pappu
12-16 01:25 PM
There is a possible solution to this. I do not wish to post it as everyone may try to misuse that route and thus block the avenue for deserving people. If you have been denied, you can contact IV.
wallpaper jessica sutta news
satish_hello
07-19 02:24 PM
Hi ,
Even i got this same message on 5/19/2008, please look at my all posting, we have been discussing in seperate thread.
It is Hard LUD.
Please update if you get any info.
Thanks
Even i got this same message on 5/19/2008, please look at my all posting, we have been discussing in seperate thread.
It is Hard LUD.
Please update if you get any info.
Thanks
cessua
04-05 03:53 PM
I am in a similar situation, i am on my 5th year H1B ROW and my laywer sent in the I485 before the retrogression started but i still have to wait for the PD to be current.
I am finishing an MBA in two months and i have had a few interviews but not sure what the wisest thing is.
Advise?
I am finishing an MBA in two months and i have had a few interviews but not sure what the wisest thing is.
Advise?
2011 Jessica Sutta,
Refugee_New
04-08 11:58 AM
I called the TSC IO a few times and finally it got cleared. Yes my PD is current and I wish the case gets assigned to some one soon.
These IO's knows nothing and they talk all bullshit. They keep on changing the story whenever you call them. Thats what happened in my case.
In Feb '08 my NC was pending
Mid Feb' 08 NC cleared
March 1st, NC pending
March 15, NC cleard and good to go
March 26, NC pending and waiting to be assigned to officer
April4th, NC pending and still waiting to go to an officer.
These IO's knows nothing and they talk all bullshit. They keep on changing the story whenever you call them. Thats what happened in my case.
In Feb '08 my NC was pending
Mid Feb' 08 NC cleared
March 1st, NC pending
March 15, NC cleard and good to go
March 26, NC pending and waiting to be assigned to officer
April4th, NC pending and still waiting to go to an officer.
more...
gcpadmavyuh
09-23 11:54 AM
My Wife is on AOS (as a dependent with me as primary). She has recently applied for admission into Graduate School. Since she does not have her green card yet, she was being considered as an international application and was requested to submit her "visa documents". We sent in her I-485 Application, EAD and AP documents. Apparently, the school did not have these in their list of acceptable "documents for admission". The school insisted that we need to apply for my wife's F-1 and provide proof of financial support.
I was trying to convince the Director of Intl Affairs that my wife is in the country legally and while on AOS, she can attend school and work for any employer.
The school now comes back saying that they understand being able to work, but they are now asking if there is any law that explicitly states that an AOS applicant can go to school.
Could you please help?? Is there such a law? I personally went through F-1 to H1 to AOS myself and understand each of these statuses, but am looking for a way to convince that AOS can attend school while in the USA.
It's really frustrating to get denied because one is on AOS even though one qualifies for admission. Really alarming to see that not many out side the immigration community understand US visa laws.
I would really appreciate your help!
I was trying to convince the Director of Intl Affairs that my wife is in the country legally and while on AOS, she can attend school and work for any employer.
The school now comes back saying that they understand being able to work, but they are now asking if there is any law that explicitly states that an AOS applicant can go to school.
Could you please help?? Is there such a law? I personally went through F-1 to H1 to AOS myself and understand each of these statuses, but am looking for a way to convince that AOS can attend school while in the USA.
It's really frustrating to get denied because one is on AOS even though one qualifies for admission. Really alarming to see that not many out side the immigration community understand US visa laws.
I would really appreciate your help!
trueguy
08-08 06:18 PM
^^^^^^^
bump
^^^^^^^
bump
^^^^^^^
more...
glosrfc
01-02 05:44 PM
Are you considering actually creating something in AS1?
:)
I already have something in AS1 that fits the guidelines of this competition perfectly!
:)
I already have something in AS1 that fits the guidelines of this competition perfectly!
2010 Jessica Sutta Photos
lostinbeta
10-04 12:10 AM
Ok, Hold the CTRL key on your keyboard then click on the layer that contains your original rectangle.
Like where it says, make sure you have the marquee tool active in the tools menu on the left side, otherwise the rest won't work. The marquee tool is the first tool on the upper left hand side. It is a dotted rectangle.
Press the up arrow once and the left arrow once (on your keyboard)
Create a new layer...self explanitory
Fill it with white... self explanitory
Hold CTRL again and select the layer with your original rectangle again. Like you did earlier in this step. Make sure the new layer you created with the white fill is still active (it will be blue or something ,you will know if it is selected).
Hit the delete key on your keyboard (or go to edit/cut or something, it also might be backspace on a MAC).
Deselect with CTRL+D - self explanitory
Now the next part of this I don't really agree with. Just keep the lines layer selected and use the down and right arrows on your keyboard to move it into place so it looks like the image in the tutorial.
Hope this helps. That was only step 2! If you have any questions about the other steps, just post I guess :)
mmm, photoshop......... its the best. I eat it for breakfast, lunch and dinner:)
Like where it says, make sure you have the marquee tool active in the tools menu on the left side, otherwise the rest won't work. The marquee tool is the first tool on the upper left hand side. It is a dotted rectangle.
