singhsa3
07-20 12:26 PM
Guys,
The calculations below is not to scare anyone but it may very well a reality. Based on the assumptions below, some people may have to wait up to 20 months to get a EAD card: Ouch!
A Total I-485 Applicants: 750000 Applicants
B Each EAD processing time: 5 Minutes
C Total processing hrs: 62500 Hours
(Calculations: AxB/60)
D Daily productive Hours: 5 Hours
(It is a government body!)
E Total Man Days (Business Days): 12500 Man Days
(Calculations: C/D)
F EAD Workforce: 30 People
G Total Business Days: 417 Days
(Calculations: E/F)
H Average Business Days in a month: 21 Days
I Total Clearing Time : 20 Months
(Calculations: G/I)
The calculations below is not to scare anyone but it may very well a reality. Based on the assumptions below, some people may have to wait up to 20 months to get a EAD card: Ouch!
A Total I-485 Applicants: 750000 Applicants
B Each EAD processing time: 5 Minutes
C Total processing hrs: 62500 Hours
(Calculations: AxB/60)
D Daily productive Hours: 5 Hours
(It is a government body!)
E Total Man Days (Business Days): 12500 Man Days
(Calculations: C/D)
F EAD Workforce: 30 People
G Total Business Days: 417 Days
(Calculations: E/F)
H Average Business Days in a month: 21 Days
I Total Clearing Time : 20 Months
(Calculations: G/I)
wallpaper desnudo de eugenio siller.
Nagireddi
09-16 09:53 AM
Dear friends,
Unfortunately, I am not able to attend the rally. I have just found out that my cheques have been cashed. I am contributing another $100 once again.Google Order #373309135239869
My sincere prayers to the god that our rally will be a huge success.Good luck for all of us.Keep sending us the photos,videos as the events are happening.
I LOVE IV.:)
Applied 140/485 concurrent on 8/6/07 to NSC-EB2
Unfortunately, I am not able to attend the rally. I have just found out that my cheques have been cashed. I am contributing another $100 once again.Google Order #373309135239869
My sincere prayers to the god that our rally will be a huge success.Good luck for all of us.Keep sending us the photos,videos as the events are happening.
I LOVE IV.:)
Applied 140/485 concurrent on 8/6/07 to NSC-EB2
legalVoice
06-03 12:06 PM
Canadian_Dream, I think your interpretation is wrong..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
Well this is very confusing.
What if a person files the I-140 after May 15th and his/her I-140 is approved. Later assume that I-485 date becomes current for that particular person (before Oct 2008), he/she files for the AOS/I-485 (before Oct 2008). While the I-485 petition is pending the date Oct 2008 comes what happens then? Will this nulify the filed I-140?
Thanks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
Well this is very confusing.
What if a person files the I-140 after May 15th and his/her I-140 is approved. Later assume that I-485 date becomes current for that particular person (before Oct 2008), he/she files for the AOS/I-485 (before Oct 2008). While the I-485 petition is pending the date Oct 2008 comes what happens then? Will this nulify the filed I-140?
Thanks
2011 desnudo de eugenio siller.
thomachan72
06-04 11:54 AM
All this May 15th/21 date is open to interepretation there is no set concrete laws yet.I just filed I-140 and I-1485 on the 1 st June and my attorney told me just go and wait now and live your life.We can worry about stupid laws that MIGHT go into affect a yr or never and destroy your precious time.
In the meantime go to NUMBERSUSA website and send as many faxs against this CIR bill and get it shutdown.
Yes i know NUMBERSUSA is anti-immigrant but in this situation it beneficial to all us legals if this bill goes down in flames.
How could you file the 140 and 485 at the same time, are you filing in EB1 catagory? which country?
In the meantime go to NUMBERSUSA website and send as many faxs against this CIR bill and get it shutdown.
Yes i know NUMBERSUSA is anti-immigrant but in this situation it beneficial to all us legals if this bill goes down in flames.
How could you file the 140 and 485 at the same time, are you filing in EB1 catagory? which country?
more...
adhantari
07-06 02:56 PM
I checked 2007 return and it has only 100K asset. I am not sure we accumulated 350K since then. I think you got confused with revenue vs. cash on hand / asset.
raised 461K in 2007 and spent 400K on lobbying? Sounds like lot of money....
but looking at revenues does'nt look bad situation either...... raising 461K in one year?....
I see cash at hand 165K. #21......
raised 461K in 2007 and spent 400K on lobbying? Sounds like lot of money....
but looking at revenues does'nt look bad situation either...... raising 461K in one year?....
I see cash at hand 165K. #21......
Macaca
10-01 02:26 PM
FS limits � The worldwide level for FS preferences is calculated as:
480K
- the number of aliens who were issued visas or adjusted to legal permanent residence in the previous fiscal year as
immediate relatives of U.S.citizens
children born subsequent to the issuance of a visa to an accompanying parent
children born abroad to lawful permanent residents on temporary trips abroad
+ unused EB preferences in the previous fiscal year.
