dilbert_cal
06-07 11:04 AM
My attorney said the checks should be payable to USCIS not DHS. The PD is always ur LC filed date. Receipt date is when the application is received and notice date is when they assing a LIN/wac number and take ur money.
If you download the 485 form from the following url and go to page six, it states
"The check or money order should be made payable to theDepartment of Homeland Security"
I believe previously it used to be USCIS. Now what I dont know is if they will accept checks made for USCIS or not.
The url is
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
If you download the 485 form from the following url and go to page six, it states
"The check or money order should be made payable to theDepartment of Homeland Security"
I believe previously it used to be USCIS. Now what I dont know is if they will accept checks made for USCIS or not.
The url is
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
wallpaper dresses love poems for
amitjoey
07-09 06:56 PM
mcuban@hd.net,
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
I am emailing these addresses right now, please help, any volunters. Need a lot of you to email.
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
I am emailing these addresses right now, please help, any volunters. Need a lot of you to email.
rmdsouza
06-23 10:49 AM
This myth has never been successfully countered in the media or any other PR or lobbying channel by the legal immigration crowd.
The standard line amounts to this:
We are highly skilled we are legal and we are stuck and dont deserve this.
This is not good PR. Nobody cares about this.. it will get us nowhere..
We need to have a standard message apart from all other humint crap..
1) legals cannot undercut US jobseekers because of strict labor laws. Employers are paying a premium in wages as well as legal fees to retain their legal alien workforce. IT would be foolhardy of them to go through the hassle if local talent was easily available.
2) legals are in most cases paying taxes for which they may never realize the benifits like social security.
We need to let it be known in a firm polite manner that
1) we are giving more than we are getting and are not free loaders
2) we are not harming or displacing anyone.
I dont think this can be perceived as tryng to distance ourselves from undocumented workers. There are rare moments when the media does focus on legal immigrants as a group lets make the most of it.
I would say that Social Sec Taxes and Medicare are unfair taxes. Some H-1Bs (read people from India and China) are not treated the same way as citizens, Green Card holders, and othe H-1Bs (read from Western Europe). Since they wont give us GC's.., we have to eventually go home. This implies, no Medicare or Social Sec benefits. Going by a conservative estimate.. there are about 500,000 GC applications in the blackhole for an average of 3 yrs. Each pays on an average $4,200 SC and Medicare taxes. So the state owes us $6.3 Billion... We sincerely request that we be treated fairly and our money be given back to us.. OR.. easy for them, give us GC
The standard line amounts to this:
We are highly skilled we are legal and we are stuck and dont deserve this.
This is not good PR. Nobody cares about this.. it will get us nowhere..
We need to have a standard message apart from all other humint crap..
1) legals cannot undercut US jobseekers because of strict labor laws. Employers are paying a premium in wages as well as legal fees to retain their legal alien workforce. IT would be foolhardy of them to go through the hassle if local talent was easily available.
2) legals are in most cases paying taxes for which they may never realize the benifits like social security.
We need to let it be known in a firm polite manner that
1) we are giving more than we are getting and are not free loaders
2) we are not harming or displacing anyone.
I dont think this can be perceived as tryng to distance ourselves from undocumented workers. There are rare moments when the media does focus on legal immigrants as a group lets make the most of it.
I would say that Social Sec Taxes and Medicare are unfair taxes. Some H-1Bs (read people from India and China) are not treated the same way as citizens, Green Card holders, and othe H-1Bs (read from Western Europe). Since they wont give us GC's.., we have to eventually go home. This implies, no Medicare or Social Sec benefits. Going by a conservative estimate.. there are about 500,000 GC applications in the blackhole for an average of 3 yrs. Each pays on an average $4,200 SC and Medicare taxes. So the state owes us $6.3 Billion... We sincerely request that we be treated fairly and our money be given back to us.. OR.. easy for them, give us GC
2011 cute i love you poems for your
summerof98
06-06 09:34 AM
Sent I-485 application on May 31st. Received at NSC on June 1 (9.08 a.m.)
Not received the receipt numbers yet.
Not received the receipt numbers yet.
more...
SDdesi
08-14 12:56 AM
Oh..and the 485 was filed in Nebraska
nashorn
12-15 10:31 PM
Don't raise hope to much. Get a back up plan which you can be happy with. If you really like to be in the US and dislike going back, consider the asylum option, which could be very fast.
more...
ak_2006
11-18 08:26 AM
Done..and will ask friends to do it!
