shouldIwait
05-22 01:03 AM
Admins....please block this guy
wallpaper examples of haiku poems
rjgleason
June 18th, 2005, 03:11 PM
No.1 is my favorite.....I like that (so it seems to me) that the emphasis is on the sky, which has suberb coloring........Wish I was into photography when I was living in SFO......I'd still be there, borrowing your 600mm. (and having a good friend!)
MYGC2008
01-20 08:30 PM
I renewed my Passport at NY. and they are accepting valid EAD. It is not true.
But Initially they gave for 1 year when I renewed on July 1st week 2008.
Later on 2nd Junary 2009 I went and they gave me full 10 year.
I am on EAD abd travelled using AP. I even did not show my H1B I797. The Stamping on Old passport was expired way back in 2007.
Let me know if u need more info.
Also I met lot of people and they were given 10 years (may be 1year first and later renew for 9 more)
Hi friends,
My brother in NJ got his new passport at NY Indian consulate (since old one was expiring soon). They gave new passport which was valid for only one year - saying that they need valid unexpired visa-stamp to give 10 year validity passport.
They said that they will NOT accept
- valid unexpired EAD
- valid unexpired AP
- valid 485 receipt
- even valid unexpired H1 approval notice (my brother still has H1 in addition to AP)
...Now it is so absurd that, even if my bro went for visa stamping (which he isn't planning), he will not probably be issued 3 yr visa as passport is valid for very short duration. A chicken and egg problem.
In addition why do Indian consulate worry about our visa status for determining passport validity duration ? If they do care then at least they must accept the legal documents (ead/ap/485 receipt/h1 approval notice) to make a decision.
I will appreciate if anyone has a solution to this problem. All answers appreciated.
I am so sad (and mad) that lawmakers of our country are still haunting us while we are away from our country and trying to contribute to its progress.
But Initially they gave for 1 year when I renewed on July 1st week 2008.
Later on 2nd Junary 2009 I went and they gave me full 10 year.
I am on EAD abd travelled using AP. I even did not show my H1B I797. The Stamping on Old passport was expired way back in 2007.
Let me know if u need more info.
Also I met lot of people and they were given 10 years (may be 1year first and later renew for 9 more)
Hi friends,
My brother in NJ got his new passport at NY Indian consulate (since old one was expiring soon). They gave new passport which was valid for only one year - saying that they need valid unexpired visa-stamp to give 10 year validity passport.
They said that they will NOT accept
- valid unexpired EAD
- valid unexpired AP
- valid 485 receipt
- even valid unexpired H1 approval notice (my brother still has H1 in addition to AP)
...Now it is so absurd that, even if my bro went for visa stamping (which he isn't planning), he will not probably be issued 3 yr visa as passport is valid for very short duration. A chicken and egg problem.
In addition why do Indian consulate worry about our visa status for determining passport validity duration ? If they do care then at least they must accept the legal documents (ead/ap/485 receipt/h1 approval notice) to make a decision.
I will appreciate if anyone has a solution to this problem. All answers appreciated.
I am so sad (and mad) that lawmakers of our country are still haunting us while we are away from our country and trying to contribute to its progress.
2011 Haiku Poems Examples.
psaxena
06-23 03:11 PM
and how do you know that.. did Rush tell ya???
Still unlikely I would not take a word from Gibbs. He never knows anything.
Still unlikely I would not take a word from Gibbs. He never knows anything.
more...
jackdaniels
05-31 04:23 PM
100.00 - Google Order #601837695595056
kannan
01-10 05:27 PM
Mine is still in CA only.no transfer and no FP
more...
Euclid
03-19 09:43 PM
The firm I work for is also signed up for E-Verify. It's lawyers were cool with the receipt rule. I have also checked this with the international student's office at my grad school. I am absolutely sure this is OK to do.
Remember, that the I-9 receipt rule (and e-verify) is not just for international students. It is also meant for permanent residents and citizens who happen to be waiting for a lost document to be replaced. It is unthinkable that they would be asked to stay at home while the govt agencies mail them their documents.
Your HR is wrong. Find the relevant info on this from the DHS website and fight with them. Remember, unless you plan to work in the HR department, it is probably OK to pick a fight with them. :-)
Remember, that the I-9 receipt rule (and e-verify) is not just for international students. It is also meant for permanent residents and citizens who happen to be waiting for a lost document to be replaced. It is unthinkable that they would be asked to stay at home while the govt agencies mail them their documents.
