theOne
09-09 03:13 PM
What is the difference between 1099 and W2 ?
Thanks,
theOne
Thanks,
theOne
wallpaper Audi S8 Brake Rotors - Power
onemorecame
07-25 11:45 AM
Here is the calculation I came up with USCIS processing of our I-485 applications.
USCIS should allocate 140,000 applications in a fiscal year. So, in a month they need to process, at least, 140,000/ 12 = 11,667 applications.
Assuming that they have, at least, 20 working days in a month, they need to process 11,667/ 20 = 584 applications.
So, now the question is, how many employees does USCIS have and are dedicated to the I-485 processing? We don�t know the exact number. Considering that USCIS is getting lot of revenue, they should have, at least, 50 employees doing this work.
So, 584/50 = 12(Approx) applications they need to process in a day, per person.
So, do you think it is viable? Of course, it is�
What they need to process the I-485 application? They are not doing any FBI names check, or background check (Assuming that everything is done by other organization). So, how long does it take to review the I-485 application? Well, when I filled the application, it took me about 1 hour. So, to review it, let�s us say, it takes about 1/2 the time fill the application; that�s about half an hour. Considering the calculation that we made, it takes an about 6 hours to process 12 candidates. With this assumption, they still have 2 hours left to do miscellaneous tasks. Now the question is what the heck they are doing all the time? Why did they process only 80,000 applications in about 8 months? Are they lazy? Don�t they have enough employees (This shouldn�t be; an average Indian consultant company will have at least 20 employees!!). This is really a mystery. Anyways, if the USCIS really and whole heartedly wants to process the applications, they can; but they really don�t care about immigrants or their plights. :rolleyes:
Good Calculation
USCIS should allocate 140,000 applications in a fiscal year. So, in a month they need to process, at least, 140,000/ 12 = 11,667 applications.
Assuming that they have, at least, 20 working days in a month, they need to process 11,667/ 20 = 584 applications.
So, now the question is, how many employees does USCIS have and are dedicated to the I-485 processing? We don�t know the exact number. Considering that USCIS is getting lot of revenue, they should have, at least, 50 employees doing this work.
So, 584/50 = 12(Approx) applications they need to process in a day, per person.
So, do you think it is viable? Of course, it is�
What they need to process the I-485 application? They are not doing any FBI names check, or background check (Assuming that everything is done by other organization). So, how long does it take to review the I-485 application? Well, when I filled the application, it took me about 1 hour. So, to review it, let�s us say, it takes about 1/2 the time fill the application; that�s about half an hour. Considering the calculation that we made, it takes an about 6 hours to process 12 candidates. With this assumption, they still have 2 hours left to do miscellaneous tasks. Now the question is what the heck they are doing all the time? Why did they process only 80,000 applications in about 8 months? Are they lazy? Don�t they have enough employees (This shouldn�t be; an average Indian consultant company will have at least 20 employees!!). This is really a mystery. Anyways, if the USCIS really and whole heartedly wants to process the applications, they can; but they really don�t care about immigrants or their plights. :rolleyes:
Good Calculation
Kitiara
05-27 06:04 PM
It totally immobilised the person sitting next to me, they were reduced to a gibbering wreck under their desk. :P Truly evil sites. :)
2011 Road Test 2001 Audi TT
dbevis
October 27th, 2003, 07:41 AM
Some shots from yeasterday at and around the Delaware Water Gap:
http://www.pbase.com/image/22684252
I really like that waterfall shot.
http://www.pbase.com/image/22684252
I really like that waterfall shot.
more...
freakin_gc
02-01 12:25 PM
NSC,I know they are really pain in the ass...my wife recently completed her PHD...we are now seriously thinking about filing another I-140 in EB1 category at TSC. I believe they are much faster than NSC. Again we are not sure whether we can able to file another I-485
If your i-140 reciept mentions 'Skilled worker or Professional, sec.203(b)(3)A(i) or (ii)' Then you are good to go.....dont worry about it was applied as skilled worker.... you should not have any problem in getting the approval again if you company financial status is good..
All the best..
BTW what is your service center, NSC or Texas ?
Thanks
sb
If your i-140 reciept mentions 'Skilled worker or Professional, sec.203(b)(3)A(i) or (ii)' Then you are good to go.....dont worry about it was applied as skilled worker.... you should not have any problem in getting the approval again if you company financial status is good..
All the best..
