raoece
03-04 04:40 PM
expect a 60 day turn around for receiving...PERM PWD and LCA timing are same now...
ImmInfo Newsletter: PERM Planning (http://imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-2-15/PERM-planning.html)
ImmInfo Newsletter: PERM Planning (http://imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-2-15/PERM-planning.html)
wallpaper Modern hairstyles
subba
04-12 08:23 PM
Hello,
I sent you a PM with some info.
Hope you find it useful.
Thanks,
Subba
I sent you a PM with some info.
Hope you find it useful.
Thanks,
Subba
geniousatwork
06-23 02:21 PM
You referring to FLC Data Center website?
FLCDataCenter.com (http://www.flcdatacenter.com/)
FLCDataCenter.com (http://www.flcdatacenter.com/)
2011 Modern Short wavy hairstyles
STAmisha
11-15 12:43 PM
Pls reply if you know the answer
more...
martinvisalaw
07-31 12:28 PM
It is very unlikely that a physical therapist would qualify for a national interest waiver. You need to show exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business and that you will substantially benefit the national economy, cultural, or educational interests or welfare of the United States.
Macaca
09-27 05:46 PM
Bill Would Protect Frosh on Immigration (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_30/news/20086-1.html) By Jennifer Yachnin | ROLL CALL STAFF, September 20, 2007
House Democratic leaders are drafting a resolution designed to inoculate freshman lawmakers on the issue of immigration, despite concerns from within their own Caucus about reopening debate over the contentious topic.
According to several freshman Democratic lawmakers in attendance at a weekly breakfast meeting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), Members were told to prepare statements on the resolution, which will endorse laws already on the books that prevent illegal immigrants from participating in taxpayer-funded programs, such as Social Security or food stamps.
In a draft of the resolution obtained by Roll Call, the measure expresses the sense of the House "with respect to the importance of upholding federal immigration laws and ensuring the integrity and security of the borders of the United States."
In addition to the language on public benefits, the draft resolution also contains provisions calling on the executive branch to enforce laws on voter fraud and border security.
But one House lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said some senior Members have objected to the proposal over concerns that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to limit the scope of the debate. The House largely abandoned plans to pursue a comprehensive immigration reform bill earlier this year after the Senate failed to cut off debate on its own version of the legislation, effectively killing the bill.
Majority Whip James Clyburn (S.C.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.) began work on the resolution earlier this month in response to repeated Republican efforts to force votes on immigration on the House floor through the use of procedural amendments.
"We're trying to figure out a way we can do this and maintain party unity on the motions ... without making it a crisis," said one Democratic lawmaker, who is a member of the Whip operation.
Although one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified since plans have not been finalized, said the measure could move to the floor as early as next week, a House leadership aide said it is unlikely to be that soon.
To date, Democratic leaders have not demanded that Members vote against all motions to recommit - a procedural tool that can be used by the minority party immediately before a vote on final passage of a bill - unless the amendment contains language that would shelve the legislation.
"I've resisted motions to recommit unless they're substantive and then I'll vote for them," explained Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), a freshman lawmaker who has faced attacks from the National Republican Congressional Committee for votes against some GOP-authored amendments on immigration.
"It's frustrating to me," Walz added, criticizing the amendments as political footballs. "I'm appreciative that our leadership lets us vote accordingly."
But that policy led to some confusion on the House floor in early August during a vote on a GOP-authored amendment to the Agriculture spending bill to prohibit illegal immigrants from accessing certain federally funded programs, with nearly 20 Democrats initially voting in favor of the proposal.
Republicans allege that the Democratic majority mishandled that vote, resulting in the defeat of the measure. GOP leaders assert that a tied 214-214 vote - rending a defeat - announced by the Speaker Pro Tem was inaccurate and that the motion had in fact passed 215-213 as Republicans changed their votes.
But Democrats dispute that version of events, noting that their own Members were changing votes on the House floor, resulting in the final tally of 212-216.
The dispute prompted the establishment of a select committee to investigate the vote, which is scheduled to hold its first meeting this morning, and produce an interim report Sept. 30.
Republican Rep. Tom Price (Ga.), who has sponsored similar amendments addressing the use of federal funds to assist illegal immigrants, including a measure that failed Tuesday night on a federal housing bill, expressed interest in the Democratic proposal.
"I'd love to be able to talk with them about it and work on it," Price said. He could not say whether such a measure would deter him from offering such amendments in the future without seeing the details of the bill.
"When I talk to folks at home they want to know why we're not including this language on every single piece of legislation," he added.