EB limits � The worldwide limit on EB preference immigrants is equal to
140K
+ unused FS-preference visas in the previous year.
What is the relationship of 480K to 366K = 140K (EB) + 226 (FS)?
Very interesting that FS (EB) can capture EB (FS) but can not capture FS (EB)!
480K
- the number of aliens who were issued visas or adjusted to legal permanent residence in the previous fiscal year as
immediate relatives of U.S.citizens
children born subsequent to the issuance of a visa to an accompanying parent
children born abroad to lawful permanent residents on temporary trips abroad
+ unused EB preferences in the previous fiscal year.
EB limits � The worldwide limit on EB preference immigrants is equal to
140K
+ unused FS-preference visas in the previous year.
What is the relationship of 480K to 366K = 140K (EB) + 226 (FS)?
Very interesting that FS (EB) can capture EB (FS) but can not capture FS (EB)!
more...
Libra
09-12 11:10 AM
thank you sameold and sukhwindered for your contributions, hope to see you guys in DC.
2010 desnudo de eugenio siller.
Keeme
03-04 12:34 PM
Not sure if something is cooking at USCIS, last week an USCIS office called my attroney to get clarification on why we (my wife and I) are residing at separate addresses. We are in the process of relocation (company moved), my wife chose to continue her employment while she's searching for opportunities in the new location. The officer stated that they are trying to adjudicate the cases ASAP, hence he's inquiring to ensure there isnt any marriage fraud. My attorney responsed back will all the possible evidence to proved we are together.
Has anyone had a similar experience.
My PD: Aug 2004
Cat: EB3 India.
A soft LUD today 03/04 on my/wife's I-485 application.
I see lot of cases of EB2-I with PDs of 2005/06 and EB3- I with PDs 2003/04 have recentely received LUDs/RFEs.
Let's wait what next visa bulletin says !
Any one else with recent LUDs on their I-485s ?
Has anyone had a similar experience.
My PD: Aug 2004
Cat: EB3 India.
A soft LUD today 03/04 on my/wife's I-485 application.
I see lot of cases of EB2-I with PDs of 2005/06 and EB3- I with PDs 2003/04 have recentely received LUDs/RFEs.
Let's wait what next visa bulletin says !
Any one else with recent LUDs on their I-485s ?
more...
kevinkris
07-14 01:23 PM
Conf Number: 7YB0F-K01XZ
hair desnudo de eugenio siller.
GayatriS
01-05 08:22 PM
I don't think there are contradictions. I have read his Businessweek articles. He is researching ways for America to remain competetive and believes that skilled immigrants who get permanent residence are the key.
Listen to the last minute of the video and you will see what his message is.
Listen to the last minute of the video and you will see what his message is.
more...
Caliber
03-12 01:12 PM
Here is my point. I spend several hours 3-4 hours at least every day looking through the forum posts hoping to find ways i can contribute to efforts. There are several ideas that are generated in the forum. But cannot find out who is leading it. All i am saying is if we can have a listing of initiatives with some names associated. So i can contribute to the ones that i can support. I am not sure if i am asking for too much here. I am not a IT guy. I do not know what it takes to post it in the front page.
Dear Vin,
Thanks for your inputs. What I am suggesting is that, every one of us should volunteer for our own good. If you can spend some time, I sugggest that, you send an email to IV core offering them your time so that you can share some of their work load.
Dear Vin,
Thanks for your inputs. What I am suggesting is that, every one of us should volunteer for our own good. If you can spend some time, I sugggest that, you send an email to IV core offering them your time so that you can share some of their work load.
hot desnudo de eugenio siller.
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
more...
house Roger Gonzalez
gaz
09-12 12:10 PM
three different ways of doing this
1) use a provider - http://www.balloonsbymail.com/
2) leave it to an act of God - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balloon_mail
3) hold a balloon protest (eg. http://washingtonsquarepark.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/report-back-from-washington-sq-park-balloon-protest-313/)
4) others?
Thats is also not a bad Idea. But how the logistic will work. i,e how we will inflate and deliver those balloons
1) use a provider - http://www.balloonsbymail.com/
2) leave it to an act of God - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balloon_mail
3) hold a balloon protest (eg. http://washingtonsquarepark.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/report-back-from-washington-sq-park-balloon-protest-313/)
4) others?
Thats is also not a bad Idea. But how the logistic will work. i,e how we will inflate and deliver those balloons
tattoo desnudo de eugenio siller. no
anurakt
12-18 02:32 PM
# nycgal369, Senior Member like you coming up with this idea...hmmm..
Do you think mass rallies by illegals has helped them? Did not it back fire? will be the same for us. Will not help. The question is not about being scared, its more about doing the right thing.
First of all, forget about back firing, can we get 100 people to do this. IV has been trying for funds and i dont think even 10% have contributed..why would u think any one would loose a pay day? even if you take 20$/hour i.e 160$ per day. Lot of members are not ready to contribute 50 bucks :) There might be a few who can not contribute due to various reasons and i totally sympathize with them but what about the remaining?