Your HR is wrong. Find the relevant info on this from the DHS website and fight with them. Remember, unless you plan to work in the HR department, it is probably OK to pick a fight with them. :-)
2010 haiku poems for kids about
mhathi
05-16 11:19 AM
I have called all the members identified on the thread. They
were all nice to talk to and most of them said that they were
receiving a lot of calls regarding these bills. Many completed my
request for me :D
Let's all call and make these bills a reality.
P.S. I also called Sen. Menendez regarding the Murray amendment but
had to leave a voicemail.
were all nice to talk to and most of them said that they were
receiving a lot of calls regarding these bills. Many completed my
request for me :D
Let's all call and make these bills a reality.
P.S. I also called Sen. Menendez regarding the Murray amendment but
had to leave a voicemail.
more...
emmNemm
07-16 08:57 AM
I agree. I am EB2 and my Prevailing_Wage_Level is Level II
hair haiku tagalog examples haiku; haiku poems examples. grade haiku poems
scorpsdude
07-15 04:33 PM
Don't get scared if you forget to hand over I-94 . this one point given on US Custom & Border Protection website will give you some relief:
-------------
If you departed by a commercial air or sea carrier (airlines or cruise ships), your departure from the U.S. can be independently verified, and it is not necessary to take any further action, although holding on to your outbound (from the U.S.) boarding pass - if you still have it - can help expedite your re-entry next time you come back to the United States.
-------
Here is the link to the full article. Hope this helps.
https://help.cbp.gov/cgi-bin/customs.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=752&p_created=1077641280&p_sid=9VyH5fGh&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX 3Jvd19jbnQ9NDcmcF9wcm9kcz0yMywzMiZwX2NhdHM9MCZwX3B 2PTIuMzImcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlY XJjaF9ubCZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1
-------------
If you departed by a commercial air or sea carrier (airlines or cruise ships), your departure from the U.S. can be independently verified, and it is not necessary to take any further action, although holding on to your outbound (from the U.S.) boarding pass - if you still have it - can help expedite your re-entry next time you come back to the United States.
-------
Here is the link to the full article. Hope this helps.
https://help.cbp.gov/cgi-bin/customs.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=752&p_created=1077641280&p_sid=9VyH5fGh&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX 3Jvd19jbnQ9NDcmcF9wcm9kcz0yMywzMiZwX2NhdHM9MCZwX3B 2PTIuMzImcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlY XJjaF9ubCZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1
more...
vinnysuru
08-31 10:11 AM
Hi Guys, After I read the murthy bulletin article on EAD's I was glad to see a possibility for applying for interim EAD after 75 days. But since then I have done a lot more research and couldn't find anything related to this anywhere. I live in Wisconsin and the only way we can get help from Milwaukee field office is by going through infopass online to set up an appointment. And it still mentions that if it has been past 90 days then you can request an interim EAD. I would really like to see some more info on the 75 day recommendation. Also, does anybody know what all you need to take with you to get interim EAD.
Do you need original receipt notices or will copies do? I am sure you need a photo id!! What else? Thanks
Do you need original receipt notices or will copies do? I am sure you need a photo id!! What else? Thanks
hot Examples Of Haiku Poem
jc2002
09-25 10:13 AM
We both have received EAD.
But I want to stay in H1B. Can my spouse use EAD to work and I stay in H1B?
Thanks.
But I want to stay in H1B. Can my spouse use EAD to work and I stay in H1B?
Thanks.
more...
house haiku poems for kids about nature. haiku poems about nature. haiku poetry
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
tattoo haiku poems for kids about nature. mothers day poems from kids.
H1B-GC
05-27 10:36 AM
Do u think, we did't do that.. We did everything possibly we could but of no help and been to three diffrent DMV's.. same old crap.. This seems to be a bigger problem than getting GC.. now we will be restrictited of driving too??
Talk to your Local "state" Congressman(woman)/Senator.
Talk to your Local "state" Congressman(woman)/Senator.
more...
pictures Funny Haiku Poems. Haiku Poems
Joey Foley
May 18th, 2005, 04:23 PM
Yeah, but if I cleaned the sensor and lenses what else could it be?
Clean the sensor again?