House Democratic leaders are drafting a resolution designed to inoculate freshman lawmakers on the issue of immigration, despite concerns from within their own Caucus about reopening debate over the contentious topic.
According to several freshman Democratic lawmakers in attendance at a weekly breakfast meeting with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), Members were told to prepare statements on the resolution, which will endorse laws already on the books that prevent illegal immigrants from participating in taxpayer-funded programs, such as Social Security or food stamps.
In a draft of the resolution obtained by Roll Call, the measure expresses the sense of the House "with respect to the importance of upholding federal immigration laws and ensuring the integrity and security of the borders of the United States."
In addition to the language on public benefits, the draft resolution also contains provisions calling on the executive branch to enforce laws on voter fraud and border security.
But one House lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said some senior Members have objected to the proposal over concerns that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to limit the scope of the debate. The House largely abandoned plans to pursue a comprehensive immigration reform bill earlier this year after the Senate failed to cut off debate on its own version of the legislation, effectively killing the bill.
Majority Whip James Clyburn (S.C.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (Md.) began work on the resolution earlier this month in response to repeated Republican efforts to force votes on immigration on the House floor through the use of procedural amendments.
"We're trying to figure out a way we can do this and maintain party unity on the motions ... without making it a crisis," said one Democratic lawmaker, who is a member of the Whip operation.
Although one Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified since plans have not been finalized, said the measure could move to the floor as early as next week, a House leadership aide said it is unlikely to be that soon.
To date, Democratic leaders have not demanded that Members vote against all motions to recommit - a procedural tool that can be used by the minority party immediately before a vote on final passage of a bill - unless the amendment contains language that would shelve the legislation.
"I've resisted motions to recommit unless they're substantive and then I'll vote for them," explained Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), a freshman lawmaker who has faced attacks from the National Republican Congressional Committee for votes against some GOP-authored amendments on immigration.
"It's frustrating to me," Walz added, criticizing the amendments as political footballs. "I'm appreciative that our leadership lets us vote accordingly."
But that policy led to some confusion on the House floor in early August during a vote on a GOP-authored amendment to the Agriculture spending bill to prohibit illegal immigrants from accessing certain federally funded programs, with nearly 20 Democrats initially voting in favor of the proposal.
Republicans allege that the Democratic majority mishandled that vote, resulting in the defeat of the measure. GOP leaders assert that a tied 214-214 vote - rending a defeat - announced by the Speaker Pro Tem was inaccurate and that the motion had in fact passed 215-213 as Republicans changed their votes.
But Democrats dispute that version of events, noting that their own Members were changing votes on the House floor, resulting in the final tally of 212-216.
The dispute prompted the establishment of a select committee to investigate the vote, which is scheduled to hold its first meeting this morning, and produce an interim report Sept. 30.
Republican Rep. Tom Price (Ga.), who has sponsored similar amendments addressing the use of federal funds to assist illegal immigrants, including a measure that failed Tuesday night on a federal housing bill, expressed interest in the Democratic proposal.
"I'd love to be able to talk with them about it and work on it," Price said. He could not say whether such a measure would deter him from offering such amendments in the future without seeing the details of the bill.
"When I talk to folks at home they want to know why we're not including this language on every single piece of legislation," he added.
more...
blog30
08-03 05:34 PM
Thank you for your answer.
Any other opinions?
If no, my next question goes to what choices do I have to help him get a GC also (considering I am in the process of filling I-485&other docs for myself and the other members of my family).
Thanks
Any other opinions?
If no, my next question goes to what choices do I have to help him get a GC also (considering I am in the process of filling I-485&other docs for myself and the other members of my family).
Thanks
2010 Woman Modern Hairstyles
akhilmahajan
08-16 09:31 AM
Sir/Madam,
Right now they have not even done with July 2nd filers.
Also ppl whose applications have been transfered have not got any receipts.
About the 17th July, i think we should be atleast looking for minimum 15-20 business days.
I will request you to please concentrate on the September Rally. It will bring relief for all of us.
Right now they have not even done with July 2nd filers.
Also ppl whose applications have been transfered have not got any receipts.
About the 17th July, i think we should be atleast looking for minimum 15-20 business days.
I will request you to please concentrate on the September Rally. It will bring relief for all of us.
more...
akashintouch
03-07 10:07 AM
Normally when you Get an RFE there are very goodChances of getting your Application processed pretty soon
hair Hairstyles for Teenagers
glamzon
08-03 03:07 PM
old info - close this thread
more...
