freddyCR
January 9th, 2005, 04:23 PM
Just returned from a relaxing week end at Jaco Beach, Pacific Ocean- Costa Rica .I saw quite a lot of beautiful sights. This is the first prize I got once I arrived.
I'd appreciate your comments. ;)
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/2555Dusk_at_Bohio_Street_-_Jaco_cr_med.jpg
I'd appreciate your comments. ;)
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/2555Dusk_at_Bohio_Street_-_Jaco_cr_med.jpg
wallpaper Improved workout performance
andy.thorne
08-02 08:57 AM
This is my first stamp...
kirupa
10-20 10:20 PM
Haha added :)
2011 during and after exercise.
kufloyd
03-11 01:04 PM
Hi,
Is it possible for a resident of Pune to apply for a tourist visa at the Hyderabad consulate? The Mumbai consulate doesn't seem to have any openings online, so not sure how to make an appt with the Mumbai consulate..
Thanks.
Is it possible for a resident of Pune to apply for a tourist visa at the Hyderabad consulate? The Mumbai consulate doesn't seem to have any openings online, so not sure how to make an appt with the Mumbai consulate..
Thanks.
more...
Blog Feeds
12-31 06:11 AM
Our current immigration system which forces parents to be separated from their children and husbands to be separated from their wives for years at a time is both cruel to immigrant families and unworthy of our country's proud heritage as a nation of immigrants. The immigration reform bill introduced by Representative Luis Gutierrez (D-IL.) and 90 co-sponsors on December 15 would improve the backlog-plagued family-based immigration system in a number of ways. We list some of the most significant changes below: 1) Immediate Relatives Would No Longer Be Subtracted from Preference Categories - Spouses, parents and children of U.S. citizens...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/12/how-immigration-reform-bill-would-change-family-based-immigration.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/12/how-immigration-reform-bill-would-change-family-based-immigration.html)
pappu
02-19 10:08 AM
/\/\
more...
Dr. Barry Post
03-31 10:56 PM
:snug:
2010 and after your workout.
Dhundhun
10-14 02:49 AM
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 1 May 2002 1 May 2002
FX 15 July 2001 15 July 2001
F2A 8 Februrary 2004 8 February 2004
F2B 15 January 2000 15 January 2000
F3 1 July 2000 1 July 2000
F4 22 July 1997 15 November 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 June 2003 Current
E3 1 October 2001 1 May 2005
EW 15 Janurary 2003 15 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
F1 1 May 2002 1 May 2002
FX 15 July 2001 15 July 2001
F2A 8 Februrary 2004 8 February 2004
F2B 15 January 2000 15 January 2000
F3 1 July 2000 1 July 2000
F4 22 July 1997 15 November 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 June 2003 Current
E3 1 October 2001 1 May 2005
EW 15 Janurary 2003 15 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
more...
amslonewolf
07-23 08:18 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicko
I watched Sicko last night. Quiet a disturbing movie, makes you wonder if all this waiting/delays/b.s makes sense at all??
I watched Sicko last night. Quiet a disturbing movie, makes you wonder if all this waiting/delays/b.s makes sense at all??
hair Use mainly efore (for extreme
x1050us
06-28 09:58 PM
My last H1 transfer gave me a 3yr H1 approval. But in reality, this will make it 1 year more than the 6 years allowed. My Perm and 140 are approved before the 6th year ended and my company filed a H1B amendment request just a day before 6th year ended. It is still pending. Now, my wife is in india and she has to get back here for filing 485 in july. Can I use my existing H1 to apply for visa in this situation?
more...
invincibleasian
02-19 05:19 PM
You can travel using AP only. No need to worry about visa stamp! But take your lawyers advice on this too!
hot capsules efore and after
starving_dog
06-01 02:23 PM
Yes here is the link... https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp
Make sure that you omit the dashes in your receipt number.
