and trucks, which proponents had called an important alternative to petroleum. Additionally, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) failed to win approval for a proposal to allow exploration for natural gas off the Virginia coast, and Republicans blocked an effort to require that more of the nation's electricity come for renewable sources.
The passage of fuel-efficiency measure was viewed as a major triumph for the Democrats, particularly the last-minute dealmaking that enabled passage of the comprehensive change to mileage standards.
The politics of fuel economy had gone virtually unchanged since Congress passed the first nationwide standards -- known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE -- in 1975. The last time the full Senate tried to boost fuel-economy standards was in 2002, and the effort was defeated handily.
The auto industry successfully argued that large increases in efficiency standards would force them to build smaller vehicles -- the kind American consumers won't buy. In recent years, however, low mileage standards left U.S. automakers with little market defense against higher-mileage Japanese cars, particularly at times when gas prices soar. As consumers have moved gradually from SUVs and pickup trucks to smaller vehicles, Detroit's Big Three automakers have gone through a painful restructuring period.
The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.
The fuel-efficiency language in the Senate energy package originally had coupled a 35 mile-per-gallon standard with a requirement of 4 percent annual increases for the decade after 2020. A group led by the two Michigan senators -- Democrats Carl M. Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) had sought instead to gain support for an amendment that would impose less-stringent standards while satisfying growing demands for change in the fuel-efficiency laws.
In the compromise-- shepherded principally by Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) -- lawmakers dropped a provision that would have mandated additional 4 percent annual increases in fuel efficiency between 2021 and 2030. They also softened a provision that would have required all automakers to build substantially more vehicles that can run on ethanol and other biofuels.
After the fuel-economy vote, Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), another architect of the compromise, said the nation's desire to be less dependent on foreign oil would be a "hopeless journey" without more efficient cars and trucks.
"Now, in our vehicles, we have better cup-holders, we have keyless entry, we have better music systems, we have heated seats," Dorgan said. "It is time that we expect more automobile efficiency."
Senators who had previously been friendly to the auto industry said they were changing their position after growing weary of the industry's position. "I listened and I listened, year after year," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. "And now, after 20 years, I firmly do believe it is time for a change."
In the end, Senate aides said, Levin's group did not have the votes.
Democratic leaders said the bipartisan backing of the compromise worked out in the Senate would help build support in the House when that chamber House begins debate on its energy package. Already, Rep. John D. Dingell, (D-Mich.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have battled over fuel economy.
In another Senate battle yesterday, Democrats lost a fight against oil companies when Republicans blocked a $32 billion tax package that would have poured money into alternative fuel projects by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.
President Bush, meanwhile, visited the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Athens, Ala., where he touted nuclear power as a clean, dependable and safe source of electricity and promised to streamline the federal regulatory process to ease the way for the construction of new plants.
"Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases," Bush said. "If you're interested in cleaning up the air you ought to be for nuclear power."
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher in Athens, Ala., contributed to this report.
The Senate passed a sweeping energy legislation package last night that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters.
After three days of intense debate and complex maneuvering, Democratic leaders won passage of the bill shortly before midnight by a 65 to 27 vote.
The package, which still must pass the House, would also require that the use of biofuels climb to 36 billion gallons by 2022, would set penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing. It would provide federal grants and loan guarantees to promote research into fuel-efficient vehicles and would support test projects to capture carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants to be stored underground.
Democratic leaders said they hoped the legislation will be a rallying point for voters concerned about national security, climate change and near-record gasoline prices.
"This bill starts America on a path toward reducing our reliance on oil by increasing the nation's use of renewable fuels and for the first time in decades significantly improving the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks," said Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader.
Final passage of the bill capped an otherwise rancorous week in which senators grappled over energy policy. Early yesterday, Democrats accused Republicans of obstruction after a $32 billion package of energy tax cuts was blocked on a procedural vote. But late in the day, a bipartisan group of senators came together to break an impasse on vehicle fuel-efficiency standards that would require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicle to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected additions to the bill that would have pumped billions of federal dollars into efforts to ramp up production of a coal-based fuel for cars and trucks, which proponents had called an important alternative to petroleum. Additionally, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) failed to win approval for a proposal to allow exploration for natural gas off the Virginia coast, and Republicans blocked an effort to require that more of the nation's electricity come for renewable sources.
The passage of fuel-efficiency measure was viewed as a major triumph for the Democrats, particularly the last-minute dealmaking that enabled passage of the comprehensive change to mileage standards.
The politics of fuel economy had gone virtually unchanged since Congress passed the first nationwide standards -- known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE -- in 1975. The last time the full Senate tried to boost fuel-economy standards was in 2002, and the effort was defeated handily.
The auto industry successfully argued that large increases in efficiency standards would force them to build smaller vehicles -- the kind American consumers won't buy. In recent years, however, low mileage standards left U.S. automakers with little market defense against higher-mileage Japanese cars, particularly at times when gas prices soar. As consumers have moved gradually from SUVs and pickup trucks to smaller vehicles, Detroit's Big Three automakers have gone through a painful restructuring period.
The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.
The fuel-efficiency language in the Senate energy package originally had coupled a 35 mile-per-gallon standard with a requirement of 4 percent annual increases for the decade after 2020. A group led by the two Michigan senators -- Democrats Carl M. Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) had sought instead to gain support for an amendment that would impose less-stringent standards while satisfying growing demands for change in the fuel-efficiency laws.
In the compromise-- shepherded principally by Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) -- lawmakers dropped a provision that would have mandated additional 4 percent annual increases in fuel efficiency between 2021 and 2030. They also softened a provision that would have required all automakers to build substantially more vehicles that can run on ethanol and other biofuels.
After the fuel-economy vote, Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), another architect of the compromise, said the nation's desire to be less dependent on foreign oil would be a "hopeless journey" without more efficient cars and trucks.
"Now, in our vehicles, we have better cup-holders, we have keyless entry, we have better music systems, we have heated seats," Dorgan said. "It is time that we expect more automobile efficiency."
Senators who had previously been friendly to the auto industry said they were changing their position after growing weary of the industry's position. "I listened and I listened, year after year," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. "And now, after 20 years, I firmly do believe it is time for a change."
In the end, Senate aides said, Levin's group did not have the votes.
Democratic leaders said the bipartisan backing of the compromise worked out in the Senate would help build support in the House when that chamber House begins debate on its energy package. Already, Rep. John D. Dingell, (D-Mich.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have battled over fuel economy.
In another Senate battle yesterday, Democrats lost a fight against oil companies when Republicans blocked a $32 billion tax package that would have poured money into alternative fuel projects by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.
President Bush, meanwhile, visited the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Athens, Ala., where he touted nuclear power as a clean, dependable and safe source of electricity and promised to streamline the federal regulatory process to ease the way for the construction of new plants.
"Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases," Bush said. "If you're interested in cleaning up the air you ought to be for nuclear power."
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher in Athens, Ala., contributed to this report.
gesfox
03-26 10:30 PM
very nice... well done fai.
No comments:
Post a Comment