Press the up arrow once and the left arrow once (on your keyboard)
Create a new layer...self explanitory
Fill it with white... self explanitory
Hold CTRL again and select the layer with your original rectangle again. Like you did earlier in this step. Make sure the new layer you created with the white fill is still active (it will be blue or something ,you will know if it is selected).
Hit the delete key on your keyboard (or go to edit/cut or something, it also might be backspace on a MAC).
Deselect with CTRL+D - self explanitory
Now the next part of this I don't really agree with. Just keep the lines layer selected and use the down and right arrows on your keyboard to move it into place so it looks like the image in the tutorial.
Hope this helps. That was only step 2! If you have any questions about the other steps, just post I guess :)
mmm, photoshop......... its the best. I eat it for breakfast, lunch and dinner:)
more...
rkat
08-16 04:39 PM
Since USCIS will not send anything back that they actually withdrew this petiton what kind of proof / evidence do i need to keep with me for furture reference.?
Thanks..!
Thanks..!
hair Jessica Sutta
RNGC
04-08 09:38 PM
As per INA 202, many of you know that for employment based immigration, the limit is 7% of 140k per country, if there are unused visas from family based or from previous years, USCIS should try to use them, which is not happenning....
see a detailed notes on INA 202 here...
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=240387
(search for gclong1)
I am trying to understand why the 7% was set ? When the law was signed. Things have drastically changed, more skilled people are coming to US from India, shouldn't the law be changed ? I think we should start pushing for more employment based visas, double it to 300k. The 7% formula has to be revisited.
Is 7% per country is fair ?
------------------------
Legal Immigrant Source Source:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table03d.xls
(More reports here...(http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR06.shtm)
Population Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population
Cuba: ( BTW, Cuba is just taken as a example just to explain the math)
Total Population = 11,000,000 (11 Million)
Total Population Percent = 0.17 %
Legal Immigrants from Cuba to USA in 2006 = 45,614
Percent of Legal Immigrants from Cuba to USA compared with their population in 2006 = 0.4146 %
[(45614.0/11000000.0)*100.0 = 0.4146]
India:
Total Population = 1,131,264,000 (1.1 Billion)
Total Population Percent = 17 %
Legal Immigrants from India to USA in 2006= 61,369
Percent of Legal Immigrants from India to USA compared with their population in 2006 = 0.0054
[(61369.0/1131264000)*100.0 = 0.0054]
Cuba has a 0.4146 Legal Immigrants in US per 100 of their population
India has 0.0054 Legal Immigrants in US per 100 of their population
What is the difference in percent ?
(0.4146 - 0.0054)*100.0 = 40.92 % difference!!!!
India constitute 17% of world population, Cuba constitute .17 % of world population, so if we go by a country's population in deciding the % of EB visas it gets...
(17.0/100.0) * 140000.0 = 23,800 EB visas ?
(0.17/100.0) * 140000.0 = 238 EB visas ?
Soon, USA will be Chindia!
I am not arguing that we should follow the above formula either, just like how India and Cuba both have 7% limit, which does not make sense, the above math also does not make sense....
My argument is 7% per country limit for all countries, for a small country with 1 Million population and a big country with 1 B population does not make sense.
So, two issues need to dealt with for long term solution.
1. 140k EB visas to be increased to 300k
2. 7% per country needs to be changed (not sure what should be the criteria)
see a detailed notes on INA 202 here...
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=240387
(search for gclong1)
I am trying to understand why the 7% was set ? When the law was signed. Things have drastically changed, more skilled people are coming to US from India, shouldn't the law be changed ? I think we should start pushing for more employment based visas, double it to 300k. The 7% formula has to be revisited.
Is 7% per country is fair ?
------------------------
Legal Immigrant Source Source:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table03d.xls
(More reports here...(http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR06.shtm)
Population Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population
Cuba: ( BTW, Cuba is just taken as a example just to explain the math)
Total Population = 11,000,000 (11 Million)
Total Population Percent = 0.17 %
Legal Immigrants from Cuba to USA in 2006 = 45,614
Percent of Legal Immigrants from Cuba to USA compared with their population in 2006 = 0.4146 %
[(45614.0/11000000.0)*100.0 = 0.4146]
India:
Total Population = 1,131,264,000 (1.1 Billion)
Total Population Percent = 17 %
Legal Immigrants from India to USA in 2006= 61,369
Percent of Legal Immigrants from India to USA compared with their population in 2006 = 0.0054
[(61369.0/1131264000)*100.0 = 0.0054]
Cuba has a 0.4146 Legal Immigrants in US per 100 of their population
India has 0.0054 Legal Immigrants in US per 100 of their population
What is the difference in percent ?
(0.4146 - 0.0054)*100.0 = 40.92 % difference!!!!
