gcobsessed
07-11 08:40 PM
I consider this movement of dates a ticket to enter a lucky draw. Whatever visa numbers remain to be used in last two months of the fiscal year is going to be allocated at random to people who have their PD current in this period. So, congratulations to whoever gets lucky.
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
wallpaper cut into long layers and
cn0568
07-22 11:58 PM
I came to US through CompanyA on L1A Visa 4 months back. My L1A Visa is valid till Mar-09. I had applied for the H1B Visa when I was in India. I got the H1B Visa and now has a valid petition effective Oct-07.
I would like to know the following.
Can I join the Company B from Company A without going back to India after Oct-07?
I would like to know the following.
Can I join the Company B from Company A without going back to India after Oct-07?
noendinsight
10-26 10:24 AM
Eb3 India
PD- Jan 2004
PD- Jan 2004
2011 Layered Hairstyles Pictures
gk_2000
08-10 08:39 PM
I have no intention of playing spoilsport if you are taking some good faith initiative. In fact, if there is some campaign launched on this - I will probably even contribute (well - if you are doing something in good faith for a community then I have a moral obligation to support it if it is not harmful for the community).
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
You are absolutely right in pointing out the need to really see the law. I just dived into it. I will try to study it more thoroughly, as there are possibly multiple places we could explore in the language; not just this one. If I get more ideas I will come back and post them here.
I request all members to participate in the other thread discussing the various provisions of the INA
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
You are absolutely right in pointing out the need to really see the law. I just dived into it. I will try to study it more thoroughly, as there are possibly multiple places we could explore in the language; not just this one. If I get more ideas I will come back and post them here.
I request all members to participate in the other thread discussing the various provisions of the INA
more...
sam_hoosier
07-02 12:51 PM
I support it.
vjkypally
09-26 10:04 AM
I also sent a note
more...
vdlrao
09-26 02:43 PM
Dear Reader,
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
2010 Long Hair With Short Layers
vagish
04-04 10:22 AM
You will notice that there is not a single provision here that protects the rights of H1B workers and saves them from exploitation.
There is not a single provision to punish employers who exploit H1Bs.
Even with other immigration bills you will see there is not a single provision in these immigrtaion bills that punishes employers that hire illegal aliens. Thus all immigration laws being made never punish any US citizen breaking the law by employing an illegal alien or paying low salary or exploiting an H1B.
Even with the current law, have you seen how many employers have been punished for employing illegal aliens. Do you know the penalty for getting caught. It is a mere $500 and nothing else. And you will be surprised to know that not even 100 employers have been fined last year. And only 2 H1B employers were punished after being sued by employees. No H1B employer was caught and punished for exploiting any employee. The laws are being made to favor US employers and to punish immigrants.
I am surprised that nobody is noticing this.
the laws are there , but only on the books, they don't fund them for enforcement.
Also some laws are very week and needs to be changed.
I think general american public is getting to know more about it as everyday
passess with immigration debate. I think in the future if they pass any law
it will come with heavy enforcement and also the provisions like hiking h1B and
green card numbers, both will go hand in hand , there will be some controvercial provisions for both sides .
There is not a single provision to punish employers who exploit H1Bs.
Even with other immigration bills you will see there is not a single provision in these immigrtaion bills that punishes employers that hire illegal aliens. Thus all immigration laws being made never punish any US citizen breaking the law by employing an illegal alien or paying low salary or exploiting an H1B.
Even with the current law, have you seen how many employers have been punished for employing illegal aliens. Do you know the penalty for getting caught. It is a mere $500 and nothing else. And you will be surprised to know that not even 100 employers have been fined last year. And only 2 H1B employers were punished after being sued by employees. No H1B employer was caught and punished for exploiting any employee. The laws are being made to favor US employers and to punish immigrants.
I am surprised that nobody is noticing this.
the laws are there , but only on the books, they don't fund them for enforcement.
Also some laws are very week and needs to be changed.
I think general american public is getting to know more about it as everyday
passess with immigration debate. I think in the future if they pass any law
it will come with heavy enforcement and also the provisions like hiking h1B and
green card numbers, both will go hand in hand , there will be some controvercial provisions for both sides .
more...
srkamath
07-13 02:31 PM
It is just a temporary movement to capture as many visa number as possible. Dates will move back in Oct and surge forward in June 09.
NO it won't !:);)
NO it won't !:);)
hair hair in layers with long
ItIsNotFunny
10-15 12:05 PM
Guys,
I think this is a time to start another flower campaign to USCIS. It is ridiculuous to have 7 years of retrogression on EB3 India, same is true to good extend for EB2 India also.
