yanj
12-14 11:58 AM
I searched some ways to solve the GAP problem.
Now I collect it and please correct it if I have some mistakes.
GAP problem is a normal problem . So we can share our information about it
to help each other.
Now I collect it and please correct it if I have some mistakes.
GAP problem is a normal problem . So we can share our information about it
to help each other.
wallpaper images Cars Wallpaper latest
fasterthanlight�
06-06 06:35 PM
When do the polls close?
krithi
03-22 12:39 PM
All,
I have filled I-485 in 2007, PD is June 2006, EB2. I went to India and came back using my AP on 07/16/2008. I was working for the same company when I came back. I have changed my employer in April, and haven't filled for AC21 yet.
Can you please help me with following question?
My Question is: Will it be Okay to travel using Advance Parole after changing employer and not filled AC21? If anyone traveled like this, Can you please let me know what documents do I need to take with me?
I am in the same boat and travelled twice, no questions asked about employment.
I have filled I-485 in 2007, PD is June 2006, EB2. I went to India and came back using my AP on 07/16/2008. I was working for the same company when I came back. I have changed my employer in April, and haven't filled for AC21 yet.
Can you please help me with following question?
My Question is: Will it be Okay to travel using Advance Parole after changing employer and not filled AC21? If anyone traveled like this, Can you please let me know what documents do I need to take with me?
I am in the same boat and travelled twice, no questions asked about employment.
2011 wallpapers
akilaakka
07-13 11:17 AM
Checklaw,
By Law, you must apply for an intended travel.
However it has been routine practice to get AP renewed because if there is an emergency and on your return if your GC is approved AP is handy.
I am July 2007 filer. I applied in 2007. Did not apply in 2008 (had a valid h1b visa stamped in Passport which expires in Sep 2009) and re applied in 2009. No Issues.
Thanks
Senthil
By Law, you must apply for an intended travel.
However it has been routine practice to get AP renewed because if there is an emergency and on your return if your GC is approved AP is handy.
I am July 2007 filer. I applied in 2007. Did not apply in 2008 (had a valid h1b visa stamped in Passport which expires in Sep 2009) and re applied in 2009. No Issues.
Thanks
Senthil
more...
crystal
02-04 10:52 AM
There is no need to change to H4. asaik , that is an extra un-necessary step.
AP should be enough.
Does it make sense to change status to h4 from f1 before my spouse goes out of country and come back on h4 instead of AP?
AP should be enough.
Does it make sense to change status to h4 from f1 before my spouse goes out of country and come back on h4 instead of AP?
Brittanicus
04-22 08:38 PM
First and foremost we are a nation of laws, or as we are all anticipated? But years of previous administrations have neglected the illegal immigrant problem, to the detriment of American workers. Ever since the inception of the 1986 Immigration & Reform Act, signed into law by Ronald Reagan, the politicians have pushed for a new AMNESTY. In addition, anytime a new law has been drafted to combat the illegal immigrant occupation of our country, they have behind closed doors killed it or weakened it's enactment. The law of given instant citizenship to babies intentionally born here, is a complete misinterpretation of the 14th amendment, after the civil war that emancipated African slaves.
It was never meant for (Anchor Babies) to give pregnant illegal alien mothers the right to legal status? The law has been badly mauled because the children can then draw on US education, free medical care, free baby delivery and after care, low income housing and it is a route to many government handouts. The major problem now facing the Obama White House is are the children of illegal immigrants to blame for their parents breaking the law? Obviously the left-wingers are to blame for this conundrum, but both parties have added to neglect to the sovereign laws of our nation. I think we should follow other countries "Rule of Law" and cement in place that children who have proven themselves can go to a place of higher learning. We desperately need a wide scope of professionals in Engineering, Science and 21st Century technology. But also remember that our government settles the largest population of new immigrants on Earth. What we don't need is more poorly educated, non-English speaking, impoverished aliens, looking for handouts. Like other developed nations we must be very specific, who we pick and choose as new citizens. We must also restrain ourselves from chain migration, who are liable to become a public charges, because the family sponsors have decided the US taxpayer should carry the financial weight?
We can thank our corrupt liberal politicians, judges in the past as drafting a passive law, instead of entering America being a criminal offense. Now we have uncountable number of illegal aliens squatting here, because of the absolute intentional neglect of our lawmakers. Is there any other country in the world, that makes illegally crossing into their sovereign territory a Civil Crime--I really don't think so? Our laws deliberately drafted this way in favor of the open border, big Catholic church and special interest groups. To HXXX with the American people, who are forced to fight for their jobs?