Blog Feeds
05-01 12:40 AM
Congrats to President Obama on his first 100 days in office. And well done on keeping immigration reform on the front burner. During his prime time press conference last night, the President had this to say about immigration reform: Okay. Lori Montenegro. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, when you met with the Hispanic caucus a few weeks ago, reports came out that the White House was planning to have a forum to talk about immigration and bring it to the forefront. Going forward, my question is, what is your strategy to try to have immigration reform? And are...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/04/obama-promises-to-push-for-immigration-reform-this-year.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/04/obama-promises-to-push-for-immigration-reform-this-year.html)
hot Modern Shag latest haircuts
kirupa
11-11 01:35 AM
Added :)
more...
house Men modern hairstyles
needGCcool
07-23 02:52 PM
Not yet.. lot of threads....with same information......:eek:
tattoo Modern Hairstyles Trends for
lecter
October 27th, 2003, 09:12 PM
Here it is...
same sensor, same image size....
10MP ?
doesn't seem to fit....
what do the members think?
I am not anti Sigma or anti anything, but I do watch the competitors closely so that they might make a "better 1Ds" to bring the price of the canon gear down for us struggling artists....
thoughts??
same sensor, same image size....
10MP ?
doesn't seem to fit....
what do the members think?
I am not anti Sigma or anti anything, but I do watch the competitors closely so that they might make a "better 1Ds" to bring the price of the canon gear down for us struggling artists....
thoughts??
more...
pictures girlfriend Modern Hairstyles
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:30 AM
Kudos to my colleague Elissa Taub who pointed out something rather interesting that none of the supporters of the Arizona law have told Arizonans. Under federal immigration law, a removal proceeding is a civil proceeding and one is not entitled to a public defender or any assistance in paying for help from an immigration lawyer. However, the new Arizona law makes it a state crime to be illegally present in the state. What this means is that any person charged under the new law is entitled to a taxpayer funded public defender or taxpayer funded private lawyer. And we lawyers...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/arizona-taxpayers-will-now-have-to-pay-for-lawyers-for-immigrants.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/arizona-taxpayers-will-now-have-to-pay-for-lawyers-for-immigrants.html)
dresses 1 Modern Hairstyles (6 pics)
MerciesOfInjustices
12-28 11:36 PM
Enrique's Journey (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5225180) is a very powerful book written by an LA Times journalist about illegal migrants who take the Tren de los muertos, or the Train of the Dead to get to the US.
Will it be the kind of book, like 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom's_Cabin) to shake the conscience of a country to generate true Immigration reform? Will it move the likes of even politicians, who have no conscience, and get Immigration Reform accomplished?
I hope so. I had tears all through while reading the excerpts from the book, and hearing Sonia Nazario on NPR today.
As a disclaimer, this is my personal opinion - IV has no position on the issue of illegal immigration.
Will it be the kind of book, like 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom's_Cabin) to shake the conscience of a country to generate true Immigration reform? Will it move the likes of even politicians, who have no conscience, and get Immigration Reform accomplished?
I hope so. I had tears all through while reading the excerpts from the book, and hearing Sonia Nazario on NPR today.
As a disclaimer, this is my personal opinion - IV has no position on the issue of illegal immigration.
more...
makeup Choosing the right hairstyles
Macaca
06-02 08:13 PM
Dems have tough time enacting changes (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEMOCRATS_WHATS_DIFFERENT?SITE=VAROA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT) By CHARLES BABINGTON Associated Press Writer Jun 2
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Under a portrait of George Washington and a sign proclaiming "A New Direction," Democratic lawmakers boasted of their accomplishments their first five months running Congress.
Their press release covered two pages.
Yet most people might be excused for hardly noticing, except maybe those who are paid the minimum wage or who live in hurricane-ravaged areas.
Upon taking control in January, Democrats led efforts to increase the minimum wage for the first time in a decade and to force modest spending increases in hurricane and drought relief, children's health care and a few other areas.
Beyond that, the majority party has found it difficult or impossible to redirect federal policies, thwarted by a veto-wielding Republican president whose congressional allies hold nearly half the Senate seats and a significant portion of the House.
To the frustration of their liberal base, Democrats have been unable to mandate a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. Nor have they found a way to boost federal support for embryonic stem cell research, rewrite tax and spending priorities or force the removal of an embattled attorney general.
Their promises to reduce student loan rates, overhaul lobbying practices and put in place recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission are works in progress, at best.
They have largely abandoned their push to allow the government to negotiate prescription drug prices for the Medicare program in the face of Bush's opposition.
Democratic voters might be disappointed, but they should not be surprised, say congressional scholars and political strategists. While Democrats can set the legislative agenda and investigate the Bush administration, they "don't have the power" to determine the results, said Ronald Walters, a political scientist at the University of Maryland.