BTW what is your service center, NSC or Texas ?
Thanks
sb
ebizash
07-24 05:06 PM
Sanjay:
Most likely you will not have to do anything further and your application will be approved when the Visa Bulletin reaches your priority date. However it will depend on how long it is before that date is reached. you may have to be fingerprinted again, as the fingerprint checks are only valid for 18 months. Also, if the wait is long enough, USCIS may want you to go for another interview to make sure you are still eligible.
I heard contrary to what you mentioned about the fingerprints being valid only for 18 months. I think someone had posted a document from USCIS site that said that they have digitized FPs and can reuse them without having to do fingerprinting every 18 months. I will try to search for that document and will post if I find it
Most likely you will not have to do anything further and your application will be approved when the Visa Bulletin reaches your priority date. However it will depend on how long it is before that date is reached. you may have to be fingerprinted again, as the fingerprint checks are only valid for 18 months. Also, if the wait is long enough, USCIS may want you to go for another interview to make sure you are still eligible.
I heard contrary to what you mentioned about the fingerprints being valid only for 18 months. I think someone had posted a document from USCIS site that said that they have digitized FPs and can reuse them without having to do fingerprinting every 18 months. I will try to search for that document and will post if I find it
more...
styrum
11-10 04:44 PM
Thanks folks for all the replies. I got to know finally that the employer can setup the LC to provide for any relocation. It looks like my employer usually does that so that the employees does not loose out in a relocation scenario.
Thanks for all the inputs
Please somebody clarify how exactly this is done with PERM. If it's a consulting company, should all advertisement, PWD and Job Order be done in the location of the main office? The job location indicated on the PERM should also then be the main office, but the job description must mention that projects may be located all over US? There is really no place on the PERM form for "alternate" location. Where is that exception for consulting companies mentioned? Can somebody please clarify?
Thanks for all the inputs
Please somebody clarify how exactly this is done with PERM. If it's a consulting company, should all advertisement, PWD and Job Order be done in the location of the main office? The job location indicated on the PERM should also then be the main office, but the job description must mention that projects may be located all over US? There is really no place on the PERM form for "alternate" location. Where is that exception for consulting companies mentioned? Can somebody please clarify?
2010 2001 Audi S8 VelourTex Factory
chanduv23
03-27 09:52 AM
My wife is currently on a H1b doing her residency. When she was on h4, she wanted to do research or observership on a voluntary basis so that she can get some good letters and also have her name on papers and journals.
She got into a research position as a "research volunteer" at Emory University in Atlanta and was an unpaid volunteer. After getting into that position she figured out that the department was actually advertising for that position for a "research assistant" position - which is a salaried position but they could not really find people to fill that position and because they found her promising and did not want to lose her, they offered her a research position.
Without her knowledge she was a regular worker and was dumped with regular work like a paid employee (though she was not paid). They stressed her out and not flexible with hours and never allowed her to study for USMLE etc... and were expecting her to continue that way for 3 months she worked and worked. So I interfered and stopped her from going there, and we wrote a strong letter to the Head of Cardiology at Emory, who got pissed off because she was not aware that the position was not being paid and the department did not officially want to acknowledge that they did it. So they called her to the department and "WARNED" her not to have any kind of communication and not to step into the department or talk to anyone for any reason. We got pissed and we strongly requested for a "Research Experience Letter" which they told they will mail us. We never recieved any mail for 3 months and then one day we called heer superior doctor and blasted her on phone and she in turn blasted us saying we must not call her. Then after a few weeks, we emailed the department politely asking for a experience letter and pleaded them and used a lot of sugar coated words with a lot of A** Ki***" and finally we got a decent letter. Then after a few weeks, the department sent her an email asking her if she still wants her name to be on a paper she worked on, she replied she wanted to. Then they responded that it is not possible to have her name as she was never working there and in future there must not be any communication from us.
The reason I wrote all this is : Most of you people seem to be desperate to work around the system for your benefit. As people do it, it becomes a mess.
Ours was a genuine case and see how an organization like Emory can do whatever they want for their advantage.
So it all depends on the kind of people you deal with - if you want to work on h4 just for sake of experience - expect the unexpected.
Most skilled immigrants are capable of doing great work if allowed to do but we are unable to do it , and organizations that break rules (Desi consultants or Microsoft or Emory or anyone for that sake) - will have only one motive - to exploit your skill and get the work done. In case of any issues, they will "scapegoat you" and make themselves look clean. So think twice before get attracted to breaking rules.
