nojoke
10-20 06:34 PM
I missed on some of the conversation here
- '92-'00 was a good economic time because of the dot com boom.
It happened because of Al Gore and policies of Clinton
- the repubs were in charge of the house and senate, and they helped in part to frame/pass the policies during that time.
I thought they are in charge till 2006? So what got changed from 1992-2000 and from 2000-2006?
- the housing sector debacle started in the clinton era, when the dems pushed the fannie may & freddie mac to lower the lending standards to give loans to the people who couldn't afford it. though it sounded like a good objective they all knew that at one point it would boomerang.
This credit problem was caused by not only Fannie/Freddie but due to deregulation of banking and finance sector that started from Regan era. Republicans are so proud of deregulation.
- the dems did that for their own purposes:
1. to gain the support of the lower income/middle income population which they did.
And for Bush to be proud of the ownership society that he bragged about in 2004.
2. to fatten their own wallets-they changed the compensation rules so that the more they loan out the more their compensation. the dem guy in charge of the loaning agencies earned 90 mil in 6 years.
Prove.
3. the top two beneficiaries of contribution from fm/fm were guess who chris dodd & barck obama (barack got 130K in just 3 years). not to mention the favorable interest rates on their mortgage loans.
Not True. The employees of the firm gave to obama campaign. Companies are prohibited by law from giving donations. On the otherhand
The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list � using figures from the Federal Election Commission � shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.
- the US has prospered so far because of its capitalistic philosophy. it has advanced innovation, and entrepreneurship, because innovators know they'll be compensated for their hardwork. barack recently claimed he want's to spread the wealth around which is a socialist philosophy...you've seen that in the communist countries (no growth, poverty, and low standards).
FOX news talking point. He meant tax the rich to give tax break for the middle class. If you are super rich then I understand your anger.
Unregulated capitalism will cause serious trouble. We just found that out.
[/QUOTE]
- barack has had no accomplishment at all...no executive decision made, no major legislation (bills) introduced or passed (let alone through bipartisan efforts). so all of a sudden to assume he's going to bring change is ridiculous. hillary would have made a better president of course the press decides/controls everything now.
It is leadership skills. Not the most experienced skill that is needed. He obviously has the skills since he defeated the great clintons.
- look at the huge spending plan he has (free giveaways to everybody)...to fund that he'll tax you and I (take away whatever money we've saved).
FOX news talking points. He said he will give tax cut for middle class. Moreover McCain's spending plan is will have a deficit of 1trillion compared to 750billion from obama's plan. Google.
- he's ambiguous on everything...he changed his initial position on almost everything, and not just once (again according to the audience)
FOX news talking point again. No proof. McCain said economy fundamentally good then bad, he has a long list. I don't have time http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm
I don't think we need to go thru all this again. all i care now is my gc, and I don't think obama is for it. even if he says he's for it, you can't trust him. he'll change his position when it becomes unpopular.
again be rational in your thinking.
p.s with the limited time I had I wrote all this...so don't pounce on any gramatical errors (of course the dems like to do that).
- '92-'00 was a good economic time because of the dot com boom.
It happened because of Al Gore and policies of Clinton
- the repubs were in charge of the house and senate, and they helped in part to frame/pass the policies during that time.
I thought they are in charge till 2006? So what got changed from 1992-2000 and from 2000-2006?
- the housing sector debacle started in the clinton era, when the dems pushed the fannie may & freddie mac to lower the lending standards to give loans to the people who couldn't afford it. though it sounded like a good objective they all knew that at one point it would boomerang.
This credit problem was caused by not only Fannie/Freddie but due to deregulation of banking and finance sector that started from Regan era. Republicans are so proud of deregulation.
- the dems did that for their own purposes:
1. to gain the support of the lower income/middle income population which they did.
And for Bush to be proud of the ownership society that he bragged about in 2004.
2. to fatten their own wallets-they changed the compensation rules so that the more they loan out the more their compensation. the dem guy in charge of the loaning agencies earned 90 mil in 6 years.
Prove.
3. the top two beneficiaries of contribution from fm/fm were guess who chris dodd & barck obama (barack got 130K in just 3 years). not to mention the favorable interest rates on their mortgage loans.
Not True. The employees of the firm gave to obama campaign. Companies are prohibited by law from giving donations. On the otherhand
The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list � using figures from the Federal Election Commission � shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.
- the US has prospered so far because of its capitalistic philosophy. it has advanced innovation, and entrepreneurship, because innovators know they'll be compensated for their hardwork. barack recently claimed he want's to spread the wealth around which is a socialist philosophy...you've seen that in the communist countries (no growth, poverty, and low standards).
FOX news talking point. He meant tax the rich to give tax break for the middle class. If you are super rich then I understand your anger.