Make sure that you omit the dashes in your receipt number.
more...
house When is creatine mono taken best? efore or after workout?
kisana
06-09 08:11 AM
My wife is right now on H4 and having her EAD which will be expiring in another 2 months. She is not planning to work. Currently I am woking on H1B, soon I will be joing another employer on EAD. My question is it necessry for my wife to renew EAD even if she is not planning to use it. Once I swith on EAD what need to be done for my wife.
tattoo Post-workout creatine
raysaikat
04-28 02:06 AM
Dear Attorneys,
My freind is about to file I-140 application but his family is in India, does his family needs to be here during I-140 filing? if no when does the family need to be here ?
Please reply.
Thanks
At the time of I-485 filing (assuming that he is not choosing CP).
My freind is about to file I-140 application but his family is in India, does his family needs to be here during I-140 filing? if no when does the family need to be here ?
Please reply.
Thanks
At the time of I-485 filing (assuming that he is not choosing CP).
more...
pictures Creatine Before Or After
Ajaykumar
11-12 11:57 PM
Hi All,
Case:EB3
Priority Date: Sep 2004
Status: Labor & I-140 approved
EB2: Labor got approved November 2009.
I'm trying to file 1-140 amendment with EB3 priority date. Currently i'm thinking of going with Sheela Murthy/Rajiv Khanna,
could you please suggest some good attorney who can handle my case very well in a limited time? Thanks a lot and really
appreciate your help.
Regards,
Ajay
Case:EB3
Priority Date: Sep 2004
Status: Labor & I-140 approved
EB2: Labor got approved November 2009.
I'm trying to file 1-140 amendment with EB3 priority date. Currently i'm thinking of going with Sheela Murthy/Rajiv Khanna,
could you please suggest some good attorney who can handle my case very well in a limited time? Thanks a lot and really
appreciate your help.
Regards,
Ajay
dresses All I took was Creatine before
chanduv23
11-14 11:39 AM
No one joined the call - I will reschedule for next Sunday. Folks, please let me know if you want the call at a different time.
Thanks,
-Raj
You may want to post it on ur state chapter email list.
Thanks,
-Raj
You may want to post it on ur state chapter email list.
more...
makeup Post-workout creatine
willIWill
11-18 03:25 PM
I'm surprised no organization is following up with USCIS about the prompt monthly updates on pending Volumes. So much for the push for openess during the 90 day initiative by the President !
Going by the charts and Dashboard one would come to think the September volumes has whittled down to Zero !! Hmmm..
Going by the charts and Dashboard one would come to think the September volumes has whittled down to Zero !! Hmmm..
girlfriend After:
ragz4u
05-30 08:28 AM
Thanks a ton to Prabir for helping us out with this article. Thanks also to Dave Williams for writing this excellent article.
Dave heard about us through our Washington Post article and had contacted us via email. Prabir, who is from that area, willingly agreed to speak to him about issues faced by Legal High-Skilled immigrants
http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=32&url_subchannel_id=&url_article_id=15537&change_well_id=2
Dave heard about us through our Washington Post article and had contacted us via email. Prabir, who is from that area, willingly agreed to speak to him about issues faced by Legal High-Skilled immigrants
http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=32&url_subchannel_id=&url_article_id=15537&change_well_id=2
hairstyles creatine for working out.
Macaca
05-19 07:30 AM
A New Reality in Washington, but Can It Last? (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19assess.html) By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Six months after Republicans lost control of Congress, President Bush is learning the rules of a game that, for six years, he seemed to have forgotten: the Capitol Hill edition of �Let�s Make a Deal.�
In the last eight days alone, talks involving cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking White House officials have produced two surprises: a major compromise with Democrats on trade and Thursday�s fragile bipartisan accord on immigration. The question now is whether the sudden burst of deal-making will extend from these easier targets to the most intractable issue in Washington: the war in Iraq.
It is still far from clear whether the Bush administration and Congressional Democrats can be flexible enough to reach an accommodation on war spending � and indeed, the Iraq talks stumbled on Friday. What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.
�The president has become belatedly pragmatic,� said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. �I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he�s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.�
The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, who is the president�s lead negotiator on the Iraq bill, conceded in an interview earlier this week that it had been difficult for the administration to get accustomed to not controlling the legislative agenda.
Yet despite �a fair amount of substantive tension� in the relationship with Democrats, Mr. Bolten said, the immigration and trade deals have left him feeling encouraged.