I think this is a time to start another flower campaign to USCIS. It is ridiculuous to have 7 years of retrogression on EB3 India, same is true to good extend for EB2 India also.
more...
ameryki
03-17 03:00 PM
PD Nov 2005 filed in Aug 2007
hot long hair, layers ginnifer
waitingGC
01-16 06:21 PM
I just got the word from our treasurer that the IRS has approved Immigration Voice as a non-profit organization of 501 (C) (4) type.
Until now, it was pending approval. Now Immigration Voice is a non-profit for sure and this means that we do not pay taxes on the income. This also means that no volunteers can get paid compensations for the work done.
Immigration Voice will file the tax return as a non-profit and hopefully, that will remove doubts from some members/visitors that all the money is spent only on advocacy(lobbying) and website maintenance and no one is personally profiting from this effort.
This is a big relief for us and now its time to file taxes.
I actually don't think this is the main concern of many people who have not contributed. I have talked with many friends who got stuck with their GC applications regarding IV and urged them to contribute. However, not many of them were very passionate about this. They just simply believed that they could not achieve their GCs faster with IV's effort than without. $20 per month is not a big deal for them. But without any confidence and hope, they did not even want to bother to register and contribute. Most of my friends are EB2 with PD 2004 or later. Some who have filed 485s see no sign for SKIL being passed and are fine with their APs and EADs. Those who have not filed their 485 truly believe that they could file their 485s in about 2 years and got used to this waiting.
So I think maybe we can let people know what IV has achieved in the past one year(not just how many members or how much money IV has achieved..., but things really matter to people) and inspire them.
Until now, it was pending approval. Now Immigration Voice is a non-profit for sure and this means that we do not pay taxes on the income. This also means that no volunteers can get paid compensations for the work done.
Immigration Voice will file the tax return as a non-profit and hopefully, that will remove doubts from some members/visitors that all the money is spent only on advocacy(lobbying) and website maintenance and no one is personally profiting from this effort.
This is a big relief for us and now its time to file taxes.
I actually don't think this is the main concern of many people who have not contributed. I have talked with many friends who got stuck with their GC applications regarding IV and urged them to contribute. However, not many of them were very passionate about this. They just simply believed that they could not achieve their GCs faster with IV's effort than without. $20 per month is not a big deal for them. But without any confidence and hope, they did not even want to bother to register and contribute. Most of my friends are EB2 with PD 2004 or later. Some who have filed 485s see no sign for SKIL being passed and are fine with their APs and EADs. Those who have not filed their 485 truly believe that they could file their 485s in about 2 years and got used to this waiting.
So I think maybe we can let people know what IV has achieved in the past one year(not just how many members or how much money IV has achieved..., but things really matter to people) and inspire them.
more...
house long layered hairstyles
bkarnik
07-25 06:46 PM
Thanks a lot, please keep us posted about the outcome, even if we have one percent of hope, there is no harm trying that.
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Anyways, I sent the following email to my lawyer, the entire chain with names deleted is reproduced here for your reading pleasure. This exchange highlights the apathy with which the legal community (at least my lawyer) view the issue and their knowledge of the law.... enjoy.. :(
From: Attorney
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
I see your point. You should contact the American Immigration Lawyers Association with your question. If the issue has not already been addressed by this organization, I'm sure they will readily champion your cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:49 AM
To: attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
Thank you for your time and the quick turnaround. However, the question still remains. If you notice in the link sent by you below, the USCIS refers to the US 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c) According to the USCIS, the CFR is the interpretation made by the agencies of the INA as passed and amended by Congress. The INA itself does not seem to have any clause relating to EAD for employment based categories because I believe the Congress never foresaw a situation where it will take up to 5-6 years for the process to complete.
I know that the USCIS has on many occasions by using the Federal Register or by Memorandums modified the CFR or changed the regulations governing the validity of the EAD, and I am wondering if something similar can be achieved in this case, wherein an appeal is made to the USCIS to change the rules governing eligibility for issuing an EAD.
Thanks once again.
Bkarnik.
-----Original Message-----
From: AttorneySent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:57 PM
To: Bkarnik
Subject: RE: Question..
Hello BKarnik,
Your argument is sound, however, U.S. Immigration does indeed adjudicate
I-765 EAD applications based upon eligibility for filing. Please click this
link: http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/i-765.htm. It will take you to the USCIS web site where you can download form I-765. Included with the form is an instruction sheet. In the section entitled "Eligibility Categories", U.S. Immigration spells out the categories for which form I-765 may be filed. For example, under the "Foreign Students" title, you can see that an F-1 OPT student is eligible to obtain EAD work authorization pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(i). Your eligibility for EAD work authorization will fall under the "EAD Applicants Who Have Filed for Adjustment of Status" title under subsection (c)(9). Unfortunately, there is no eligibility category for I-140 IVP applicants or for IVP approval notice holders.
I hope this answers your questions.
Attorney
________________________________
From: Bkarnik
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:16 PM
To: Attorney
Subject: Question..