Lacking the two-thirds majorities needed in both chambers to override a veto, Democrats must make the most of their abilities to pressure the White House, hold oversight hearings and drive the toughest bargains they can, Walters said.
"Democrats are in a negotiating framework consistently," Walters said. "That's where they will be as long as the president has a veto pen."
Even the Democrats' most clear-cut legislative victory - raising the minimum wage to $7.25 from the current $5.15 over three years - has questionable impact.
Only a small fraction of workers earns the minimum wage, and Democrats had to buy Republican support with $4.84 billion in new tax cuts for small businesses.
Still, raising the minimum wage has value as a fairness issue, some Democrats say. They urge the party's constituents to welcome such symbolic and incremental victories in a divided government.
Having Democrats control the House and Senate "makes a huge difference, given the set of challenges the country faces and given that so little was done in the last Congress," said former Democratic Rep. Tim Roemer of Indiana, a member of the Sept. 11 commission.
Democrats have shifted the debate in important ways that may lead to policy changes in this Congress or the next, he said.
On Iraq, Roemer said "it's no longer a question of if" the United States will adopt a withdrawal timeline, only a question of when.
Citing global warming, he said Congress is no longer seriously debating whether the problem exists - as it did last year under Republican control- but considering how to address it.
Veteran Democrats say party supporters must understand that legislative victories often will come at the margins of major issues.
Consider children's health care, a Democratic campaign priority. Congress in May added an immediate $650 million to the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Budget bills for 2008 call for an extra $50 billion, but the effort must survive the appropriations process, and Bush has pledged to veto measures he considers too costly.
Democratic leaders hailed the increases for the children's program, even as they acknowledged the proposed new spending would hardly fill the health insurance gaps.
The change in control of Congress is important, "but what it doesn't mean is the Democrats can impose their will," said Florida Democrat Bob Graham, a former senator, governor and presidential candidate. "It does mean the Democrats can set the agenda and force issues" to the forefront, such as a minimum wage raise that Republicans had blocked for years.
Perhaps the most dramatic change in Congress involves the rising number and intensity of hearings into alleged misdoings by the administration.
Subjects of investigations include contracting practices in Iraq; the use of prewar intelligence; the firings of federal prosecutors; the use of warrantless wiretaps; the friendly fire death in Afghanistan of Army Cpl. Pat Tillman; and the use of political e-mail accounts by White House officials.
The "amazing lack of oversight of White House programs and initiatives" that existed under GOP-controlled congresses has ended, Walters said.
Some Democratic activists say it is important to remind voters that Bush and congressional Republicans play a central role in legislative impasses.
"It's hard to see a lot getting done," said lobbyist Steve Elmendorf, a former top House Democratic aide. "I don't know if Bush has the juice to deliver the Republican votes he needs" even on issues the president strongly backs, such as a proposed overhaul of immigration laws, he said.
At the end of this Congress, Elmendorf predicted, Democrats will have "a record of fiscal responsibility" and voters will understand that they could not overcome Bush's resistance on matters such as embryonic stem cell research.
As for the Iraq war, he said, even if Democrats can't force a withdrawal deadline, "the message that Americans are getting is: Democrats want change, Republicans don't."
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Under a portrait of George Washington and a sign proclaiming "A New Direction," Democratic lawmakers boasted of their accomplishments their first five months running Congress.
Their press release covered two pages.
Yet most people might be excused for hardly noticing, except maybe those who are paid the minimum wage or who live in hurricane-ravaged areas.
Upon taking control in January, Democrats led efforts to increase the minimum wage for the first time in a decade and to force modest spending increases in hurricane and drought relief, children's health care and a few other areas.
Beyond that, the majority party has found it difficult or impossible to redirect federal policies, thwarted by a veto-wielding Republican president whose congressional allies hold nearly half the Senate seats and a significant portion of the House.
To the frustration of their liberal base, Democrats have been unable to mandate a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. Nor have they found a way to boost federal support for embryonic stem cell research, rewrite tax and spending priorities or force the removal of an embattled attorney general.
Their promises to reduce student loan rates, overhaul lobbying practices and put in place recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission are works in progress, at best.
They have largely abandoned their push to allow the government to negotiate prescription drug prices for the Medicare program in the face of Bush's opposition.
Democratic voters might be disappointed, but they should not be surprised, say congressional scholars and political strategists. While Democrats can set the legislative agenda and investigate the Bush administration, they "don't have the power" to determine the results, said Ronald Walters, a political scientist at the University of Maryland.
Lacking the two-thirds majorities needed in both chambers to override a veto, Democrats must make the most of their abilities to pressure the White House, hold oversight hearings and drive the toughest bargains they can, Walters said.