But if American defeat the next Amnesty ready to pounce on the unsuspecting legal population, we must make an example in using the 1986 law. We as a people must build-on the E-Verify application, upgrade, modify to extract illegal job applicants from the workplace. Illegal immigrants who have overstayed visas, illegal crossed the border and children must be exempt from any pardon. All children of illegal parents that have committed crimes, been expelled or just deserted school should leave with parents in the usage of self-deportation. This is a compliance way to remove foreign nationals and any criminal businesses that employ them, must receive mandatory, fines, asset confiscation and prison terms. The use of a in-perpetuity E-Verify will be a ultimate deterrent and see movement of illegal labor and families packing and leaving under the term of "ATTRITION" We must force our reluctant politicians to be governed by--THE PEOPLE'S--WILL or face the dire consequences in the election process. This will surely happen when Sen. Reid, Speaker Pelosi and 48 other Senate lawmakers come up for re-election. They underfunded E-Verify, that obviously is working efficiently for them to kill it. Today I have heard Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano is approaching State governors to appeal the Real ID Act, that would add national standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards, Revising and tightening the laws on application for asylum and deportation of aliens for terrorist activity. That wouldWaiver laws that interfere with construction of physical barriers at the borders, to name a few statutes. So that means since the new Presidency, the Democratic run Congress are trying to revoke E-Verify and the Real ID act. My guess, is under this regime they will be rescinding the Federal program for State and local police called 247(g) that trains officers to arrest and detain illegal alien criminals.
The open border, free traders, special interest groups will use any contradictions, epithets, racial slurs to annul any new law--which they have done successfully up to now. But American should realize strongly, that this has nothing to do with a persons color, religion or ethnic background--and EVERYTHING--to do with being--CARTE BLANCHE--for parasite employers, who pay nothing to illegal immigrant upkeep? It's left to Taxpayers? Its everything to do with billions of dollars spent, to pacify the big Catholic church, a portion of Liberal voters and others who see nothing wrong in loading citizens, residents down with sky high taxes. Supposedly the last White House promised no thoughts of a Path to Citizenship until the border was orderly and closed to undesirable With another drafted and secret Amnesty on the House and Senate table, like always--this is not the case. Drug smuggling and incessant illegal immigration is still very prevalent. The rumors from the new White House are clearly signaling another push for AMNESTY?
So go to these sites: VDARE, FAIRUS, JUDICIALWATCH, NUMBERSUSA, AMERICANPATROL, CAPSWEB & ALIPAC. The stakes are sky high because Amnesty means, thousands more will swamp the border looking for yet a 3rd---AMNESTY.
It was never meant for (Anchor Babies) to give pregnant illegal alien mothers the right to legal status? The law has been badly mauled because the children can then draw on US education, free medical care, free baby delivery and after care, low income housing and it is a route to many government handouts. The major problem now facing the Obama White House is are the children of illegal immigrants to blame for their parents breaking the law? Obviously the left-wingers are to blame for this conundrum, but both parties have added to neglect to the sovereign laws of our nation. I think we should follow other countries "Rule of Law" and cement in place that children who have proven themselves can go to a place of higher learning. We desperately need a wide scope of professionals in Engineering, Science and 21st Century technology. But also remember that our government settles the largest population of new immigrants on Earth. What we don't need is more poorly educated, non-English speaking, impoverished aliens, looking for handouts. Like other developed nations we must be very specific, who we pick and choose as new citizens. We must also restrain ourselves from chain migration, who are liable to become a public charges, because the family sponsors have decided the US taxpayer should carry the financial weight?
We can thank our corrupt liberal politicians, judges in the past as drafting a passive law, instead of entering America being a criminal offense. Now we have uncountable number of illegal aliens squatting here, because of the absolute intentional neglect of our lawmakers. Is there any other country in the world, that makes illegally crossing into their sovereign territory a Civil Crime--I really don't think so? Our laws deliberately drafted this way in favor of the open border, big Catholic church and special interest groups. To HXXX with the American people, who are forced to fight for their jobs?
But if American defeat the next Amnesty ready to pounce on the unsuspecting legal population, we must make an example in using the 1986 law. We as a people must build-on the E-Verify application, upgrade, modify to extract illegal job applicants from the workplace. Illegal immigrants who have overstayed visas, illegal crossed the border and children must be exempt from any pardon. All children of illegal parents that have committed crimes, been expelled or just deserted school should leave with parents in the usage of self-deportation. This is a compliance way to remove foreign nationals and any criminal businesses that employ them, must receive mandatory, fines, asset confiscation and prison terms. The use of a in-perpetuity E-Verify will be a ultimate deterrent and see movement of illegal labor and families packing and leaving under the term of "ATTRITION" We must force our reluctant politicians to be governed by--THE PEOPLE'S--WILL or face the dire consequences in the election process. This will surely happen when Sen. Reid, Speaker Pelosi and 48 other Senate lawmakers come up for re-election. They underfunded E-Verify, that obviously is working efficiently for them to kill it. Today I have heard Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano is approaching State governors to appeal the Real ID Act, that would add national standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards, Revising and tightening the laws on application for asylum and deportation of aliens for terrorist activity. That wouldWaiver laws that interfere with construction of physical barriers at the borders, to name a few statutes. So that means since the new Presidency, the Democratic run Congress are trying to revoke E-Verify and the Real ID act. My guess, is under this regime they will be rescinding the Federal program for State and local police called 247(g) that trains officers to arrest and detain illegal alien criminals.
The open border, free traders, special interest groups will use any contradictions, epithets, racial slurs to annul any new law--which they have done successfully up to now. But American should realize strongly, that this has nothing to do with a persons color, religion or ethnic background--and EVERYTHING--to do with being--CARTE BLANCHE--for parasite employers, who pay nothing to illegal immigrant upkeep? It's left to Taxpayers? Its everything to do with billions of dollars spent, to pacify the big Catholic church, a portion of Liberal voters and others who see nothing wrong in loading citizens, residents down with sky high taxes. Supposedly the last White House promised no thoughts of a Path to Citizenship until the border was orderly and closed to undesirable With another drafted and secret Amnesty on the House and Senate table, like always--this is not the case. Drug smuggling and incessant illegal immigration is still very prevalent. The rumors from the new White House are clearly signaling another push for AMNESTY?
So go to these sites: VDARE, FAIRUS, JUDICIALWATCH, NUMBERSUSA, AMERICANPATROL, CAPSWEB & ALIPAC. The stakes are sky high because Amnesty means, thousands more will swamp the border looking for yet a 3rd---AMNESTY.
more...
BharatPremi
10-19 01:40 PM
LC Salary:- $85,000
LC Location:- New York
New Job Salary:- $74,000
New job Title and Job duties are same.
Is it advisable to invoke AC21 when new job salary is less than original LC salary but more than prevailing wage of new location.
As per Aytes memo there should not be substantial salary difference. Has anyone invoked AC21 when new job salary is less than LC salary.
I've consulted few immigration laywer and the opinion differs.
Experts.... Please help
My opinion not legal advise: One can join other employer after 180 days from the 485 Receipt date with same or high salary than prevailing wage,keeping job description and Job code similar to use AC21. If you feel you are following this then you will be fine otherwise doomed.
Only confusion remains is this: When you filed LC with current employer at that time prevailing wage was 85K so
your "LC Salary" is 85K. Now say after 5 years seeing the economic condition of the
overall job market if DOL has made prevailing wage say for an example "$74K" for the
same job code now then what? In this case should your AC21 be denied or accepted? If
some expert can guide us, we would highly appreciate for this scenario.
Notes:
1) Remuneration, bonus etc do not fit the definition of "wage". So I would negotiate 20K higher job with wage equal
to current wage and 20k bonus if I can.
2) Geographic location should not matter while changing the employer.
LC Location:- New York
New Job Salary:- $74,000
New job Title and Job duties are same.
Is it advisable to invoke AC21 when new job salary is less than original LC salary but more than prevailing wage of new location.
As per Aytes memo there should not be substantial salary difference. Has anyone invoked AC21 when new job salary is less than LC salary.
I've consulted few immigration laywer and the opinion differs.
Experts.... Please help
My opinion not legal advise: One can join other employer after 180 days from the 485 Receipt date with same or high salary than prevailing wage,keeping job description and Job code similar to use AC21. If you feel you are following this then you will be fine otherwise doomed.
Only confusion remains is this: When you filed LC with current employer at that time prevailing wage was 85K so
your "LC Salary" is 85K. Now say after 5 years seeing the economic condition of the
overall job market if DOL has made prevailing wage say for an example "$74K" for the
same job code now then what? In this case should your AC21 be denied or accepted? If
some expert can guide us, we would highly appreciate for this scenario.
Notes:
1) Remuneration, bonus etc do not fit the definition of "wage". So I would negotiate 20K higher job with wage equal
to current wage and 20k bonus if I can.
2) Geographic location should not matter while changing the employer.
2010 great Dodge wallpaper with
rajeevkaza
10-31 01:12 PM
where did you see these 30/45 days numbers? you can apply an H1 extension upto 180 days in advance of the expiry of your current H1 (basically 180 days before the new start-date)
Let me clarify you guys, 180 days advance to expiry is good, I am referring to applying in the last minute, ideally it should be atleast 30 days ahead of expiry date in order to avoid the complications.
Secondly I am referring to applying for H1B Extension AFTER Expiry date which is good for 45 days. Hope you got it now.
Let me clarify you guys, 180 days advance to expiry is good, I am referring to applying in the last minute, ideally it should be atleast 30 days ahead of expiry date in order to avoid the complications.