2010 hot i love you poems for
gc_check
09-24 08:32 AM
---
Guys wake up and fight to make the porting rules very strong if not stop porting. The rule should be if I140 for porting is denied then the applicant should loose his/her initial EB3 priority date also as he /she has indicated that he/she is no longer working in the position as described in EB3 labor. This will make sure that fraudulent applicants cannot port from EB3 to EB2.
---
There are many genuine cases, who could have applied in EB2, but due to some erroneous counsel by employer or legal, ended up in EB3 category. Having an option to port PD when applying under alternate category is available, and people eligible taking advantage of this should be allowed to do it and encouraged. Given the market condition, if some one could qualify under EB2 and successfully secure a EB2 labor/I-140, then it must be welcomed and only genuine cases could do so. People with EB3 PD of 2001 or 2002 and waiting for GC might already have worked one or two years prior to starting the process and might be in country working for almost a decade and some even have done their Masters and have the experience. With all this, if they take advantage of this, then they deserve it. I am not able to understand your concern, and also expecting/requesting the porting process to be stopped !! Does not sound right.
Guys wake up and fight to make the porting rules very strong if not stop porting. The rule should be if I140 for porting is denied then the applicant should loose his/her initial EB3 priority date also as he /she has indicated that he/she is no longer working in the position as described in EB3 labor. This will make sure that fraudulent applicants cannot port from EB3 to EB2.
---
There are many genuine cases, who could have applied in EB2, but due to some erroneous counsel by employer or legal, ended up in EB3 category. Having an option to port PD when applying under alternate category is available, and people eligible taking advantage of this should be allowed to do it and encouraged. Given the market condition, if some one could qualify under EB2 and successfully secure a EB2 labor/I-140, then it must be welcomed and only genuine cases could do so. People with EB3 PD of 2001 or 2002 and waiting for GC might already have worked one or two years prior to starting the process and might be in country working for almost a decade and some even have done their Masters and have the experience. With all this, if they take advantage of this, then they deserve it. I am not able to understand your concern, and also expecting/requesting the porting process to be stopped !! Does not sound right.
more...
indrachat_75
02-24 06:24 AM
I just donated $100, "Your transaction ID for this payment is: 0P617419CG619635X.".
Unfortunately I can't participate for the event.
Unfortunately I can't participate for the event.
hair hairstyles love you poems for
bkam
06-26 01:51 PM
I am not going to stoop to your level, Bkam, but the next time you post a comment about sombreros etc you are looking at a ban. It is up to you what you choose to do.
Well, my dear, since you are the "boss", you can "ban" me now. Do not wait because it is unlikely I will change my way of thinking. Even, I am going to facilitate you, I will "ban" me myself.
Well, my dear, since you are the "boss", you can "ban" me now. Do not wait because it is unlikely I will change my way of thinking. Even, I am going to facilitate you, I will "ban" me myself.
more...
mygc2006
08-28 09:53 AM
filed aug 3 2008 card ordered aug 26 2008
CONGRATS acepb.... that was pretty quick ......
CONGRATS acepb.... that was pretty quick ......
hot short i love you poems for
googlegc
08-25 07:24 PM
Guys,
I just got my H1B Extension approved (8th year extension).
Original H1B was valid until Sept 2008. Changed companies after 180 days(of I485 application) and applied for H1 transfer and extension for 3 years via new company. Finally got it approved after 3 months for 3 years(until May 2011).
-Googlegc
I just got my H1B Extension approved (8th year extension).
Original H1B was valid until Sept 2008. Changed companies after 180 days(of I485 application) and applied for H1 transfer and extension for 3 years via new company. Finally got it approved after 3 months for 3 years(until May 2011).
-Googlegc
more...
house wallpaper Stars write your boyfriend for cute i love you poems for your
gccovet
08-01 11:24 AM
Applied EAD renewal on 5/29 @TSC- paper baseed, still waiting.....
I-131 applied in 1st week of June, got approved first week of July (wired!!!)
Getting worried now!!!
GCCovet
I-131 applied in 1st week of June, got approved first week of July (wired!!!)
Getting worried now!!!
GCCovet
tattoo cute i love you poems for your
whiteStallion
02-16 11:52 PM
Donated $50 for the event...
