skd
01-11 12:57 PM
I had gone through the layoff thing during 2001-2002 time. Maybe, I might be mistaken. But I feel that time it was even worse.
2001 It seemed like once all dot-com related stuff clears out market will stablize, But this time this problem, Is not just Whole IT, but all industries , I heard except healthcare and education all sectors are shedding jobs. Not only that all countries have same issue , just not the countries who depend on IT related sectors for there economy.
Worst part is No-End insight, So you don't how long you have to ride this out. No economist is ready to bet if the economic stimulas will really boost up to bring out of this reccession/ depression.
I am under-estimating the problems I 2001-2002. And probably people who got affected directly by that know more about the pain, then who never went through that kind of problem.
2001 It seemed like once all dot-com related stuff clears out market will stablize, But this time this problem, Is not just Whole IT, but all industries , I heard except healthcare and education all sectors are shedding jobs. Not only that all countries have same issue , just not the countries who depend on IT related sectors for there economy.
Worst part is No-End insight, So you don't how long you have to ride this out. No economist is ready to bet if the economic stimulas will really boost up to bring out of this reccession/ depression.
I am under-estimating the problems I 2001-2002. And probably people who got affected directly by that know more about the pain, then who never went through that kind of problem.
wallpaper wallpaper hd lack. Audi R8
guygeek007
07-26 09:41 AM
Lapisguy,
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
sobers
07-04 12:06 PM
"It's like living in a holding pattern continuously," said Swati Srivastava, 28, a member of Immigration Voice, a new grass-roots organization of skilled foreign workers pushing for immigration reform. The Internet-based group formed late last year and has about 5,000 members scattered around the country.
"We work in [the] U.S. legally in high-skilled jobs, but we still get penalized for playing by the rules," Immigration Voice co-founder Aman Kapoor said in an e-mail. "Since no one was working on our issues, we decided to organize."
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-skilledvisa3jul03,1,1670817.story?page=2&cset=true&ctrack=1
"We work in [the] U.S. legally in high-skilled jobs, but we still get penalized for playing by the rules," Immigration Voice co-founder Aman Kapoor said in an e-mail. "Since no one was working on our issues, we decided to organize."
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-skilledvisa3jul03,1,1670817.story?page=2&cset=true&ctrack=1
2011 Audi R8 Wallpaper 1080p
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
123456mg
07-29 04:16 AM
Hi there,
IV seems to be a terrific service to the immigration community. Kudos to the people who work hard to make it work.
Has anyone heard of cases where immigration lawyers have successfully petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby (way before the age of 18) to become GC holders or citizens?
Hmmm..... good idea! Looks like you have a baby......
I do not think in any country there are such laws in place. Why don't you write it to US congress and see if it gets passed!! You will find yourself at the end of few million illegal latinos.
Good luck buddy!!
IV seems to be a terrific service to the immigration community. Kudos to the people who work hard to make it work.
Has anyone heard of cases where immigration lawyers have successfully petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby (way before the age of 18) to become GC holders or citizens?
Hmmm..... good idea! Looks like you have a baby......
I do not think in any country there are such laws in place. Why don't you write it to US congress and see if it gets passed!! You will find yourself at the end of few million illegal latinos.
Good luck buddy!!
brintonwhite
06-07 06:14 PM
nice stamps
more...
shana04
07-21 09:05 AM
Friends / Gurus,
Please advice or suggest.
Here is my situation, filed I 485 in July 2007 and No FP done.
Called USCIS in Mar 2008 and opened a SR and got SR for my self in hard copy and an email for my wife that some one contacted about your case for FP and a notice will be mailed to with specific time and date.
And I waited this long and no notice has arrived for me and dates are current in Aug 2008.
Today (July 21 2008) I called USCIS and used the following menus.
2-6-1-(Enter Receipt Number)-1-1-3-1
And a representative has greeted very well and asked bunch of questions and asked to answer yes or no (no details just yes or no)
Then she said as the Background Clearance has not been done for my case, they would not send the FP. And to open a SR I have to wait at least 441 days from Receipt date of I485 to open SR.
When I asked about my wife's case, she replied the same in no FP has done then probably she has not got her background clearance yet. so need to wait for 441 days for her case too.
Then I said my dates are current and if no FP done then I would loose my chance and she replied that until background clearance is done no FP will be sent and they would not touch the case until then.
Friends / Gurus, any advice or please let me know how to follow up on this. I do not want to loose this opportunity.
Thanks in advance.
Shana
Please advice or suggest.
Here is my situation, filed I 485 in July 2007 and No FP done.
Called USCIS in Mar 2008 and opened a SR and got SR for my self in hard copy and an email for my wife that some one contacted about your case for FP and a notice will be mailed to with specific time and date.
And I waited this long and no notice has arrived for me and dates are current in Aug 2008.
Today (July 21 2008) I called USCIS and used the following menus.
2-6-1-(Enter Receipt Number)-1-1-3-1
And a representative has greeted very well and asked bunch of questions and asked to answer yes or no (no details just yes or no)
Then she said as the Background Clearance has not been done for my case, they would not send the FP. And to open a SR I have to wait at least 441 days from Receipt date of I485 to open SR.
When I asked about my wife's case, she replied the same in no FP has done then probably she has not got her background clearance yet. so need to wait for 441 days for her case too.
Then I said my dates are current and if no FP done then I would loose my chance and she replied that until background clearance is done no FP will be sent and they would not touch the case until then.
