ab53579
06-18 10:42 PM
thanks for your reply, where I shuld put concurnt i-140 and i-485, there is just a chck mark and there is n clumn where I can write cncurent i-140 and i-485,
Thanks,
Jan
Thanks,
Jan
wallpaper medium hairstyle
geniousatwork
09-23 06:21 PM
I saw two LUDs recently 09/11 and 09/14 on my case.
crazyghoda
01-21 06:12 PM
Deleted.
2011 A great haircut styles ob
jay75
09-21 06:48 PM
NSC Received my AOS apps. on Aug 10th
I140 Approved 11/2006 from NSC
EB3 Ind with PD 10/2004
I140 Approved 11/2006 from NSC
EB3 Ind with PD 10/2004
more...
Blog Feeds
09-11 12:00 PM
The Migration Policy Institute has released a report outlining the impact of the global downturn on the movement of immigrants. Key findings include the following: � The recession has dampened the movement of economic migrants to the major immigrant-receiving regions of the world. And, counter to some widely held public perceptions, immigrants overwhelmingly are choosing to stay put in their adopted countries rather than return home despite higher unemployment and lack of jobs. � While the overall picture is one of sharp remittance decline, some regions are experiencing remittance increases or are holding steady. Though remittances have dropped globally amid...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/09/mpi-recession-impacting-global-migration-patterns.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/09/mpi-recession-impacting-global-migration-patterns.html)
laksmi
12-13 06:57 PM
Its fine, It should not be a problem
more...
aadimanav
07-17 05:39 PM
To - Congress (Capitol Hill, DC)
Purpose - To address EB3 visa issue.
How about wrapping the flowers in the following
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20190
or similar petition.
Thanks,
Purpose - To address EB3 visa issue.
How about wrapping the flowers in the following
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20190
or similar petition.
Thanks,
2010 Beautiful Long Bob Hairstyles
MDix
01-08 11:31 AM
http://www.dol.gov/dol/budget/2009/PDF/CBJ-2009-V1-10.pdf
Thanks,
MDix
Thanks,
MDix
more...
drona
07-10 06:16 PM
We are posting media coverage on this thread. Just posted an article from Reuters there!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6305
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6305
hair 2011 long hairstyles 2011
gangadhargs
05-12 05:10 AM
Thanks to IV for making the multi year EAD/AP happen. Since USCIS might or might not announce this, I want to track when people start getting these multi year EAD/APs. Anyone in the IV community got one of these yet?
more...
plakshmi
08-28 11:00 AM
Any help on this question?
hot In medium short hairstyles bob
MissionImpossibleGC
09-02 06:07 PM
Most of the members here think. GC are long pending only because of beneficiary or USCIS only.
This news is also making me to think about the reality of the issues in finding the good company for GC processing.
Let have discussion on this how to find good company for GC processing. Appreciate in advance.
This news is also making me to think about the reality of the issues in finding the good company for GC processing.
Let have discussion on this how to find good company for GC processing. Appreciate in advance.
more...
house Celebrity Short Bob Hairstyle
Macaca
07-24 08:04 AM
Reform, the FDR way (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shlaes23jul23,1,2603353.story) Democrats are right to revere Roosevelt, but even he knew when to reform his own reforms. By Amity Shlaes, AMITY SHLAES is the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg News and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. July 23, 2007
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
tattoo In medium short hairstyles bob
GC1027
10-03 09:22 AM
Our Application was also received by M.Salcedo at TSC on August 2nd. We got all our receipts on October 1st. When I checked the status online for 765, the status showed - 'Card Production Ordered'
You receipts may be on their way!
You receipts may be on their way!
more...
pictures medium hairstyles 2010 for
desigirl
08-31 10:05 AM
Senate Democrat: Immigration reform not happening this year - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/116321-dem-senator-immigration-reform-isnt-happening-this-year)
The party did move in recent weeks, though, to make itself seem tougher on immigration, with the Senate coming back to convene a special session to advance a $600 million bill to boost border security that the House had passed in a special session of its own.
At LEGAL IMMIGRANTS expense :eek:!!!
The party did move in recent weeks, though, to make itself seem tougher on immigration, with the Senate coming back to convene a special session to advance a $600 million bill to boost border security that the House had passed in a special session of its own.
At LEGAL IMMIGRANTS expense :eek:!!!
dresses Medium Shag Haircuts 2010
easygoer
08-17 03:53 PM
Lawyers please help,
I am on my 7th year of H-1B (not stamped) and H-1B is due to expire in 2011. I am with the same employer since beginning of H-1B. My AOS is pending and have received AP and EAD.
I am planning to visit Canada next month and want to enter USA with the help of AP. My question is Can I continue my salary using H-1B with the same employer? I read somewhere that I can use my H-1B for salary processing in such circumstances provided I am working for same employer.
I am on my 7th year of H-1B (not stamped) and H-1B is due to expire in 2011. I am with the same employer since beginning of H-1B. My AOS is pending and have received AP and EAD.
I am planning to visit Canada next month and want to enter USA with the help of AP. My question is Can I continue my salary using H-1B with the same employer? I read somewhere that I can use my H-1B for salary processing in such circumstances provided I am working for same employer.
more...
makeup Modern Black Hairstyles 2010
gcformeornot
04-09 01:27 PM
quota is open.... try again...
girlfriend http://long-hairstyle.com/wp-
vdlrao
10-06 01:52 AM
Finally some movement from GCC states to satisfy their peoples wishes
The demise of the dollar - Business News, Business - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175.html)
This would cause the decrease of the cruciality of the dollar trading in international markets.
The demise of the dollar - Business News, Business - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175.html)
This would cause the decrease of the cruciality of the dollar trading in international markets.
hairstyles Hairstyle 2010 2011.
lilymc
07-18 09:35 PM
Ooh, I like this one. :D
ashokmads
02-13 04:10 PM
Hi All,
My parents I94 is expiring on March 27th 2008.
We had filed for extension (form I 539) in California Service Centre with receipt date of Jan 02 2008.
Calif is currently processing Oct 2007 I529s.
My concerns are :
1) I think their stay here is legal till we hear back from USCIS on their extension. Please confirm if this is true.
2) If they get declined , they have to leave immediately. Is that period of stay considered illegal?
3) Is overstaying with legal extension an issue if they need to come again after 6 months or so? What is the criteria they look for for frequency of visits/stay periods at port of entry.
Will greatly appreciat all your personal experiences /wise opinion on this matter of pressing concern for us.
Thanks
Ash
My parents I94 is expiring on March 27th 2008.
We had filed for extension (form I 539) in California Service Centre with receipt date of Jan 02 2008.
Calif is currently processing Oct 2007 I529s.
My concerns are :
1) I think their stay here is legal till we hear back from USCIS on their extension. Please confirm if this is true.
2) If they get declined , they have to leave immediately. Is that period of stay considered illegal?
3) Is overstaying with legal extension an issue if they need to come again after 6 months or so? What is the criteria they look for for frequency of visits/stay periods at port of entry.
Will greatly appreciat all your personal experiences /wise opinion on this matter of pressing concern for us.
Thanks
Ash
Blog Feeds
10-21 02:10 PM
I'm glad to see Immigration Voice weighing in on this one. Under some of the versions of health care reform proposals being considered by Congress, legal immigrants could be excluded for five years before they can access the Medicaid and insurance subsidies despite the fact that they pay taxes, are abiding by all of our laws and are often making critical contributions to the success of this country.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
0 comments:
Post a Comment