"Democrats are in a negotiating framework consistently," Walters said. "That's where they will be as long as the president has a veto pen."
Even the Democrats' most clear-cut legislative victory - raising the minimum wage to $7.25 from the current $5.15 over three years - has questionable impact.
Only a small fraction of workers earns the minimum wage, and Democrats had to buy Republican support with $4.84 billion in new tax cuts for small businesses.
Still, raising the minimum wage has value as a fairness issue, some Democrats say. They urge the party's constituents to welcome such symbolic and incremental victories in a divided government.
Having Democrats control the House and Senate "makes a huge difference, given the set of challenges the country faces and given that so little was done in the last Congress," said former Democratic Rep. Tim Roemer of Indiana, a member of the Sept. 11 commission.
Democrats have shifted the debate in important ways that may lead to policy changes in this Congress or the next, he said.
On Iraq, Roemer said "it's no longer a question of if" the United States will adopt a withdrawal timeline, only a question of when.
Citing global warming, he said Congress is no longer seriously debating whether the problem exists - as it did last year under Republican control- but considering how to address it.
Veteran Democrats say party supporters must understand that legislative victories often will come at the margins of major issues.
Consider children's health care, a Democratic campaign priority. Congress in May added an immediate $650 million to the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Budget bills for 2008 call for an extra $50 billion, but the effort must survive the appropriations process, and Bush has pledged to veto measures he considers too costly.
Democratic leaders hailed the increases for the children's program, even as they acknowledged the proposed new spending would hardly fill the health insurance gaps.
The change in control of Congress is important, "but what it doesn't mean is the Democrats can impose their will," said Florida Democrat Bob Graham, a former senator, governor and presidential candidate. "It does mean the Democrats can set the agenda and force issues" to the forefront, such as a minimum wage raise that Republicans had blocked for years.
Perhaps the most dramatic change in Congress involves the rising number and intensity of hearings into alleged misdoings by the administration.
Subjects of investigations include contracting practices in Iraq; the use of prewar intelligence; the firings of federal prosecutors; the use of warrantless wiretaps; the friendly fire death in Afghanistan of Army Cpl. Pat Tillman; and the use of political e-mail accounts by White House officials.
The "amazing lack of oversight of White House programs and initiatives" that existed under GOP-controlled congresses has ended, Walters said.
Some Democratic activists say it is important to remind voters that Bush and congressional Republicans play a central role in legislative impasses.
"It's hard to see a lot getting done," said lobbyist Steve Elmendorf, a former top House Democratic aide. "I don't know if Bush has the juice to deliver the Republican votes he needs" even on issues the president strongly backs, such as a proposed overhaul of immigration laws, he said.
At the end of this Congress, Elmendorf predicted, Democrats will have "a record of fiscal responsibility" and voters will understand that they could not overcome Bush's resistance on matters such as embryonic stem cell research.
As for the Iraq war, he said, even if Democrats can't force a withdrawal deadline, "the message that Americans are getting is: Democrats want change, Republicans don't."
girlfriend 2009 Modern Emo Hairstyles
MunnaBhai
01-08 11:53 PM
I have been using his services since 2003. Very Professional, intelligent and resonable fees. Turnaround time is very quick
http://www.habbulaw.com
http://www.habbulaw.com
hairstyles Medium Length Hairstyles with
akshayhere
05-24 10:42 PM
I would suggest keep Visitor Visa appointment on separate date as your parent will not have option saying they want to meet kids and spend more time with you.
sunny1000
08-06 01:35 PM
Read this below pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/B5eng.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/B5eng.pdf
H1B2009
07-30 01:54 AM
I am currently a H1B visa holder engaged to a US citizen. We are planning on going to India soon for the formal engagement ceremony and getting married early next year.
I had two points of concern:
1. Upon returning after the engagement, I will still be on H1B (since the wedding is going to be a bit more than 90 days after the official engagement so the K1 visa is not an option), will this cause issues at port of entry?
2. After marriage, we plan to go abroad for our honeymoon (we likely won't have time to file anything with immigration before our return): how should I proceed upon reentry then or is this even advisable since I'll be returning on an H1 but be married to a US citizen?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks.
I had two points of concern:
1. Upon returning after the engagement, I will still be on H1B (since the wedding is going to be a bit more than 90 days after the official engagement so the K1 visa is not an option), will this cause issues at port of entry?
2. After marriage, we plan to go abroad for our honeymoon (we likely won't have time to file anything with immigration before our return): how should I proceed upon reentry then or is this even advisable since I'll be returning on an H1 but be married to a US citizen?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий