Almond
07-13 08:51 PM
I think it will change to green if someone likes you enough to vote for you:)
wallpaper 2010 drill hair japanese
485Mbe4001
05-14 07:09 PM
Thanks guys for all the hard work and continuing efforts.
When i started jumping up and down, my lawyers gently reminded me that my PD will be current on June 1 and not as of today :p
When i started jumping up and down, my lawyers gently reminded me that my PD will be current on June 1 and not as of today :p
cdeneo
04-02 10:31 PM
The new employer does need to support you thru the GC process, again unclear if this is something that is needed in the AC21 letter or not.
The main thing per my understanding is that AC21 does not apply to contract positions - one would hope that the previous employer does not revoke the I-140 petition causing a NOID/RFE.
My question still stands - if the sponsoring employer revokes the approved I-140 petition post 180 days of 485 filing - this would cause problems if the person has taken up a contract position on EAD unless one can respond to the NOID/RFE stating a full time offer in hand for future employment, etc.
It is not very clear if the new employer needs to explicitly state that they would like to continue your GC. I understand that a major chunk of employers will have reservation stating this in an offer letter.
My understanding is that to invoke AC21, employer needs to provide an offer letter for a full time position. Please clarify.
The main thing per my understanding is that AC21 does not apply to contract positions - one would hope that the previous employer does not revoke the I-140 petition causing a NOID/RFE.
My question still stands - if the sponsoring employer revokes the approved I-140 petition post 180 days of 485 filing - this would cause problems if the person has taken up a contract position on EAD unless one can respond to the NOID/RFE stating a full time offer in hand for future employment, etc.
It is not very clear if the new employer needs to explicitly state that they would like to continue your GC. I understand that a major chunk of employers will have reservation stating this in an offer letter.
My understanding is that to invoke AC21, employer needs to provide an offer letter for a full time position. Please clarify.
2011 Japan, Dog Surgeries, Red Hair, and Tweets from Ray **********ing Toro
morchu
05-14 12:09 PM
Thanks for pointing this out (Hernandez letter).
It is new information to me.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
It is new information to me.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
more...
makemygc
07-18 11:56 AM
some people r thinking of flower campaign to atlanta center so as to speed up slowed down processin. if anyone is interested...
http://www..com/discussion-forums/atlanta-perm/4827173/last-page/
I don't think it's going to work again plus its only going to annoy people at USCIS as they have to assign someone to accept and trash those flowers.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/atlanta-perm/4827173/last-page/
I don't think it's going to work again plus its only going to annoy people at USCIS as they have to assign someone to accept and trash those flowers.
Rockford
07-17 02:23 PM
What's the point of starting a new thread to throw in your opinion?
Servers and all members are already very stressed.
To begin with, it is not my opinion. It is an excerpt from other web site and I gave the link.
This is new thread because it is different info than the popular belief here that there is going to be a definite relief.
Hope you understand :)
Servers and all members are already very stressed.
To begin with, it is not my opinion. It is an excerpt from other web site and I gave the link.
This is new thread because it is different info than the popular belief here that there is going to be a definite relief.
Hope you understand :)
more...
dvb
12-14 11:40 AM
- My port of entry was Minneapolis/St. Paul.
- Remember to please take ALL originals of the AP that you have (let the officer sort out what to do with them).
- I had I-485 application receipt (or take a copy if you do not have the original) just in case (I did not need it, but why not!).
- Remember to please take ALL originals of the AP that you have (let the officer sort out what to do with them).
- I had I-485 application receipt (or take a copy if you do not have the original) just in case (I did not need it, but why not!).
2010 Japan, Dog Surgeries, Red Hair
alg
12-11 01:47 PM
The first time, my husband and I were asked all kinds of questions by the secondary CIS officer at LAX, and was asked NOT to do our own copies of the original AP, that we are not supposed to do copies of official documents. He kept and use our copies anyway. The stamp in the AP extended it for a year after this entry.
Two weeks later, upon arriving again at LAX, the secondary CIS officer did not ask any questions and did not make copies of the AP. We just got another stamp on the original one extending its validity again for one year from date of entry. It went pretty fast.
Two weeks later, upon arriving again at LAX, the secondary CIS officer did not ask any questions and did not make copies of the AP. We just got another stamp on the original one extending its validity again for one year from date of entry. It went pretty fast.
more...
amitjoey
07-13 05:24 PM
That means you have no reputation at all :D :D :D .. kidding.
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
hair elegant hair styles magazines
hopefulgc
08-21 11:26 AM
Man, I lost my patience with them long back.
My case is NSC-EAC-NSC
I keep a log of anything "useful" I am told every time I speak to them. And usually, the first few mins are wasted in them giving me wrong info, me telling them what they told me last time and them finally agreeing with it after re-checking their screens.
btw .. it is indeed super-frustrating and unacceptable they way they are bouncing your case around.
Why is USCIS forgetting that we are paying for their third grade services?
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
My case is NSC-EAC-NSC
I keep a log of anything "useful" I am told every time I speak to them. And usually, the first few mins are wasted in them giving me wrong info, me telling them what they told me last time and them finally agreeing with it after re-checking their screens.
btw .. it is indeed super-frustrating and unacceptable they way they are bouncing your case around.
Why is USCIS forgetting that we are paying for their third grade services?
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
more...
GLIX
02-22 06:14 AM
it was already at july 13, 2006, now it's back at june? how could that happen?:confused:
hot dresses japanese long
NikNikon
May 24th, 2005, 09:21 AM
Cool, I learned something new today. I guess I knew the concept of the polarizer but had yet to learn all of the ins and outs. Thanks Josh.
Linear vs. Circular has mainly to do with whether it works with metering and autofocus sensors in modern cameras. Both polarizers rotate and function similarly (I'm not sure if there is any difference in the effect shown in the image, but I doubt it).
Anyway, an unevenly polarized sky happens not because the polarizer is not rotated properly / enough, but rather because the camera is not quite at a 90 degree angle to the sun; this uneven polarization becomes more noticeable with wide angle lenses (to a point, then as even wider lenses are used, the sky will get dark in the middle and lighter on the edges even right at 90 degrees from the sun).
Linear vs. Circular has mainly to do with whether it works with metering and autofocus sensors in modern cameras. Both polarizers rotate and function similarly (I'm not sure if there is any difference in the effect shown in the image, but I doubt it).
Anyway, an unevenly polarized sky happens not because the polarizer is not rotated properly / enough, but rather because the camera is not quite at a 90 degree angle to the sun; this uneven polarization becomes more noticeable with wide angle lenses (to a point, then as even wider lenses are used, the sky will get dark in the middle and lighter on the edges even right at 90 degrees from the sun).