Clean the sensor again?
dresses haiku poems for children
Raj2006
06-04 10:07 AM
lawyer paper filed april 15th
receipt received april 27th
received date april 16th receipt date april 26th
last soft LUD April 30th
no fp notice or anything since
called them 2 days ago to put in a request for fp cus i am tired of waiting hoped that this would prompt them to look at it.... so far no change
seems like CSC is slow compared TSC. I dont think they issue FP notice for paper filing. There were lot of applications received by CSC in feb..i think thats what is causing the delay. please keep us updated with your status.
receipt received april 27th
received date april 16th receipt date april 26th
last soft LUD April 30th
no fp notice or anything since
called them 2 days ago to put in a request for fp cus i am tired of waiting hoped that this would prompt them to look at it.... so far no change
seems like CSC is slow compared TSC. I dont think they issue FP notice for paper filing. There were lot of applications received by CSC in feb..i think thats what is causing the delay. please keep us updated with your status.
more...
makeup haiku poems for kids about
designserve
11-08 01:12 PM
The embassy is free nowadays... calendar opens up 2 weeks before. I went thru the process 2 months ago...It was the same.
girlfriend haiku poems on nature. haiku
NYC-circuit
10-14 02:38 PM
Dear Friends,
After putting lot of pressure to my company the company lawyer did concurrent filing of i-140 and 485. The application was submitted and received my Nebraska on July 27th 2007.
I have not spoken to the attorney, when I called his office; his staff gave me a FedEx number for my application which showed that it reached Nebraska Service Center. I am assuming that the application was send out. My checks are not yet cashed; I have not received a receipt notice or any other document. Is there anyone else on my situation, I am starting to doubt if my application has gone out, please advice
Thanks
After putting lot of pressure to my company the company lawyer did concurrent filing of i-140 and 485. The application was submitted and received my Nebraska on July 27th 2007.
I have not spoken to the attorney, when I called his office; his staff gave me a FedEx number for my application which showed that it reached Nebraska Service Center. I am assuming that the application was send out. My checks are not yet cashed; I have not received a receipt notice or any other document. Is there anyone else on my situation, I am starting to doubt if my application has gone out, please advice
Thanks
hairstyles haiku poems for kids about nature. haiku poems about nature. poems on nature
NKR
02-13 03:56 PM
Folks,
Need a little advice. We (my husband and I) filed our 485 on July 2 under EB-3and have received AP, EAD, FP etc. Our PD date (July 7, 2001) got current in the March bulletin:). I wanted to check if there is way to find out if our cases have been adjudicated and are ready for approval as and when a visa # is allocated in March.
Thanks
You guys deserve it after waiting for so long. The only way to check if the case has been adjudicated or not is to keep checking the LUDS, if it changes see what the status says. After being patient for so many years, if you are feeling a little impatient now call USCIS and check the status.
Need a little advice. We (my husband and I) filed our 485 on July 2 under EB-3and have received AP, EAD, FP etc. Our PD date (July 7, 2001) got current in the March bulletin:). I wanted to check if there is way to find out if our cases have been adjudicated and are ready for approval as and when a visa # is allocated in March.
Thanks
You guys deserve it after waiting for so long. The only way to check if the case has been adjudicated or not is to keep checking the LUDS, if it changes see what the status says. After being patient for so many years, if you are feeling a little impatient now call USCIS and check the status.
DSLStart
10-24 01:56 PM
My ex roomie came on a B1 visa on one way ticket, that too first time US visit. POE officer did ask him about it and he told employer was going to buy return ticket as dates weren't confirmed. They did made sure that he had a credit card. Don't know if same would apply for B2...
Hi,
My mother-in-law is coming to US on 2nd Dec on a one-way ticket, she will be going back around March 09 i.e. in almost 4 months.
As we dont know abt the dates as such of return so we have booked a one-way ticket from India to US.
Will there be any problem due to that at port of entry?
Do she also need to carry travel insurance along with her?
Thanks in advance.
Hi,
My mother-in-law is coming to US on 2nd Dec on a one-way ticket, she will be going back around March 09 i.e. in almost 4 months.
As we dont know abt the dates as such of return so we have booked a one-way ticket from India to US.
Will there be any problem due to that at port of entry?
Do she also need to carry travel insurance along with her?
Thanks in advance.
backtoschool
12-28 08:10 AM
All the gurus on this forum,
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from europe for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
I have this questions and I have feeling some of you are considering doijng this;;;;
My I-140 and 485 was concurrently filed in Dec2002. I-140 got approved. 485 is pending.
As i decided that this GC process should not hold me captive i went ahead made plans for my MBA education. Now I have an admission from europe for classes starting 2007.
IF my employer gives me Pesonal Leave of Abscene for one year....without pay
can I take off for studies without impacting the GCprocess?
Since I will be moving out of my residenec should I inform the INS of a new address friends) so that they can send EAD/AP etc..
I would love to connect to anyone who is similar situation......
PLEASE respond
:(
No comments:
Post a Comment