She got into a research position as a "research volunteer" at Emory University in Atlanta and was an unpaid volunteer. After getting into that position she figured out that the department was actually advertising for that position for a "research assistant" position - which is a salaried position but they could not really find people to fill that position and because they found her promising and did not want to lose her, they offered her a research position.
Without her knowledge she was a regular worker and was dumped with regular work like a paid employee (though she was not paid). They stressed her out and not flexible with hours and never allowed her to study for USMLE etc... and were expecting her to continue that way for 3 months she worked and worked. So I interfered and stopped her from going there, and we wrote a strong letter to the Head of Cardiology at Emory, who got pissed off because she was not aware that the position was not being paid and the department did not officially want to acknowledge that they did it. So they called her to the department and "WARNED" her not to have any kind of communication and not to step into the department or talk to anyone for any reason. We got pissed and we strongly requested for a "Research Experience Letter" which they told they will mail us. We never recieved any mail for 3 months and then one day we called heer superior doctor and blasted her on phone and she in turn blasted us saying we must not call her. Then after a few weeks, we emailed the department politely asking for a experience letter and pleaded them and used a lot of sugar coated words with a lot of A** Ki***" and finally we got a decent letter. Then after a few weeks, the department sent her an email asking her if she still wants her name to be on a paper she worked on, she replied she wanted to. Then they responded that it is not possible to have her name as she was never working there and in future there must not be any communication from us.
The reason I wrote all this is : Most of you people seem to be desperate to work around the system for your benefit. As people do it, it becomes a mess.
Ours was a genuine case and see how an organization like Emory can do whatever they want for their advantage.
So it all depends on the kind of people you deal with - if you want to work on h4 just for sake of experience - expect the unexpected.
Most skilled immigrants are capable of doing great work if allowed to do but we are unable to do it , and organizations that break rules (Desi consultants or Microsoft or Emory or anyone for that sake) - will have only one motive - to exploit your skill and get the work done. In case of any issues, they will "scapegoat you" and make themselves look clean. So think twice before get attracted to breaking rules.
more...
lost_in_migration
11-08 02:05 PM
Why are number of I-485 less than number of I-130
I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker
Both require a I-485 to adjust status
I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker
Both require a I-485 to adjust status
hair 2001 Audi S8 4 Dr quattro AWD
SU1979
10-09 12:37 PM
I came to the USA on 3rd November, 2006 in company A. I did not work a single day in company A. I joined to company B on 17th January, 2007. I have no idea how my employer filed my H1B in company B without any paystub. I joined to company C on 24th July as they started my GC process right away. My H1B with company B and C are still pending. Company C has filed my labor on 31st August and got approval on 11th September. I am planning to file I-140, I-485, I-765 and I-131 together. So my questions are:
1) Is there any possibility to get denied/RFE for my GC as my last two H1B are still pending ?
2) What are the risks to be considered if I go back to my country and come back on AP as I don't have a visa stamp on my passport ? I am from a non-retrogressed country.
3) I heard that it takes too much time to bring spouse here if I marry after GC approval. I am planning to go back and marry and come back but don't want to bring my future wife on H4. Will it help me later to avoid unnecessesary waiting time to bring her here once my GC is approved ?
I shall be thankful to you to get my answer.
Thanks & regards,
SU1979
1) Is there any possibility to get denied/RFE for my GC as my last two H1B are still pending ?
2) What are the risks to be considered if I go back to my country and come back on AP as I don't have a visa stamp on my passport ? I am from a non-retrogressed country.
3) I heard that it takes too much time to bring spouse here if I marry after GC approval. I am planning to go back and marry and come back but don't want to bring my future wife on H4. Will it help me later to avoid unnecessesary waiting time to bring her here once my GC is approved ?
I shall be thankful to you to get my answer.
Thanks & regards,
SU1979
more...
rubinop
04-15 03:33 PM
Again your LC approval has no direct connection with what you are being paid currently. LC is for future job so I find it unlikely that DOL will factor your current salary in any way. They may consider your employer's ability to pay the stated salary on LC based on their finacial situation but your current pay stub should not matter.
Does that answer your question?
Yes, it heps a lot! Thank you! And thanks to mann7 as well.
Does that answer your question?
