crystal
10-15 12:39 PM
as far as i know CSC sending the transfer notices after issuing the receipts. Did u check with ur lawyer for receipts? .
Received Transfer notice from CSC to NSC...originally filed at TSC.
No Receipt Notice, EAD, AP or FP.:mad:
Received Transfer notice from CSC to NSC...originally filed at TSC.
No Receipt Notice, EAD, AP or FP.:mad:
wallpaper 1986 Ford Aerostar Exterior
kunjirs
03-07 03:01 PM
I am in the same boat. Filed EAD on DEC 10 2010 with TSC and still waiting. Contacted USCIS Customer Support and create Expedite Request last Friday. I was told that I will hear back in 5 days. Will post back if I hear anything.
alkg
09-24 03:43 PM
don't worry be happy
2011 well van has been off road
xela
06-18 07:55 AM
I never saw a change from the April 30th LUD and got the CPO yesterday.
So dont get too concerend if after the receipt notice LUDs you do not see any movement, seems like it goes straight from that to CPO!
Good luck for everyone who is still waiting! :)
So dont get too concerend if after the receipt notice LUDs you do not see any movement, seems like it goes straight from that to CPO!
Good luck for everyone who is still waiting! :)
more...
test101
07-18 11:04 PM
Can I file I-131 after filing for I-485? or does it have to be done at the same time?
thanks
thanks
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
more...
sac-r-ten
03-12 09:54 AM
really funny...
but hey it should go in the "Lighten Up" thread, instead of creating a new thread. just a thought.
but hey it should go in the "Lighten Up" thread, instead of creating a new thread. just a thought.
2010 1993 Ford Aerostar
masala dosa
05-10 02:31 AM
asdqwe2k,
Actually this event is being held to celebrate your's and your daughter's birthday if you didn't know. :-)
Happy birthday to both of you in advance. Enjoy.
PRETTY FUNNY!!
Actually this event is being held to celebrate your's and your daughter's birthday if you didn't know. :-)
Happy birthday to both of you in advance. Enjoy.
PRETTY FUNNY!!
more...
eb3_nepa
02-12 02:14 PM
Dont forget "CHEAP" ;)
Good but LAZY and CHEAP ;)
Good but LAZY and CHEAP ;)
hair 1990 Ford Aerostar Van.
pkd666
02-14 02:05 PM
Courts in NJ are not all that friendly to the employees in the case of a non-compete issue. I did some research in this regard when i was having trouble with my desi employer. If you were in California, you can just show him the finger, but NJ is different. If you did sign a non-compete agreement then i would suggest you try switching vendors and join the client after a while. but if you did not sign anything, then there is not much the employer can do.
more...
Bpositive
03-26 10:06 AM
Great frequent flyer program...great service....and no transit visa bs....no brainer
heard very good things about qatar airlines too..haven't used it...
heard very good things about qatar airlines too..haven't used it...
hot 1993 Ford Aerostar
walking_dude
10-23 11:03 AM
I have created this thread to communicate and track MI chapter activities on creation of eGroups to serve the needs of the MI chapter
1) Data on 10/20 meet has been compiled and documented. Minutes of the Meeting will be provided to the attendees soon through a secure eGroup (files/document section)
2) Work in progress to provide a secure, trusted E-group which provides the best features available to our community. Pilot groups have been created in Yahoo and Google to study the features, ease of use and ease of management (for the mods).
Results so far
Google
---------
Pros :
1) New.
2) Has stacked thread view similar to Gmail.
3) Ease of use (not much functionality to confuse users).
4) Supports HTML pages and also commenting on those pages. Google search available to search the threads.
5) New, hence not blocked in many offices ( esp mine :))
Cons :
1) Buggiest of the three! (I created a 'Restricted' group. None of the links are working)
2) Key features such a Polls, Database missing.
3) Limited management options.
Yahoo
---------
Pros :
1) Stable
2) Lots of management options. Powerful
3) Powerful member features - Polls, Database
Cons:
1) Old/dated
2) Text only ( unless you send E-mails externally)
3) Options could be overwhelming to a new user!
4) Blocked in many offices ( E-mails can still be received. Other features like Polls, Database need to be accessed from home)
Right now, per my experience so far - Yahoo seems the best option. Let me know your ideas.
And once we decide on a platform
1) I need 2-3 days to setup the group to meet groups needs and expectations.
2) MI meet attendees will be sent invitations to join the group.