Friends / Gurus, any advice or please let me know how to follow up on this. I do not want to loose this opportunity.
Thanks in advance.
Shana
2010 hairstyles audi r8 wallpaper
shivaz90
07-16 10:40 PM
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
Well .. lets think for a second before trumpeting our victory here. And Victory, I mean is not achieved by one group over the other. Various groups and parties have put in thier efforts to find a resolution and to cast blame on one another is playing some childish games.
Lets leave out our passion for a second and think "logically" for a second - which one of this scares the s*** out of the USCIS people here - flower campaign or a Class action lawsuit by bunch of immigration lawyers? I am not doubting anyone's efforts here - but to say that we have achieved victory here is too early, too short sighted and blaming other groups for not doing much is silly. As much as the flower campaign help spread the word among the media of the plight of legal immigrants - the proposed lawsuit has made USCIS tremble in thier pants.
Sheikh - couldn't agree more here with you.
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
Well .. lets think for a second before trumpeting our victory here. And Victory, I mean is not achieved by one group over the other. Various groups and parties have put in thier efforts to find a resolution and to cast blame on one another is playing some childish games.
Lets leave out our passion for a second and think "logically" for a second - which one of this scares the s*** out of the USCIS people here - flower campaign or a Class action lawsuit by bunch of immigration lawyers? I am not doubting anyone's efforts here - but to say that we have achieved victory here is too early, too short sighted and blaming other groups for not doing much is silly. As much as the flower campaign help spread the word among the media of the plight of legal immigrants - the proposed lawsuit has made USCIS tremble in thier pants.
Sheikh - couldn't agree more here with you.
more...
reddymjm
12-04 04:52 PM
I am also flying to Chennai in 2 days.
hair audi r8 v10 wallpaper.
freedom_fighter
06-24 09:44 PM
what is ur priority date, EB2/EB3 and how much time for u to reply the RFE?
more...
rani77
03-17 07:57 AM
I saw your post completely. It looks like that is a no go but you can try two things open a MTR and file an 140 in EB3 .Also parallely start another new case from scratch . You PD is Aug 2006 which may not seem a big advantage now but in a couple of years of time it will be. This may also cost a bit more so apart from financial aspect it doesnt hurt more to do these do things parallely. You got to take the call. Also make sure that you hire a good /well know attroney , your case typically indicates that the attorney made the wrong decision in filing
hot Car Wallpapers Audi R8
IfYouSeekAmy
01-20 02:45 PM
OK OK, EB1 kicks ass too !!!! :D
If they are so good, Show the list of names.
Any EB3 started big company after getting Greencard? Any EB3 invented after getting Greencard?
If they are so good, Show the list of names.
Any EB3 started big company after getting Greencard? Any EB3 invented after getting Greencard?
more...
house Every Audi R8 5.2 FSI
h1bemployee
02-25 06:49 PM
can anybody help me here?
tattoo Audi R8 Red HD iPhone
sabr
09-18 04:44 PM
But if I get out of US and get back with H1b stamping will then I can start again with my current company as H1b while I wil work with EAD for another company full time?
more...
pictures audi r8 wallpaper hd,
mallu
02-17 03:40 AM
There's nothing new in that website. EB-2 India for entire FY is GONE.. FINIS.. KHATAM... KHALLAS.
....
That forum posting by Attorney says " ...Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
...
So ?
....
That forum posting by Attorney says " ...Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
...
So ?
dresses audi r8 hd wallpaper
nviren
04-13 07:58 PM
The following doc, 'How the senate bill becomes a law' does not mention any waiting period after President's sign the bill to become a law
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/legprocessflowchart.pdf
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/legprocessflowchart.pdf
more...
makeup Audi r8 2008 HD car Wallpapers
lazycis
09-28 08:35 PM
Hello Everyone,
I need to find someone that can help me to file the Mandamus my name is been stuck over 2 years now and the USCIS still telling me it's PENDING....Please help me if anyone know a good lawyer that can file Mandamus.....
Thanks
Anan:confused:
Check this
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
Ask any questions here
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1781629
Here is the sample complaint:
http://boards.immigration.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16571&d=1182786004
Your PD does not have to be current (it changes from month to month), if it was current at some time in the past, that will be enough.
Fight for your rights!
I need to find someone that can help me to file the Mandamus my name is been stuck over 2 years now and the USCIS still telling me it's PENDING....Please help me if anyone know a good lawyer that can file Mandamus.....
Thanks
Anan:confused:
Check this
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
Ask any questions here
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1781629
Here is the sample complaint:
http://boards.immigration.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16571&d=1182786004
Your PD does not have to be current (it changes from month to month), if it was current at some time in the past, that will be enough.
Fight for your rights!
girlfriend HD Audi R8 VS BMW M3 Wallpaper
leoindiano
08-04 09:37 PM
I-140 receipt will not have A#. Only approval notice will have it. In the beneficiary column along with name of the person.
hairstyles ABT Audi R8 GT S hd cars.
ho_gaya_kaya_?
01-12 06:48 PM
Hey Bhnupriya
could you please post some tips on how to form the sample letter for I140 ?
i need both I140 as well as copy of labor
Thanks.
could you please post some tips on how to form the sample letter for I140 ?
i need both I140 as well as copy of labor
Thanks.
royus77
07-17 10:29 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
ExoVoid
06-13 05:21 AM
CONFUSED: what is up with those percentages, my count is just a bit above 100...
I get approx 600%
I get approx 600%
No comments:
Post a Comment