Secondly I am referring to applying for H1B Extension AFTER Expiry date which is good for 45 days. Hope you got it now.
more...
sanju_dba
08-13 02:48 PM
Poor guys... they can give away $7.5 Billion to some country as Aid, but cannot secure their own borders without increasing burden on H1/L1 Visas for $0.6 Billion(not even 10% in comparison ) ....what a pity.... :mad:
This is pure B.S. politics....
Thats - "andar pareshani bahar shervani"
This is pure B.S. politics....
Thats - "andar pareshani bahar shervani"
hair Latest Cars 2010 Wallpapers
eb3_nepa
04-13 09:56 AM
People on here mentioned that there was a special provision for a a further 3 month wait for the director of immigration studies to examine it. Is that true?
Now is 90 days a normal wait time, or is there something special in this bill?
Now is 90 days a normal wait time, or is there something special in this bill?
more...
optimystic
04-21 04:24 PM
hi friends,
even my PD is current. but my case is transferred from texas to vermont. though my PD is current my processing date is not current. what is the reason for transferring I- 485 case from one center to other.
any response is appreciated
Load balancing is one of the primary reasons.
even my PD is current. but my case is transferred from texas to vermont. though my PD is current my processing date is not current. what is the reason for transferring I- 485 case from one center to other.
any response is appreciated
Load balancing is one of the primary reasons.
hot Fsi Quattro Car Wallpaper
babuworld
11-19 03:33 PM
Gurus , I dont know if this question have been addressed before. I am currently on H1B and is valid still july 2009. But i dont have stamping on my passport. I am waiting for AP for my wife and myself. If we user AP to India Trip then
1.Is my H1B still valid?
2. What will be the status? My employer didnt apply for EAD at this movement.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
1.Is my H1B still valid?
2. What will be the status? My employer didnt apply for EAD at this movement.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
more...
house all car wallpaper. latest cars
purgan
04-13 10:13 AM
USINPAC, for instance, promotes its role in the India-US nuclear deal.
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
tattoo Latest Cars Wallpapers
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
more...
pictures 2010 tattoo cars wallpaper
ganam
10-03 10:02 PM
Does anybody know in what order GC will be issueed ?
Is it based on priority date or just randomly ?
Is it based on priority date or just randomly ?
dresses Cars Wallpaper
Madhuri
07-18 11:21 AM
I also think that now at least we should think of making IV a paid site. Doubtful people always used to ask for results. IV has given a big answer to all these people. Why not at least make it paid for posting in the forums/starting a new thread?
Can you IM a core and ask them to put a link on main page...
Can you IM a core and ask them to put a link on main page...
more...
makeup Latest cars images gallery
priti8888
10-02 12:30 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June/July 2007 they allocated visa numbers to various applications based on RD.
Say Mr A with a PD of 2004 applied for 485 on July 23.
But Mr B with a PD of 2005 applied for 485 in 2005 or anytime before July 2007.
Mr B may be assigned a visa number and you will see his aproval anytime from July-Oct 2007. Since he already applied 485 , his name check, FP, etc is clear and case is pre-adjudicated.
Therefore, inspite of the fact that Mr B 's PF is not current, you will still see approvals in August, sept, oct.
In June/July 2007 they allocated visa numbers to various applications based on RD.
Say Mr A with a PD of 2004 applied for 485 on July 23.
But Mr B with a PD of 2005 applied for 485 in 2005 or anytime before July 2007.
Mr B may be assigned a visa number and you will see his aproval anytime from July-Oct 2007. Since he already applied 485 , his name check, FP, etc is clear and case is pre-adjudicated.
Therefore, inspite of the fact that Mr B 's PF is not current, you will still see approvals in August, sept, oct.
girlfriend cool fast cars wallpapers.
eb3_nepa
08-16 09:39 PM
We gave them the 485 receipt and both the EADs and this is all information he actually asked for and said at the end that the system did not let him give us the DL as it needed more info.
When will this NIGHTMARE end!:rolleyes:
When will this NIGHTMARE end!:rolleyes:
hairstyles new cars wallpapers
tcsonly
07-21 04:07 PM
My PD is June 04 and the online status for my LC shows CERTIFIED since last week. Attorneys say they need DOL to send them the approved LC ... some document, which would be needed to file I-140 and I-485. Any idea how much time it takes for DOL to send the above said document back to the applicant or representative?
In that case, have your paper work ready such as medical tests, birth certs & related.
-C.
In that case, have your paper work ready such as medical tests, birth certs & related.
-C.
chantu
09-27 11:47 AM
I don't think day trading affects your H1B. It will be shown under capital gain/loss on your tax return. We can have CDs then why not profit through stocks.
But still, I am not an expert! Please consult proper person.
But still, I am not an expert! Please consult proper person.
zj142
12-22 09:14 PM
My understanding of "This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred" is alien beneficiary can retain his/her PD in the case of changine employer. Change of employer is not included in "Fraud or willful misrepresentation".
No comments:
Post a Comment