�We have some ways to go,� he said, �but there is a process of confidence building that accumulates over time.�
Maybe so, but after six years of being virtually ignored by the administration, many Democrats remain wary. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, complained on Friday that the Bush White House had �never been very interested in anything except the way they wanted to do business.� Mr. Dorgan said he was not impressed with the fact, given the change of party power, that they are talking.
�That gives credit for low expectations,� he said.
Others, less in the thick of things, sounded more upbeat. Leon E. Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, said he had been concerned, once the Democrats took control of Congress, that �an awful lot of blood in the water� would prevent the parties from coming to terms on �low-hanging fruit� like immigration and trade.
In Mr. Panetta�s view, the talks are a good sign. �Whether it can go into bigger areas like the war remains to be seen,� he said. �But it clearly helps build at least a rapport that you absolutely need if you�re going to try to come to a deal.�
Mr. Bush, of course, is not the first president who was forced to come to grips with a new political reality after losing control of Congress. Mr. Clinton did just that after Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 1994. That loss created the political climate that enabled Mr. Clinton to make good on his promise to revamp the nation�s welfare system.
Likewise, the change in November has made it easier for Mr. Bush to pursue his trade agenda and his long-cherished goal of immigration overhaul.
In the trade deal, the administration�s unlikely partner was Representative Charles B. Rangel, the tough-talking Democrat from Harlem. The White House acceded to his demands for child labor and environmental protections in several pending trade pacts, a move that would have been unthinkable when Republicans controlled the House, because Mr. Rangel�s Republican predecessor as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Bill Thomas of California, would have blocked it.
On immigration, Mr. Bush�s position already seemed nearer that of Democrats than Republicans, and some in his own party are highly nervous about the deal. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, who was majority leader when Mr. Clinton was president, said Republicans would criticize the administration as giving away too much on immigration, just as Democrats criticized Mr. Clinton as giving away too much on welfare overhaul.
�But,� Mr. Lott said, �I would argue that the White House is coming to terms with the reality of the situation in Washington, and they don�t have any choice. We can all get into our partisan crouches and get nothing, or we can go through a process of responsible negotiations.�
Administration officials say both sides seem to be learning as they go. But Iraq is an area where Mr. Bush has been especially unwilling to yield. He has made clear he has little interest in sharing his power as commander in chief.
While Mr. Bush has been trying to strike a conciliatory tone � he said Thursday that he would accept benchmarks for the Iraqi government � the breakdown in talks on Friday was a reminder that Iraq is not immigration or trade, and the president will only go so far.
Some say the trade and immigration deals could actually work against compromise on Iraq. After cutting two big deals, Democrats and Republicans might not be inclined toward another one, for fear that they will look wishy-washy with their respective political bases.
On the other hand, one force pushing toward compromise is that neither side can afford to get blamed for holding back money from the troops. Even so, Mr. Panetta says it is too early to be optimistic.
�There�s some light at the end of the tunnel,� he said, ��but it could get dark real fast.�
crystal
08-04 01:09 PM
What is so unique?
Everything is answered here (not latest though)
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html
Everything is answered here (not latest though)
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html
HaveQuestions
04-07 10:11 PM
Hi,
My H1B is with USCIS and my employer has received an intent to revoke.
I am planning to go on H4 and my questions are
1) Can my employer file for a new H1B ANYTIME regardless of whether my H1B is revoked or not? I heard that since i am already counted against the cap, it doesnt matter when the H1B is filed, once approved i could start work immediately. Is this true?
Or this can be done only till my earlier H1B is not revoked? And if revoked i will have to file H1B against the 2011 quota and start work from October?
Appreciate any response!!
My H1B is with USCIS and my employer has received an intent to revoke.
I am planning to go on H4 and my questions are
1) Can my employer file for a new H1B ANYTIME regardless of whether my H1B is revoked or not? I heard that since i am already counted against the cap, it doesnt matter when the H1B is filed, once approved i could start work immediately. Is this true?
Or this can be done only till my earlier H1B is not revoked? And if revoked i will have to file H1B against the 2011 quota and start work from October?
Appreciate any response!!
No comments:
Post a Comment