Dear Attorney:
I had a question for you (actually, it is a series of sub questions).
However, this has nothing to with my employer or my GC, so if you feel that replying to this question will take up an inordinate amount of time or of you think that this is something that is worthwhile in pursuing, please let me know what your charges will be and I will let you know if I can afford them :)) With that out of the way, here goes:
The question is about getting an EAD before filing the I-485. I was perusing the INA as posted on the USCIS website. I did not find any applicable law that directs the USCIS when it can issue EADs. It is quite likely that I missed the section as I am not a student of laws as you are.
If so, can you let me know where to find it? As you know, the EAD issue is mentioned in the US 8 CFR sec. 274a. Now, the USCIS website explains that the CFR thus: The general provisions of laws enacted by Congress are interpreted and implemented by regulations issued by various agencies.
These
regulations apply the law to daily situations. Thus, the CFR is the interpretation of the law by the USCIS for application in daily life.
If
that is the case, what prevents the USCIS from issuing EADs upon the approval of Form I-140? Especially, since as you very well know, the Form I-140 is an application made by the employer to the USCIS to petition for an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States.
Therefore,
the form requires the employer to fill in all the pertinent information about the alien and his dependents. An approval of the Form I-140 indicates (at least to me) that the USCIS has agreed with the employee that the labor certification is good and the alien is approvable as a permanent employee.
I guess that is one of the reasons, the USCIS allows concurrent filing of the I-140/I-485.
With the current retrogression concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 is not possible, if the USCIS were to be agreeable to issue EADs to persons with approved I-140 it would make life a lot easier for all while at the same time not impacting the green card process itself. All we are asking is that the EAD be issued after I-140 approval, because it does not make sense to tell an employer that the alien is approved for permanent employment, but at the same time asking the employer to keep the employee in a H1B (i.e.
temporary status) at no fault of the employer/employee. Can you let me know if my argument is flawed? If not, do you think we have a way by which we can ask the USCIS for its interpretation or opinion on the issue? If we can, and you are willing to take the matter, can you let me know your fees?
I know that you are very busy, and may not be able to take on the matter even if you find merit in it. In that case, would know of a competent person willing to take it up?
Thank you for your time and patience,
Sincerely,
Bkarnik
tattoo long hair with choppy layers
BlueSunD
03-07 12:08 AM
I guess it is kind of hard to try to complete an image that satisfies the mental picture that we have of it. Mostly, because of time, right now I have a lot to do too. But I won�t quit no matter what.... I guess that, either I love too much to work on 3D, or I like to suffer and don�t sleep :krazy: Anyway, good luck to everyone!
Geez Grinch! That�s really cool! I hadn�t reloaded this page until I posted... and I didn�t want to double post :)
Anyway, it�s really neat! Congratulations, the texturing is really nice!
Geez Grinch! That�s really cool! I hadn�t reloaded this page until I posted... and I didn�t want to double post :)
Anyway, it�s really neat! Congratulations, the texturing is really nice!
more...
pictures with long straight hair
Becks
07-12 02:39 PM
I guess if you are assigned a visa number, they may put your case as pending new 140 approval. Ammendment may not take much time. So keep fingers crossed. Good Luck.
Guru, please help, my 140 is approved with my original employer who got acquired by a big fish. The Big Fish filed for a new 140 (they called it amendment I guess) and that is still pending. My priority date is Sep'05 EB2. Would I qualify to be lucky in the lottery game with this movement? Please help.
Guru, please help, my 140 is approved with my original employer who got acquired by a big fish. The Big Fish filed for a new 140 (they called it amendment I guess) and that is still pending. My priority date is Sep'05 EB2. Would I qualify to be lucky in the lottery game with this movement? Please help.
dresses long hair short layers,long
gc28262
03-03 06:01 PM
Why are we just looking for 3 year EAD. We need GC !
more...
makeup long hair layers. Layers?
Canuck
02-14 08:10 PM
This is the exact reason why USCIS has a country quota system ensuring ROW folks do not have to compete with OVERSUBSCRIBED countries.
What WILL NOT happen? - Removal of per country quota for EB Visas!!
Why are you in favour of per country quotas, having been born in an oversubscribed country? Are you a glutton for punishment? Do you enjoy waiting 6 years more than an equally qualified counterpart from another country who moves onto bigger and better jobs while you rot in the same position and pay grade for years?
Per country rationing is discriminatory for EB migration. The best jobs should go to the best people, regardless of national origin, race, or religion - this basic principle is enshrined in employment law, but when it comes to EB migration, it is disregarded! It is not about "giving everyone an equal chance" - this is not a charity, this is a business, and in business, only the best and the brightest get those jobs.
What WILL NOT happen? - Removal of per country quota for EB Visas!!