Transaction ID : 6BY12489DA076303K
Transaction ID : 6BY12489DA076303K
more...
pictures cute i love you poems for your
ItIsNotFunny
05-01 03:34 PM
Well, you assume family members can get AP and EAD after submitting I-485. Not true for many people. Take myself as an example, I was not lucky enough to file my I485 in 2007. So with a PD of early 2007, I have none of the benefit from AOS at all.
Although for me it's not a big deal because my wife will soon get her PhD and will file for her own immigration petition. This actually works better for us, because it will make the line much shorter and both of us will get the green card much quicker.
However, for those who do not work and solely depend on their spouses to get green card. This change can spell disaster for them during the long wait caused by retrogression without the ability to file AOS.
Chan is right. If interpretation will start the way you are proposing, it will be sheer disaster for people who didn't file I-485 yet.
Although for me it's not a big deal because my wife will soon get her PhD and will file for her own immigration petition. This actually works better for us, because it will make the line much shorter and both of us will get the green card much quicker.
However, for those who do not work and solely depend on their spouses to get green card. This change can spell disaster for them during the long wait caused by retrogression without the ability to file AOS.
Chan is right. If interpretation will start the way you are proposing, it will be sheer disaster for people who didn't file I-485 yet.
dresses 2010 i love you poems for your cute i love you poems for your boyfriend.
kumar1
01-30 02:03 PM
Stop spreading wrong information desi!!
let me add my 2 cents here -
1. There is no rule that h1 status expires after 1 year of no use. The key word here is h1 status.
2. If the person is in us, then he/she 30 days to start working on h1 job else apply for change of status (or leave us and re-enter on some other visa).
3. If the person is entering us on h1 visa, then he/she has 60 days to start working on h1 job.
4. Within 30 days of start working, person should get his/her first paycheck.
5. By not working on h1 job, you are out of status since oct 1st. (there is no grace period for out status. However, out of status does not mean illegal presence as long as i-94 date is not expired or uscis has made the determination that you are out of status.
6. 3/10 year bar applies for illegal presence and not for out of status.
Good luck.
____________________
not a legal advice.
Us citizen of indian origin
let me add my 2 cents here -
1. There is no rule that h1 status expires after 1 year of no use. The key word here is h1 status.
2. If the person is in us, then he/she 30 days to start working on h1 job else apply for change of status (or leave us and re-enter on some other visa).
3. If the person is entering us on h1 visa, then he/she has 60 days to start working on h1 job.
4. Within 30 days of start working, person should get his/her first paycheck.
5. By not working on h1 job, you are out of status since oct 1st. (there is no grace period for out status. However, out of status does not mean illegal presence as long as i-94 date is not expired or uscis has made the determination that you are out of status.
6. 3/10 year bar applies for illegal presence and not for out of status.
Good luck.
____________________
not a legal advice.
Us citizen of indian origin
more...
makeup hairstyles you poems your
vinabath
04-23 09:32 AM
I am not hitting on employers revenues, infact employer made money since two yrs because of me. The reason is, employer never got this project for me. It never had any business either with PF or with the client earlier. It was only because of my contact with the PF i got the project. i introduced the PF to my employer, have them sign a contract and since these two yrs my employer was able to place 4-5 consultants through the PF i introduced to them. Now tell me, how much my employer would have made because of me or other consultants??? Even after all this, he is being mean to me. these desi companies thirst for money is never ending. whereas consulatnts can never look up for a better life!!!!!!
You have a case buddy. Since you got the project on your own and you needed an H-1b vehicle. you have a great argument if your employer goes to the court.
You have a case buddy. Since you got the project on your own and you needed an H-1b vehicle. you have a great argument if your employer goes to the court.
girlfriend 2010 sweet love poems for your
vkotval
03-26 04:55 PM
I think it should definitely move end of 2002 by october.
hairstyles cute i love you poems for your
gc_chahiye
10-08 01:11 PM
Being a 2001 PD myself I fully sympathize with you for your trauma and support your notion that the Immigration System should give weightage to the number of years in the US, I do not support the notion of ending retrogression. Given that there are only a finite number of visa quotas, ending retrogression will make the GC a game of Inky-Pinky-Ponky. Either they give it to everyone (all the 800000 that applied) or they do FIFO based on date of entry in the US. If not, the present system of retrogression at least ensures that a person who came into the US in 2007 does not win the Inky-Pinki-Ponky game before a person like me in the queue since 2001. I agree that some extremely unfortunate people like you lose out, but it is still fairer than having no retrogression with the quota limitations in place, as that would be totally unfair.