India constitute 17% of world population, Cuba constitute .17 % of world population, so if we go by a country's population in deciding the % of EB visas it gets...
(17.0/100.0) * 140000.0 = 23,800 EB visas ?
(0.17/100.0) * 140000.0 = 238 EB visas ?
Soon, USA will be Chindia!
I am not arguing that we should follow the above formula either, just like how India and Cuba both have 7% limit, which does not make sense, the above math also does not make sense....
My argument is 7% per country limit for all countries, for a small country with 1 Million population and a big country with 1 B population does not make sense.
So, two issues need to dealt with for long term solution.
1. 140k EB visas to be increased to 300k
2. 7% per country needs to be changed (not sure what should be the criteria)
more...
sac-r-ten
11-19 11:31 AM
I know of an acquaintance who worked for a reputed client w/o SSN for 4 months. He eventually got his SSN 6 months after applying. This was in NJ and his was first time H1B.
hot Jessica Sutta The Pussycat
gsc999
11-14 08:54 PM
This is the time to channelize all your frustration into positive energy. Yes, we can collective work towards ending retrogression.
Join your State Chapter today
Follow the link
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
Come on folks, this is time for action.
Start working towards IVs goals and you will be glad that you are doing it.
----
Absolutely, join the state chapters and join hands to act. If not than be prepared to wait for a rreally long time for your GCs.
Join your State Chapter today
Follow the link
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52
Come on folks, this is time for action.
Start working towards IVs goals and you will be glad that you are doing it.
----
Absolutely, join the state chapters and join hands to act. If not than be prepared to wait for a rreally long time for your GCs.
more...
house Jessica Sutta Gallery
username007
06-27 11:21 AM
My lawyer asked me to write my A# from my OPT card that I used in 1999-2000. According to him A# is assigend once for an individual and if you were assigned before you can continue to use that in future. Though I never used that in the past 7-8 years.
My wife got an OPT card last month and we used A# from that card for her dependent I-485 application
Is this information true?
My 140 is pending and I don't have the A#. Can I use that from my OPT card?
My wife got an OPT card last month and we used A# from that card for her dependent I-485 application
Is this information true?
My 140 is pending and I don't have the A#. Can I use that from my OPT card?
tattoo Jessica Sutta
yabadaba
06-26 08:24 PM
^^^^
more...
pictures Jessica Sutta#39;s pictures:
rcr_bulk
08-28 03:28 PM
Admin Dudes,
I contributed $600 dollars so far and i have no access to Donor Forums. Please fix this.
Thanks
You contributed 600:confused: for what?
I contributed $600 dollars so far and i have no access to Donor Forums. Please fix this.
Thanks
You contributed 600:confused: for what?
dresses Jessica Sutta, from the
smc
07-26 12:47 PM
This looks like he is trying it again. The older one (which was defeated) was Amendment 2339 of HR 2669, which was defeated on 7/19. This is Amendment 2428 of HR 2638 (which they are currently debating) and has a date of 7/25.
Hope it passes this time.
Hope it passes this time.
more...
makeup Jessica Sutta (L-R)
pd_recapturing
05-22 08:37 PM
In my case, I have my EB3 labor and I140 approved with PD as May 2004. I have already started a new PERM EB2 from same company in order to port PD. I have not reached to the stage where I can apply I140 (under EB2) to actually start porting PD. With the new rule of "21st May 2007", I am not sure how would my case be treated? Can somebody shed some light on this?
girlfriend Jessica Sutta
GCSeekerCT
08-22 07:35 AM
Again, I thank the community here for being supportive and hearing me out.
After considering your valuable suggestions, it only makes sense in waiting at this point, per my evaluation as well.
What are a few months in the game where I have waited this long ?
Just for the record, a major factor in this decision is that "I am not being abused by my current employer". (this is for someone in our situation who IS being abused or given a hard time by the employer)
If one wanted to, one can get out of a messy situation with the employer, thanks to AC21.
Thanks much
After considering your valuable suggestions, it only makes sense in waiting at this point, per my evaluation as well.
What are a few months in the game where I have waited this long ?
Just for the record, a major factor in this decision is that "I am not being abused by my current employer". (this is for someone in our situation who IS being abused or given a hard time by the employer)
If one wanted to, one can get out of a messy situation with the employer, thanks to AC21.
Thanks much
hairstyles Jessica Sutta Picture amp; Photo
va_dude
10-17 09:45 PM
Do you mean the first two digits of these two job codes:
13-2011.02 and 13-2011.01
So as per this law form, since they both start with a 13 we are good?
-R
13-2011.02 and 13-2011.01
So as per this law form, since they both start with a 13 we are good?
-R
akunamatata
04-02 10:04 PM
Usually the RFE states that if the requested information is not received by XX/XX/XXX date, USCICS will make a determination based on the information they have.
beautifulMind
06-09 12:05 AM
You can only get a US visa outside of USA and you only need a visa to enter US since you already in US then why do you need a visa? when you go back just apply for another B1 Visa
No comments:
Post a Comment