Why are you in favour of per country quotas, having been born in an oversubscribed country? Are you a glutton for punishment? Do you enjoy waiting 6 years more than an equally qualified counterpart from another country who moves onto bigger and better jobs while you rot in the same position and pay grade for years?
Per country rationing is discriminatory for EB migration. The best jobs should go to the best people, regardless of national origin, race, or religion - this basic principle is enshrined in employment law, but when it comes to EB migration, it is disregarded! It is not about "giving everyone an equal chance" - this is not a charity, this is a business, and in business, only the best and the brightest get those jobs.
girlfriend long brown hair fashioned
kumar1
03-16 05:56 PM
I am impressed to see that our buddy Infinite_Patience_GC is not using F** words today. Good job!
Infinite_Patience_GC,
Though I don't like your language and attitude, you have a valid point. I honestly feel that those who have used labor substitution should not get their green cards earlier than me.
Infinite_Patience_GC,
Though I don't like your language and attitude, you have a valid point. I honestly feel that those who have used labor substitution should not get their green cards earlier than me.
hairstyles long hair layers. long hair
wellwishergc
08-02 02:42 PM
:D :D
Why don't we nominate your name for the post of 'Director' of USCIS?:D
The visa numbers for Indians in EB2 category is 'unavailable' currently. Every month the USCIS estimates (rather guesses :rolleyes:) the demand for visas in each category adds to it their own forecasted work pace and based on some super secretive formula comes up with a cut-off date....as we all have seen this formula is by no means accurate (knowing how it went from being current for all employment based category in sept 05 to unavailable for eb3 indians at begining of they year to the dates moving 5 years for chinese eb2 in a few months..etc ..etc)
Wouldn't it be nice if USCIS gives themselves a break from the stressful guess work ;) every october and instead of giving cut-off dates, just make eb1-3 'available' for all across the board...then all of us waiting with approved i140's can file 485...get EADs..our wives can work...we can change jobs per will and live happily ever after...May be they can use the data gathered from all the petition received to forecast a better cut-off date for the remaining 11 months...And if they repeat this every year....the most one would have to wait with an approved I40 to file I485 is one year....I am sure lot of guys with pending applications at BECs would also jump on this idea and file new perm petitions...effectively reducing the backlog..if not eliminating it.
Mean while I am proposing all this in humour and not advocating IV to adopt it in their agenda :) ...so don't start pounding on me just yet...
Why don't we nominate your name for the post of 'Director' of USCIS?:D
The visa numbers for Indians in EB2 category is 'unavailable' currently. Every month the USCIS estimates (rather guesses :rolleyes:) the demand for visas in each category adds to it their own forecasted work pace and based on some super secretive formula comes up with a cut-off date....as we all have seen this formula is by no means accurate (knowing how it went from being current for all employment based category in sept 05 to unavailable for eb3 indians at begining of they year to the dates moving 5 years for chinese eb2 in a few months..etc ..etc)
Wouldn't it be nice if USCIS gives themselves a break from the stressful guess work ;) every october and instead of giving cut-off dates, just make eb1-3 'available' for all across the board...then all of us waiting with approved i140's can file 485...get EADs..our wives can work...we can change jobs per will and live happily ever after...May be they can use the data gathered from all the petition received to forecast a better cut-off date for the remaining 11 months...And if they repeat this every year....the most one would have to wait with an approved I40 to file I485 is one year....I am sure lot of guys with pending applications at BECs would also jump on this idea and file new perm petitions...effectively reducing the backlog..if not eliminating it.
Mean while I am proposing all this in humour and not advocating IV to adopt it in their agenda :) ...so don't start pounding on me just yet...
WillIWin?
07-24 12:24 PM
This is my law firm. Seems like they have submitted many applications (140 + 485 concurrently) WITHOUT the employment offer letter.
Anyone else with this firm ? Also I see that there are people who have already sent in their 485 applications. My 2 cents:
- Dont send in multiple 485s (with the same underlying I-140. Multiple 485s with multiple I-140s is fine). Higher chances of rejection than just a missing employment letter.
- If your lawyer is a relatively reputable firm, then chances are that they have done this in the past and have not had any issues. So chances are they know what they are doing.
Anyone else with this firm ? Also I see that there are people who have already sent in their 485 applications. My 2 cents:
- Dont send in multiple 485s (with the same underlying I-140. Multiple 485s with multiple I-140s is fine). Higher chances of rejection than just a missing employment letter.
- If your lawyer is a relatively reputable firm, then chances are that they have done this in the past and have not had any issues. So chances are they know what they are doing.
TexDBoy
09-10 02:42 PM
You can open real player ... then file -> open ..
http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/real-live/judiciary/17223/56_judiciary-coj_2141_070212.smi
http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/real-live/judiciary/17223/56_judiciary-coj_2141_070212.smi
No comments:
Post a Comment