Unregulated capitalism will cause serious trouble. We just found that out.
[/QUOTE]
- barack has had no accomplishment at all...no executive decision made, no major legislation (bills) introduced or passed (let alone through bipartisan efforts). so all of a sudden to assume he's going to bring change is ridiculous. hillary would have made a better president of course the press decides/controls everything now.
It is leadership skills. Not the most experienced skill that is needed. He obviously has the skills since he defeated the great clintons.
- look at the huge spending plan he has (free giveaways to everybody)...to fund that he'll tax you and I (take away whatever money we've saved).
FOX news talking points. He said he will give tax cut for middle class. Moreover McCain's spending plan is will have a deficit of 1trillion compared to 750billion from obama's plan. Google.
- he's ambiguous on everything...he changed his initial position on almost everything, and not just once (again according to the audience)
FOX news talking point again. No proof. McCain said economy fundamentally good then bad, he has a long list. I don't have time http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm
I don't think we need to go thru all this again. all i care now is my gc, and I don't think obama is for it. even if he says he's for it, you can't trust him. he'll change his position when it becomes unpopular.
again be rational in your thinking.
p.s with the limited time I had I wrote all this...so don't pounce on any gramatical errors (of course the dems like to do that).
wallpaper The Autobiography of Malcolm X
sam_hoosier
07-02 12:51 PM
I support it.
nozerd
01-27 10:31 AM
Why are the numbers for 2000 so low. Is it because it is pre AC21.
Also how are we currently accounting for 245I folks in this model. Do we have good numbers on them ?
Also how are we currently accounting for 245I folks in this model. Do we have good numbers on them ?
2011 Malcolm X, Manning Marable
dealsnet
08-21 11:14 PM
Nobody get any advantage from your situation. We are all very sad about your situation. Even legal IV members are forced to go home after loosing their job and after 6 years in H1B.
You are here come not in any work visa catagory. Not even in NAFTA.
You file your I-485 at the time of July 2007 visa fiasco.
USCIS got 1 million application at that period. So they didn't made much scrutiny your application. If at normal time, you may get a fast RFE and subsequent denial.
Because of work load it was not happened. I have read all of your previous threads in IV (REGARDING FINGER PRINT ETC). Your case is diffrent with the people here.
You are ignorant regarding immigration. You have acess to comuter. Google it and get info.
You are telling about I-485 only.
YOU ARE NOT TELLING ABOUT I-140 (EMPLOYMENT BASED) OR I-130 (FAMILY BASED)
IF you are not filed I-130 or I-140 at the time or before I-485, your petition is invalid.
Except EB1, almost all EB based GC need labor process.
If your I-94 date is expired and you are not extend it or change to any visa catagory at the time of I-485 filing, you are illegal. IT IS THE HARD TRUTH.
USCIS will not adjust the status, if the petitioner is not legal at the time of I485 filing.
After I-485 filing I-94 expiry is not a problem.
Canada is next country. Why you didn't go back and come in NAFTA or other visa catagory ?
Thank you to those of you who were kind enough to respond with helpful information and some understanding for my situation. I do appreciate that much.
And for those of you who were sarcastic and rude and accusing me of being illegal, if that was the case, then why has USCIS not stated that one time in all the correspondence I have had from them and why are they willing to give me a chance to file the required forms at this time?
They know where I live, who I live with and anything else they need to know. Illegal immigrants don't make themselves known to anybody that could/would report them. If I had something to hide, I would do so, but I have no secrets from them whatsoever. I have done all I have been asked to do and have the paperwork to prove it. I have not gotten a job anywhere outside of the home I live in and they are well aware of what I do here, I have not committed any crimes, my biometrics have come back clear, therefore I have no criminal record in my home country, so therefore I am not a threat whatsoever to anyone in the US.
No one at USCIS has ever stated by phone or mail that I am here illegally and if that was the case, I would think they would have been quick to deport me since they knew everything they needed to know in order to find me and still do. I have nothing to hide.
You are here come not in any work visa catagory. Not even in NAFTA.
You file your I-485 at the time of July 2007 visa fiasco.
USCIS got 1 million application at that period. So they didn't made much scrutiny your application. If at normal time, you may get a fast RFE and subsequent denial.
Because of work load it was not happened. I have read all of your previous threads in IV (REGARDING FINGER PRINT ETC). Your case is diffrent with the people here.
You are ignorant regarding immigration. You have acess to comuter. Google it and get info.
You are telling about I-485 only.
YOU ARE NOT TELLING ABOUT I-140 (EMPLOYMENT BASED) OR I-130 (FAMILY BASED)
IF you are not filed I-130 or I-140 at the time or before I-485, your petition is invalid.
Except EB1, almost all EB based GC need labor process.