3) Others who responded to the Meet invitation but couldn't attend will be contacted to check if they wish to join the group
4) MI chapter eGroups successfully launched!
1) Data on 10/20 meet has been compiled and documented. Minutes of the Meeting will be provided to the attendees soon through a secure eGroup (files/document section)
2) Work in progress to provide a secure, trusted E-group which provides the best features available to our community. Pilot groups have been created in Yahoo and Google to study the features, ease of use and ease of management (for the mods).
Results so far
---------
Pros :
1) New.
2) Has stacked thread view similar to Gmail.
3) Ease of use (not much functionality to confuse users).
4) Supports HTML pages and also commenting on those pages. Google search available to search the threads.
5) New, hence not blocked in many offices ( esp mine :))
Cons :
1) Buggiest of the three! (I created a 'Restricted' group. None of the links are working)
2) Key features such a Polls, Database missing.
3) Limited management options.
Yahoo
---------
Pros :
1) Stable
2) Lots of management options. Powerful
3) Powerful member features - Polls, Database
Cons:
1) Old/dated
2) Text only ( unless you send E-mails externally)
3) Options could be overwhelming to a new user!
4) Blocked in many offices ( E-mails can still be received. Other features like Polls, Database need to be accessed from home)
Right now, per my experience so far - Yahoo seems the best option. Let me know your ideas.
And once we decide on a platform
1) I need 2-3 days to setup the group to meet groups needs and expectations.
2) MI meet attendees will be sent invitations to join the group.
3) Others who responded to the Meet invitation but couldn't attend will be contacted to check if they wish to join the group
4) MI chapter eGroups successfully launched!
more...
house 1993 Ford Aerostar BUMPER,
vcurichmond
08-21 12:35 PM
JULY 19th Filer Checks got encashed.
My I-485 checks got encashed on August 20, 2007. I filed at NSC.
VCURich
My I-485 checks got encashed on August 20, 2007. I filed at NSC.
VCURich
tattoo Automobile Ford Aerostar SWB
srikondoji
07-05 11:33 AM
Create a seperate forum message for 'sending flowers'. And then we should all digg that message so that even media covers this practise.
--sri
PLEASE DIGG
http://digg.com/politics/Reversal_Frustrates_Green_Card_Applicants
--sri
PLEASE DIGG
http://digg.com/politics/Reversal_Frustrates_Green_Card_Applicants
more...
pictures Ford Aerostar Van. 1986 Ford
lazycis
02-11 09:52 AM
wow.. thanks guys.. you guys so nice..i didt come illegal here.. like you see i said i lost my statu becouse some thing stupit happens..and i try to stay legal..anyway..thank for you support..
Some people did not notice that you are not illegal immigrant, you are going thru legal process just like everyone else here. US legal system provides a way to reconcile overstay/out of status situation.
Anyway, you cannot use your lottery case as that visa number expired back in 03.
Some people did not notice that you are not illegal immigrant, you are going thru legal process just like everyone else here. US legal system provides a way to reconcile overstay/out of status situation.
Anyway, you cannot use your lottery case as that visa number expired back in 03.
dresses This 1993 FORD AEROSTAR XL is
sanju
03-12 10:52 AM
Here is another one
really funny...
but hey it should go in the "Lighten Up" thread, instead of creating a new thread. just a thought.
I decide to clean off the front patio. I start to the patio and notice mail on the desk that needs to be taken down to the Post Office. OK, I'm going to the Post Office . . .
BUT FIRST I'm going to go through the mail that was delivered. I lay the car keys down on desk. After discarding the junk mail, I notice the trash can is full. OK, I'll just put the bills on my desk . . .
BUT FIRST I'll take the trash out. But since I'm going to be near the mailbox, I'll address a few bills . . . Yes, Now where is the checkbook? Oops.. there's only one check left. Where did I put the extra checks? Oh, there is my empty coffee cup from last night on my desk. I'm going to look for those checks . . .
BUT FIRST I need to put the cup back in the kitchen. I start to head for the kitchen and look out at my balcony, notice the flowers need a drink of water because of the extreme heat. I put the cup on the counter and there's my extra pair of glasses on the kitchen counter.
What are they doing here? I'll just put them away . . .
BUT FIRST need to water those plants. I head for the door and . . .
Aaaagh!!! Someone left the TV remote on the wrong spot. Okay, I'll put the remote away and water the plants on my balcony . . .