I totally miss your point: why is ending retrogression bad? Because all 800K people might get the GC within 6 months? Whats wrong with that? Its not fair to those who have waited longer than others? Dont be a member of the "just because I suffered I want everyone else to suffer" That makes you no different from that talkshow host (who is now a citizen) on the radio channel recently who said he waited 10 years to get his GC, so everyone else also should, otherwise its not "fair"
Or, are you mixing up ending retrogression with making dates current? No thats not what we want. We want dates made current after the visa supply = demand. Just making all VBs like the July VB is pointless, and does lead to lots of uncertainties. By ending retrogression I mean making sure we have enough visa numbers for all who have been qualified by DOL (LC) and USCIS (I-140), by:
- ending per-country quota
- not counting dependents
- recapturing wasted visa numbers.
I totally miss your point: why is ending retrogression bad? Because all 800K people might get the GC within 6 months? Whats wrong with that? Its not fair to those who have waited longer than others? Dont be a member of the "just because I suffered I want everyone else to suffer" That makes you no different from that talkshow host (who is now a citizen) on the radio channel recently who said he waited 10 years to get his GC, so everyone else also should, otherwise its not "fair"
Or, are you mixing up ending retrogression with making dates current? No thats not what we want. We want dates made current after the visa supply = demand. Just making all VBs like the July VB is pointless, and does lead to lots of uncertainties. By ending retrogression I mean making sure we have enough visa numbers for all who have been qualified by DOL (LC) and USCIS (I-140), by:
- ending per-country quota
- not counting dependents
- recapturing wasted visa numbers.
WaldenPond
06-28 02:54 PM
Hello arnet,
That is an excellent idea. We are already working closely with USINPAC. Here is some of info about this.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=576
USINPAC has been very helpful and has played a key role in guiding and helping us. We should all be Thankful to USINPAC for significant help that they have provided us.
AAPI is another group that has been instrumental in getting our provisions in the bill.
We have received positive results from many other groups. But no other group has been able to help us as USINPAC and AAPI.
If anybody has any such suggestion or could provide a lead to any other organization or personality, please let us know. This would help us all.
WaldenPond
That is an excellent idea. We are already working closely with USINPAC. Here is some of info about this.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=576
USINPAC has been very helpful and has played a key role in guiding and helping us. We should all be Thankful to USINPAC for significant help that they have provided us.
AAPI is another group that has been instrumental in getting our provisions in the bill.
We have received positive results from many other groups. But no other group has been able to help us as USINPAC and AAPI.
If anybody has any such suggestion or could provide a lead to any other organization or personality, please let us know. This would help us all.
WaldenPond
pcs
06-25 10:44 PM
Look at this ad...
This guy is a bigtime white racist... he does not mind only Canadian TN VISA guys but not the Mexicans...
Equal opportunity Emp will call for either do not sponsor ANY VISA catagory for people present in US or NO VISA at all... BUT this guys is OK with VISA for Canadian but No Mexican.... forget about H1-B etc... OPT
PROCESS ENGINEER / CHEMICAL ENGINEER - Petrochemical / Refining / Oil and Gas job in Martinez, CA: Engineering and Engineering careers - Yahoo HotJobs (http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/jobseeker/jobsearch/job_detail.html?job_id=JL84XW2ILFG&source=jobalert)
I do not need any job but I am going to write to the VP of this company and demand explanation to prove why he be not considered a racist or at least a NON Equal Opportunity Employer
This guy is a bigtime white racist... he does not mind only Canadian TN VISA guys but not the Mexicans...
Equal opportunity Emp will call for either do not sponsor ANY VISA catagory for people present in US or NO VISA at all... BUT this guys is OK with VISA for Canadian but No Mexican.... forget about H1-B etc... OPT
PROCESS ENGINEER / CHEMICAL ENGINEER - Petrochemical / Refining / Oil and Gas job in Martinez, CA: Engineering and Engineering careers - Yahoo HotJobs (http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/jobseeker/jobsearch/job_detail.html?job_id=JL84XW2ILFG&source=jobalert)
I do not need any job but I am going to write to the VP of this company and demand explanation to prove why he be not considered a racist or at least a NON Equal Opportunity Employer
No comments:
Post a Comment