If your I-94 date is expired and you are not extend it or change to any visa catagory at the time of I-485 filing, you are illegal. IT IS THE HARD TRUTH.
USCIS will not adjust the status, if the petitioner is not legal at the time of I485 filing.
After I-485 filing I-94 expiry is not a problem.
Canada is next country. Why you didn't go back and come in NAFTA or other visa catagory ?
Thank you to those of you who were kind enough to respond with helpful information and some understanding for my situation. I do appreciate that much.
And for those of you who were sarcastic and rude and accusing me of being illegal, if that was the case, then why has USCIS not stated that one time in all the correspondence I have had from them and why are they willing to give me a chance to file the required forms at this time?
They know where I live, who I live with and anything else they need to know. Illegal immigrants don't make themselves known to anybody that could/would report them. If I had something to hide, I would do so, but I have no secrets from them whatsoever. I have done all I have been asked to do and have the paperwork to prove it. I have not gotten a job anywhere outside of the home I live in and they are well aware of what I do here, I have not committed any crimes, my biometrics have come back clear, therefore I have no criminal record in my home country, so therefore I am not a threat whatsoever to anyone in the US.
No one at USCIS has ever stated by phone or mail that I am here illegally and if that was the case, I would think they would have been quick to deport me since they knew everything they needed to know in order to find me and still do. I have nothing to hide.
more...
gcformeornot
08-15 03:59 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
feedfront
10-11 11:38 AM
Status changed to 'Your Case Status: Request for Evidence Response Review'.
Hope it will be completed in a week :)
Hope it will be completed in a week :)
more...
DSLStart
02-16 12:43 PM
You can usually get good flight deals for BWI (Baltimore airport). There is metro bus service (http://www.wmata.com/bus/timetables/md/b30.pdf)connecting from BWI to Greenbelt metro station.
has metro access. Baltimore has MARC but it won't be that frequent and cost effective.
has metro access. Baltimore has MARC but it won't be that frequent and cost effective.
2010 Quote Troll - Happy MLK Day!
gc_on_demand
11-12 03:24 PM
Under the regulation No reference to Calendar year. It mentions explicitly calendar quarter.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
more...
CSPAvictim
07-09 06:30 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
hair malcolm x quotes
andycool
07-15 11:11 AM
No changes in my status..not even phone company. :D
It is not the first time we got call..our case have been moved to Local office sometime in 2008..since then we got calls few times..asking for this document..that document..verification..saying we are consolidating etc etc...
Looks like they are doing something with cases for sure :cool:
Is your case still @ Local Office
It is not the first time we got call..our case have been moved to Local office sometime in 2008..since then we got calls few times..asking for this document..that document..verification..saying we are consolidating etc etc...
Looks like they are doing something with cases for sure :cool:
Is your case still @ Local Office
more...
milind70
05-05 06:07 PM
Hi friends,
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
I dont see any reason why you cant continue of L1 , as u would require to apply for change of status for to be on H1 and is provided your L1 is valid beyond Oct. I think you need to file Form I 539 to change the noimmigrant status for eg if u need to go from H4 to H1 then u file this form.
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
I dont see any reason why you cant continue of L1 , as u would require to apply for change of status for to be on H1 and is provided your L1 is valid beyond Oct. I think you need to file Form I 539 to change the noimmigrant status for eg if u need to go from H4 to H1 then u file this form.
hot girlfriend Malcolm X Wikipedia
gvenkat
10-21 12:38 PM
/* Last 8 years, Republicans have done nothing to improve GC system. Lets give democrats a chance this time. */
Do you have a voting right? Look whoever comes will not care abt EB3 India... for some time. The system has to fix itself or needs to be changed. If ppl with priority date of 2003 gets the GC around 2010. We should thank our stars and be happy.:)
Do you have a voting right? Look whoever comes will not care abt EB3 India... for some time. The system has to fix itself or needs to be changed. If ppl with priority date of 2003 gets the GC around 2010. We should thank our stars and be happy.:)
more...
house tagged Malcolm X Quotes; malcolm x quotes. Malcolm X Studies Portal
ak77
09-10 02:06 PM
I found another link. Not sure if its the right one ?
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx
Yes this one is working for me...but iam also not sure its the right one or not.
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx
Yes this one is working for me...but iam also not sure its the right one or not.
tattoo malcolm x quotes wallpaper.
Macaca
09-26 10:46 AM
About us (http://mediamatters.org/about_us/)
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation � news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda � every day, in real time.
Using the website www.mediamatters.org as the principal vehicle for disseminating research and information, Media Matters posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally, Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions. Contact Us (http://mediamatters.org/contact_us): mm-tips@mediametters.org
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation � news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda � every day, in real time.