Yes, it heps a lot! Thank you! And thanks to mann7 as well.
hot 2001 Audi S8 4.2 Beverly, Ma
dingudi
06-08 11:16 PM
Hi Dingudi,
The problem is not the hours I worked as I've always worked legally and within the laws of the University and visa status.
The problem is proving that I filed my taxes, which I did but I can't produce evidence and neither can the IRS.
I understand your problem. All I was saying is to make sure any response you provide includes that your work during 1999-2000 was legal as per F1 on-campus regulations. And I hope the attorney you hire should be able to do that. If you do not have Tax returns , then you don't. Like someone said earlier , your W2 along with IRS letter that they do not keep records older than 7 years maybe enough but again your attorney should make this decision wisely.
The problem is not the hours I worked as I've always worked legally and within the laws of the University and visa status.
The problem is proving that I filed my taxes, which I did but I can't produce evidence and neither can the IRS.
I understand your problem. All I was saying is to make sure any response you provide includes that your work during 1999-2000 was legal as per F1 on-campus regulations. And I hope the attorney you hire should be able to do that. If you do not have Tax returns , then you don't. Like someone said earlier , your W2 along with IRS letter that they do not keep records older than 7 years maybe enough but again your attorney should make this decision wisely.
more...
house I was in an Audi S8 the other
snathan
02-11 11:42 AM
What are IVs recommendations ??
You can get that information from donor forum.
Thanks,
You can get that information from donor forum.
Thanks,
tattoo 2001 Audi S8 Accessories amp;
jvs
03-02 06:36 PM
Regarding "New Scenario - Seeking second opinion"
Couple of things to consider...
1) You need to be present in US at time of applying for the extension and when its approved. In your case I think with travel coming up in June, you probably need to go premium so you have approval in hand my April end. Regular processing takes about 2-3 months I think.
2) You can only go 90 days in advance of your new/extended approval as far as I know. So you need to see if that matches when you plan to go for stamping.
If in similar situation I would probably do what you are planning. It adds some anxiety with both wedding and consulate visit at same time, but once past that it will make life little easier.
Couple of things to consider...
1) You need to be present in US at time of applying for the extension and when its approved. In your case I think with travel coming up in June, you probably need to go premium so you have approval in hand my April end. Regular processing takes about 2-3 months I think.
2) You can only go 90 days in advance of your new/extended approval as far as I know. So you need to see if that matches when you plan to go for stamping.
If in similar situation I would probably do what you are planning. It adds some anxiety with both wedding and consulate visit at same time, but once past that it will make life little easier.
more...
pictures 2001 Audi S8 Audi
veni001
02-03 11:05 AM
That is correct. Mixing and matching with certifications doesn't work. Although I don't know about CPA, if it goes towards professional degree.
That's correct, also if the job requirement is Bachelor + 5 year experience is entirely different from Bachelor or equivalent +5 year experience. Also if you are considering porting with the same employer please read by clicking here (http:///2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html), this is not to scare you but to shed some light on the process.
Good luck!
;)
That's correct, also if the job requirement is Bachelor + 5 year experience is entirely different from Bachelor or equivalent +5 year experience. Also if you are considering porting with the same employer please read by clicking here (http:///2011/01/eb3-to-eb2-porting-with-same-current.html), this is not to scare you but to shed some light on the process.
Good luck!
;)
dresses 2009 Audi S8, Interior Front
PDDec05
06-29 11:44 PM
Thank you for your input, do you know where I should call, if there is a number and so on? There is absolutely no information on any place on fixing 485 form.
I just called the 1-800 number on their website, but your lawyer may know someone in person at the USCIS.
I just called the 1-800 number on their website, but your lawyer may know someone in person at the USCIS.
more...
makeup ugkplayer#39;s 2001 Audi S8
hemanth22
07-21 09:24 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
girlfriend 2001 audi S8 rare car sale
MerciesOfInjustices
02-22 09:59 PM
Pardon my ignorance, but what is PBEC exactly and what are the issues regarding it? Something to do with Labor backlogs?
hairstyles 2001 Audi S8 - 1 of 2 in this
tinoue
09-27 08:24 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
blacktongue
01-26 01:16 PM
Why more IT people from Andhra India?
GCard_Dream
07-13 04:42 PM
That means you have no reputation at all :D :D :D .. kidding.
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Wow!. I did not realise that. I an unknown quantity. What does that mean?
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Wow!. I did not realise that. I an unknown quantity. What does that mean?
No comments:
Post a Comment