BUT FIRST I need to find those checks.
END OF DAY: The patio has not been cleaned, bills still unpaid, cup still on the counter, checkbook still has only one check left, lost my car keys . . .
And, when I try to figure out how come nothing got done today, I'm baffled because . . .
I KNOW I WAS BUSY ALL DAY!
I realize this condition is serious . . .
I'd get help . . .
BUT FIRST . . . I think I'll start a new thread.
Fool its not me, its the AAADD I was recently diagnosed with.
.
really funny...
but hey it should go in the "Lighten Up" thread, instead of creating a new thread. just a thought.
I decide to clean off the front patio. I start to the patio and notice mail on the desk that needs to be taken down to the Post Office. OK, I'm going to the Post Office . . .
BUT FIRST I'm going to go through the mail that was delivered. I lay the car keys down on desk. After discarding the junk mail, I notice the trash can is full. OK, I'll just put the bills on my desk . . .
BUT FIRST I'll take the trash out. But since I'm going to be near the mailbox, I'll address a few bills . . . Yes, Now where is the checkbook? Oops.. there's only one check left. Where did I put the extra checks? Oh, there is my empty coffee cup from last night on my desk. I'm going to look for those checks . . .
BUT FIRST I need to put the cup back in the kitchen. I start to head for the kitchen and look out at my balcony, notice the flowers need a drink of water because of the extreme heat. I put the cup on the counter and there's my extra pair of glasses on the kitchen counter.
What are they doing here? I'll just put them away . . .
BUT FIRST need to water those plants. I head for the door and . . .
Aaaagh!!! Someone left the TV remote on the wrong spot. Okay, I'll put the remote away and water the plants on my balcony . . .
BUT FIRST I need to find those checks.
END OF DAY: The patio has not been cleaned, bills still unpaid, cup still on the counter, checkbook still has only one check left, lost my car keys . . .
And, when I try to figure out how come nothing got done today, I'm baffled because . . .
I KNOW I WAS BUSY ALL DAY!
I realize this condition is serious . . .
I'd get help . . .
BUT FIRST . . . I think I'll start a new thread.
Fool its not me, its the AAADD I was recently diagnosed with.
.
more...
makeup 1986 Ford Aerostar Van Cdn
greencard07
09-26 10:18 AM
Hi All,
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
July 2 filer with NSC, receipt notice on Sep.7, Spouse's EAD approved and card ordered today. But mine is still pending. It seems NSC is speeding up for EAD. Good sign anyway.
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
July 2 filer with NSC, receipt notice on Sep.7, Spouse's EAD approved and card ordered today. But mine is still pending. It seems NSC is speeding up for EAD. Good sign anyway.
girlfriend 1995 Ford Aerostar XLT
a_yaja
04-02 08:33 AM
Thank you guys for helping me.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
On a separate piece of paper, this is exactly what I entered:
"Pending adjustment of status petition. Lengthy adjustment and the need to visit family from time to time."
I self filed for AP for my spouse and myself and we got it approved without any problem.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
On a separate piece of paper, this is exactly what I entered:
"Pending adjustment of status petition. Lengthy adjustment and the need to visit family from time to time."
I self filed for AP for my spouse and myself and we got it approved without any problem.
hairstyles Is the cut-off year 1992?
H1B-GC
08-03 08:36 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
Yes. I'm July 2nd Filer at TSC and Still waiting. Any Examples that TSC is processing Apps. from July 3rd ... There might be 1000's still waiting who filed on July 2nd.
Yes. I'm July 2nd Filer at TSC and Still waiting. Any Examples that TSC is processing Apps. from July 3rd ... There might be 1000's still waiting who filed on July 2nd.
heathere3
04-17 03:13 PM
It's alright abt the red dot. Is there a way I can find out who gave it to me? Just curious!
Thanks guyz for helping out!
Doesn't matter now, I fixed it! :D
I thought your post was completely logical and I'm interested in knowing if there's a way to draw the USCIS's attention to these bad employers!
Thanks guyz for helping out!
Doesn't matter now, I fixed it! :D
I thought your post was completely logical and I'm interested in knowing if there's a way to draw the USCIS's attention to these bad employers!
eb3_nepa
01-08 04:22 PM
How did you guys manage to get H1's so recently from H4?
Is there a way that H4 are exempt from the H1 quota?
Is there a way that H4 are exempt from the H1 quota?
No comments:
Post a Comment