Using the website www.mediamatters.org as the principal vehicle for disseminating research and information, Media Matters posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally, Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions. Contact Us (http://mediamatters.org/contact_us): mm-tips@mediametters.org
more...
pictures Malcolm X (1925 – 1965),
never_giveup
09-10 02:25 PM
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
This link is now functional and I can hear the audio and video.
Discussion is about Army immigration. And our Favourite Zoe Lofgren is on the mike !!!
This link is now functional and I can hear the audio and video.
Discussion is about Army immigration. And our Favourite Zoe Lofgren is on the mike !!!
dresses malcolm x quotes. Quotes, apr wife of xmalcolm x
nixstor
07-04 09:25 PM
nixstor,
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Well, Thats what I have said before as well. Its like setting the order card flag to "yes" on 60K cases with older PD's. I do not know from where Jay Solomon got the tip off about lapse of name checks, unless they are trying to make this a big issue through all possible means. There have been stories flying around that they by passed on security checks, which I thought your original post conveyed. Most of the 485's they approved have been the one's with PD's from 2003 and 2004 initially. If there are a few from the pile that were of later PD's, I don't think its a big issue. The lack of communication and implementation/interpretation at their whims and fancies has resulted in the situation at hand for every one involved in the chain. I am very very positive that the OB's office has nothing do with this and USCIS is not worried about the postmortem conducted by OB.
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Well, Thats what I have said before as well. Its like setting the order card flag to "yes" on 60K cases with older PD's. I do not know from where Jay Solomon got the tip off about lapse of name checks, unless they are trying to make this a big issue through all possible means. There have been stories flying around that they by passed on security checks, which I thought your original post conveyed. Most of the 485's they approved have been the one's with PD's from 2003 and 2004 initially. If there are a few from the pile that were of later PD's, I don't think its a big issue. The lack of communication and implementation/interpretation at their whims and fancies has resulted in the situation at hand for every one involved in the chain. I am very very positive that the OB's office has nothing do with this and USCIS is not worried about the postmortem conducted by OB.
more...
makeup malcolm x quotes on racism
gc_chahiye
08-15 05:33 PM
Well, I mean no offense to anybody but why is EB3 ROW so far back while EB2 India and China are as per June bulletin or better?
I thought for India the approved cases were 5 times the country quota for 2007? Good for those guys that were approved but I still don't get it why ROW is 2002!
India did have tons of approvals, but I believe most were EB3 (18K) so thats gone to U. These are just a small number of unused visas that were presumably returned. October and there-on dates are a real reflection of USCIS backlog etc. (see the arbitrary use of Jan 2007 for EB1 in this VB)
I thought for India the approved cases were 5 times the country quota for 2007? Good for those guys that were approved but I still don't get it why ROW is 2002!
India did have tons of approvals, but I believe most were EB3 (18K) so thats gone to U. These are just a small number of unused visas that were presumably returned. October and there-on dates are a real reflection of USCIS backlog etc. (see the arbitrary use of Jan 2007 for EB1 in this VB)
girlfriend malcolm x quotes
prioritydate
12-20 04:26 PM
Please just dont worry about it too much , there are also chances that you may not get an RFE. There are chances that you may get an RFE but you dont know what USCIS will ask from you. You need to have RFE in hand to prepare response for that.
I know that I may or may not get an RFE. I just want to find out if any of you guys are in the same situation. I am sure that some people didn't worked due to the economic situation during 2000-2001. Since I am not entirely sure what should I do if I get an RFE, I just want to find out. If the IO ask me for a proof of work, then I may not provide it. I don't have w2, I didn't filed tax returns, don't have pay stubs; not sure what status I was in at that time. My i-94 was still valid, but I just didn't worked during that time period. If IO ask me to provide w2, I simply have to pack my bags!! :eek:
I know that I may or may not get an RFE. I just want to find out if any of you guys are in the same situation. I am sure that some people didn't worked due to the economic situation during 2000-2001. Since I am not entirely sure what should I do if I get an RFE, I just want to find out. If the IO ask me for a proof of work, then I may not provide it. I don't have w2, I didn't filed tax returns, don't have pay stubs; not sure what status I was in at that time. My i-94 was still valid, but I just didn't worked during that time period. If IO ask me to provide w2, I simply have to pack my bags!! :eek:
hairstyles malcolm x quotes. {DATA-BING}
GCHope2011
07-02 01:18 AM
To senators..
perm2gc
01-05 08:30 PM
Guys we had 115 new members today.It was great to see so many new members on the same day.It is all due to the hard work of many members.If we continue ,we will make our 10,000 mark
Thank You
Thank You
tooclose
07-12 09:13 PM
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
wow... too many options ... do u know the source for any of these ?
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
wow... too many options ... do u know the source for any of these ?
No comments:
Post a Comment