Desi Unlucky
09-11 09:50 PM
Here is my contribution.
Google Order #171518030739621 ($100)
Keep up the good work.
Google Order #171518030739621 ($100)
Keep up the good work.
wallpaper kobe bryant quotes about
jayleno
10-20 10:44 AM
The thread needs to float on top
hebbar77
09-10 06:42 PM
28.6% of 7% of 140,000 per quarter is 700 not 2450.
I greatly appreciate people doing visa number math. But guys, you are wasting your time. These guys dont do any math nor logic in the process.
I greatly appreciate people doing visa number math. But guys, you are wasting your time. These guys dont do any math nor logic in the process.
2011 kobe bryant quotes about
kaisersose
06-10 12:35 PM
As EB1 is Cureent, presume processing applications up date, EB3 is Unavailable, means no work to do for USCIS people as far as EB3 Adjudicate cases, leave EB4, EB5 categories aside which dont have many applications to process. Then the only category left for working with is EB2 and that also having ROW being current, the adjuticate applications left for processing with available visa numbers are EB2 India for time being. So this means for the next few months including this June 2008 there might be many approvals in
EB2 India category, as because theres no considerable work in EB category for USCIS people except EB2 India Adjudication. So presumably all the available visa numbers will be processed effectively in the EB2 category for the fical year.
It is simple. If the number of pending EB2 Apps before April 1st 2004 (India and China combined) is less than the number of spill over visa numbers, then there will be some forward movement in EB2 next month. If not, the dates will remain the same or may even retrogress.
EB2 India category, as because theres no considerable work in EB category for USCIS people except EB2 India Adjudication. So presumably all the available visa numbers will be processed effectively in the EB2 category for the fical year.
It is simple. If the number of pending EB2 Apps before April 1st 2004 (India and China combined) is less than the number of spill over visa numbers, then there will be some forward movement in EB2 next month. If not, the dates will remain the same or may even retrogress.
more...
texcan
09-10 10:07 AM
Guys,
here is my humble contribution of 100.
keep up the great work.
A suggestion, lets keep a tally where we are for contribution goal,
this will encourage everyone to contribute more and round off any shortfalls
in overall contribution.
Thanks
On a side note,
This is my understanding, even if there are some harsh things said
on the forum, but in all everyone appreciates the great work being done
by this group.
here is my humble contribution of 100.
keep up the great work.
A suggestion, lets keep a tally where we are for contribution goal,
this will encourage everyone to contribute more and round off any shortfalls
in overall contribution.
Thanks
On a side note,
This is my understanding, even if there are some harsh things said
on the forum, but in all everyone appreciates the great work being done
by this group.
ebizash
07-14 03:59 PM
Via Chase bill pay
$25
Will update the signature shortly.
$25
Will update the signature shortly.
more...
girijas
03-04 02:17 PM
Soft LUD on my case. My I-140 is approved. My PD is May 15th 2002 India EB3
2010 kobe bryant quotes about basketball. kobe bryant shoes iv.
isedkeem
03-06 02:57 PM
Thanks for the info buddy. Where to find more information on immigration to NZ? Please guide me on that.
The main website is the NZ govt website:
Skilled Migrant Category (http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/stream/work/skilledmigrant/)
The main website is the NZ govt website:
Skilled Migrant Category (http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/stream/work/skilledmigrant/)
more...
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
hair Kobe Bryant this season.
gctoget
07-30 07:29 PM
gctoget, we are actually 39 members now. 24 is the new members that have joined since a week back. If you look at the members section on our yahoo groups we have more. Keep joining folks, we have become very active.
Sorry about that Drona. "39 members" .....that sounds great!!!:)
Sorry about that Drona. "39 members" .....that sounds great!!!:)
more...
sj2273
06-11 07:05 PM
Dear Nitinboston,
I am in 100% agreement with you on the notion that Congress probably doesnt care about people who are not voters/citizens etc. But let me quote you an example from history. I am making an extra effort to be optimistic here, but in saying that, nothing can be done will not lead us anywhere either. If we try, then we can atleast go to bed in peace thinking we tried! Here is the example though:
Blacks in this country did not have any voting rights before 1965. In order to be a registered voter they had be recommended by a white person and go through an exam. they practically had no rights. no status. nothing! I am talking about Alabama in early 50s when blacks were not even allowed to board buses from the front door. The bus driver had the right to pull out a gun if a black person did not give up his/her seat. Rosa parks ignited the Montogomery bus boycott in 1955 December and that lasted for more than a year. The result was that blacks came together and held together persistently till people in higher ranks noticed it. It wasnt easy, black leaders were bombed, harrassed and threatened for doing so. In 1964 the civil rights act came about and 1965 voters right act. And today we have a black president. Unbelievable transition from a time when even the drinking water fountains were seperate for whites and blacks.
This is just an example but what I am really trying to get to is that the Government today is much different than it was several years ago. If they could make the congress hear at that time, why cant we.
It wouldnt be wrong to say that this country still is the most tolerant country in the world. Compare this to Australia or New Zealand or Canada.
People in the government will listen if the cause is right. Its just a matter of making enough noise in a decent manner that people hear.
Thats all I have to say! I hope we can take you in the stride of our optimism. You will make a terrific addition to our optimistic force!
Thank you for reading my post.