My point is not to discourage but just for a reality check
I completely agree.....
Do you think mass rallies by illegals has helped them? Did not it back fire? will be the same for us. Will not help. The question is not about being scared, its more about doing the right thing.
First of all, forget about back firing, can we get 100 people to do this. IV has been trying for funds and i dont think even 10% have contributed..why would u think any one would loose a pay day? even if you take 20$/hour i.e 160$ per day. Lot of members are not ready to contribute 50 bucks :) There might be a few who can not contribute due to various reasons and i totally sympathize with them but what about the remaining?
My point is not to discourage but just for a reality check
I completely agree.....
more...
pictures desnudo de eugenio siller.
jungalee43
04-29 06:50 PM
Senator Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts) - left voice mail
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) - left voice mail
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) -left voice mail
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming) - left voice mail
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) - it was not on my print out. But would call right away.
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada) - Spoke with staff. Could not escape noticing her "sigh" when I mentioned CIR. She asked if I was from Nevada. I said no. But still she patientely took my message. She said there was no official statement yet from the senator and would not tell his position.
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah) - engage. Nothing happened.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) - You must call during office hours. Cannot leave voice mail.
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas) - left voice mail
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky) - engage
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) - Voice mail
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) - Mail box full !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) - left voice mail
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) - left voice mail
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) - left voice mail. Here you hear prompt both in English as well as Spanish before you get the beep of the voice mail.
In every message I mentioned my name, address and phone numbers. Will call the Sen. Graham and sponsoring dems now. I will make another round of calls during office hours tomorrow.
And please the Fax link for guests. They should not be able to edit the mesasge. But must enter name and address. I can have at least 100 faxes sent.
Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) - left voice mail
Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) -left voice mail
Senator Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming) - left voice mail
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) - it was not on my print out. But would call right away.
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada) - Spoke with staff. Could not escape noticing her "sigh" when I mentioned CIR. She asked if I was from Nevada. I said no. But still she patientely took my message. She said there was no official statement yet from the senator and would not tell his position.
Senator Orin Hatch (R-Utah) - engage. Nothing happened.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) - You must call during office hours. Cannot leave voice mail.
Senator John Kyl (R-Texas) - left voice mail
Senator Mitch Mcconnell (R-Kentuky) - engage
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) - Voice mail
Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) - Mail box full !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) - left voice mail
Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) - left voice mail
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) - left voice mail. Here you hear prompt both in English as well as Spanish before you get the beep of the voice mail.
In every message I mentioned my name, address and phone numbers. Will call the Sen. Graham and sponsoring dems now. I will make another round of calls during office hours tomorrow.
And please the Fax link for guests. They should not be able to edit the mesasge. But must enter name and address. I can have at least 100 faxes sent.
dresses Eugenio Siller
cjain
08-10 04:34 PM
what time was your application received?
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
more...
makeup Eugenio Siller
pbojja
09-11 04:38 PM
Lets set the delivery date for Ocotober 2nd - Gandhi Jayanthi . I think thats the great day to express our opinion.
girlfriend Eugenio Siller
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.
hairstyles Eugenio Siller
amitjoey
05-06 04:18 PM
During previous phone call campaigns, our members came out w/huge numbers and were instrumental in getting the support. This I know because the Senators office phones were just constantly busy and once you started mentioning high skilled, they would know and finish your statements for you. This time though, that does not seem to be the case. Please, please step up. I just called 4 out of TIER 1 again.
Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
07-24 04:59 PM
Even if you are RN licenes and educated in the USA. You still need a visa screen. I had to apply for visa screen. In my case it took only 1 week to get it. you can apply on line and send your documents. I'm not sure about the EAD though. YOu may wwant to post your question on the free Consultaion thread.
www.cgfns.org
I have applied for my visascreen, but the lawyer is saying that EAD and probably the application may be denied! I thought that it is required at the later stages of the GC process.
Now please share the secret of HOW you got a visascreen in 1 week! I'm flabbergasted. This is the first I heard. Please share
www.cgfns.org
I have applied for my visascreen, but the lawyer is saying that EAD and probably the application may be denied! I thought that it is required at the later stages of the GC process.
Now please share the secret of HOW you got a visascreen in 1 week! I'm flabbergasted. This is the first I heard. Please share
lazycis
05-14 12:17 PM
No man.........I am waiting for the outcome.......In fact to be frank I am bracing myself for Writ of Mandamus Lawsuit.....frustration....
Congressman's liason may be able to help, but to be on the safe side, fork out $350 and dispute the denial in federal district court. It is different from mandamus, it's an agency action which is not in accordance with the law. Court filing may help you to preserve status/EAD/AP.
Congressman's liason may be able to help, but to be on the safe side, fork out $350 and dispute the denial in federal district court. It is different from mandamus, it's an agency action which is not in accordance with the law. Court filing may help you to preserve status/EAD/AP.
No comments:
Post a Comment