I am in 100% agreement with you on the notion that Congress probably doesnt care about people who are not voters/citizens etc. But let me quote you an example from history. I am making an extra effort to be optimistic here, but in saying that, nothing can be done will not lead us anywhere either. If we try, then we can atleast go to bed in peace thinking we tried! Here is the example though:
Blacks in this country did not have any voting rights before 1965. In order to be a registered voter they had be recommended by a white person and go through an exam. they practically had no rights. no status. nothing! I am talking about Alabama in early 50s when blacks were not even allowed to board buses from the front door. The bus driver had the right to pull out a gun if a black person did not give up his/her seat. Rosa parks ignited the Montogomery bus boycott in 1955 December and that lasted for more than a year. The result was that blacks came together and held together persistently till people in higher ranks noticed it. It wasnt easy, black leaders were bombed, harrassed and threatened for doing so. In 1964 the civil rights act came about and 1965 voters right act. And today we have a black president. Unbelievable transition from a time when even the drinking water fountains were seperate for whites and blacks.
This is just an example but what I am really trying to get to is that the Government today is much different than it was several years ago. If they could make the congress hear at that time, why cant we.
It wouldnt be wrong to say that this country still is the most tolerant country in the world. Compare this to Australia or New Zealand or Canada.
People in the government will listen if the cause is right. Its just a matter of making enough noise in a decent manner that people hear.
Thats all I have to say! I hope we can take you in the stride of our optimism. You will make a terrific addition to our optimistic force!
Thank you for reading my post.
hot Kobe Bryant, Vanessa, and the
pa_arora
06-10 05:22 PM
When do you think would EB2-I hit Feb 2005? Before this year end?
NO ONE knows abut it...no one includes USCIS too. cause they dont work on what will be needed in future.
NO ONE knows abut it...no one includes USCIS too. cause they dont work on what will be needed in future.
more...
house kobe bryant quotes about basketball. kobe bryant shoes v.
SkilledWorker4GC
07-15 11:23 AM
^^^^^
tattoo kobe bryant quotes about
dval_dpal
12-11 07:26 AM
I got my loan approved in April 2010 from Wells Fargo, the under writer created some problems but my loan officer gave them references of prior loans getting approved for people on AOS so it worked out well in the end. I know a lot of people who's loans were approved (both conventional and FHA) and were on AOS. All the best hope everything works out well for you.
i sent all documents to loan officer at wells fargo for refinance. I sent I-140, EAD copy for immigration documents. just got email from loan office that he received my file back from underwriter and ask for greencard copy front and back as underwriter said EAD is not acceptable (Employer can not sponsor borrower).
could anybody please tell me what to do now?
thank you:(
i sent all documents to loan officer at wells fargo for refinance. I sent I-140, EAD copy for immigration documents. just got email from loan office that he received my file back from underwriter and ask for greencard copy front and back as underwriter said EAD is not acceptable (Employer can not sponsor borrower).
could anybody please tell me what to do now?
thank you:(
more...
pictures kobe bryant quotes about basketball. kobe bryant shoes 5. kobe
knnmbd
04-25 12:59 PM
Guys what about the type of visa? I mean shud the start date be ur H1B start date or ur F1 entry date? Coz if some people start on an H1 a lot of us also started on an F1. In that case doesnt it make more sense to root for the clause that says the immigrant can apply for his own GC that is employer independant? If i am not mistaken, is that not already a part of the PACE act?
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator’s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want " include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date". WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let’s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
I agree. Also, since F1 is not a dual intent visa this will not hold water. Anyways this is a ridiculous demand. We are not the law makers and we should consider ourselves lucky that couple of IV's amendments are in a few of the senator’s bills, though there are no guarantees if they will be included in the final text or let alone be passed. We should only push for what is already include in the 2 bills and not confuse everyone every time one of us comes up with this "brilliant" idea of using H1B entry date as priority date. So what's the next amendment we want " include the day I first envisioned that I will come to America as the priority date". WE NEED ONE VOICE and we have already been heard so let’s stick to what is practical and push those amendments through.
dresses kobe bryant quotes about basketball
jhokimi
05-23 03:12 PM
LCA filed in DC on 04/28/2004. 45-day letter received last Friday from Philadelphia BC.
more...
makeup kobe bryant quotes about basketball. kobe bryant shoes zoom. kobe
JunRN
10-03 10:56 PM
Concurrent filing can be done by anyone with approved Labor Certification. Schedule A applicants already have pre-approved LC.
This means, that not only Schedule A can file concurrently but also others as well.
This means, that not only Schedule A can file concurrently but also others as well.
girlfriend Kobe Bryant Quotes About Basketball. Kobe Bryant Quotes Pictures
akgind
09-14 11:06 AM
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs.
Please do not make false statements. You are trying to paint everyone with the same brush.
I had a Masters at the time EB3 was filed in 2002....from a top US school. The employer was okay with any category. The lawyer messed up...said that all categories were current and he knows best.
Please do not make false statements. You are trying to paint everyone with the same brush.
I had a Masters at the time EB3 was filed in 2002....from a top US school. The employer was okay with any category. The lawyer messed up...said that all categories were current and he knows best.
hairstyles kobe bryant quotes about
saimrathi
08-10 03:25 PM
Congrats!! Please contribute to IV!
All 6 of our checks got cleared today below are the details
I-485/131/765 recd date: 2nd july 07
I-485/131/765 notice date: 06th Aug 07
Service Center send : NSC
I-140 approved : on 31-May-06, TSC
Got Recipts : NO
All 6 of our checks got cleared today below are the details
I-485/131/765 recd date: 2nd july 07
I-485/131/765 notice date: 06th Aug 07
Service Center send : NSC
I-140 approved : on 31-May-06, TSC
Got Recipts : NO
crystal
09-11 07:34 PM
My apologies.. may be it is not right time to quote that :D----
Please stop analyzing. This is a decisive moment. Join the DC rally!
Please stop analyzing. This is a decisive moment. Join the DC rally!
Kodi
09-17 01:11 PM
My employer emailed them but no reply yet. My H1 is expiring Dec 1, 2007. I guess I better apply for H4 thru spouse.
No comments:
Post a Comment