prince_waiting
04-14 05:00 PM
hi prince,
regarding ur post, there is a correction.
holding an Approval notice alone is NOT a valid reason to bypass the transit visa in germany.
holding a valid visa or Adv parole is good . but not just an appr notice.
thanks
The text which I have posted on this forum is directly out of the email I received from the German Embassy helpline.
regarding ur post, there is a correction.
holding an Approval notice alone is NOT a valid reason to bypass the transit visa in germany.
holding a valid visa or Adv parole is good . but not just an appr notice.
thanks
The text which I have posted on this forum is directly out of the email I received from the German Embassy helpline.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. There#39;s one thing Nicki Minaj
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Nicki Minaj#39;s eye makeup Kim
anandrajesh
12-10 12:23 PM
^^^^^^
Bumping up this thread.
Bumping up this thread.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Nicki Minaj just debuted her
eb3retro
09-08 07:42 PM
Welcome to IV Immiram..
Hi all,
I know the Forums are still pretty active but is the IV Organisation itself still active?
I came across the IV website yesterday and was really stuck by the mission statement of the Organisation. I did not think twice - went ahead and got registered and made one time donation. I even voted for one of the polls for Sep 18 rally and making plans to visit DC but only to realise today that it was really old one :) Also when I was reviewing the forums today I realised that most of the activities seem to be around years 2006-2007 - like Fundraising Campaign or Media News ,etc.
Appreciate anyones response to let me know if IC is still active. Please do not direct any personal attacks. I did not need to explore GC info so far since my GC was started only during March of 2010 & got my Lc approved only yesterday.
If the organisation is still active, I am looking forward to joing the CT chapter. Thanks!
Hi all,
I know the Forums are still pretty active but is the IV Organisation itself still active?
I came across the IV website yesterday and was really stuck by the mission statement of the Organisation. I did not think twice - went ahead and got registered and made one time donation. I even voted for one of the polls for Sep 18 rally and making plans to visit DC but only to realise today that it was really old one :) Also when I was reviewing the forums today I realised that most of the activities seem to be around years 2006-2007 - like Fundraising Campaign or Media News ,etc.
Appreciate anyones response to let me know if IC is still active. Please do not direct any personal attacks. I did not need to explore GC info so far since my GC was started only during March of 2010 & got my Lc approved only yesterday.
If the organisation is still active, I am looking forward to joing the CT chapter. Thanks!
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Massive Attack 10. Rise Up
optimystic
09-29 08:43 PM
USCIS has updated the processing dates pages of all the four service centers on September 28. Now the pages say that these dates are valid as of July 31, 2008 only.
If I remember well the processing dates information was more up-to-date earlier.
So looks like CIS has backtracked from their earlier published dates. They are telling us that they simply cannot tell what the current processing dates are. All they can tell us is that what applications they were processing on July 31.
What can we deduce from this? Is it good? Is it bad? Or no relevance?
It could be good as CIS might be processing July 2007 485 applications as of today? Or may be not.
Simply more confusion, as if as it is we were not confused enough.
Its hard to gauge what they are trying to do here by mentioning that the processing dates are accurate only as of July 31, 2008. But just attempting to make a few guesses. I might be totally wrong though
- May be they are trying to cover up their silly, non-backable acts of swinging Processing Dates back and forth as a pendulum. And hence keep the web posting data perpetually at a older date, so that if some official corners them they can say "Oh, forget the web data, it is out of date. Here's the more updated *internal* info" . But at the same time to the general public , they can point to "Go look at the web data, I can't open a service request for you based on where the processing dates are at" and thus avoid all accountability and head aches of opening service requests etc.
- May be they are going to fast forward the dates now that the PDs are retrogressed and people can't file service requests left and right based on processing dates outside normal processing times.
If I remember well the processing dates information was more up-to-date earlier.
So looks like CIS has backtracked from their earlier published dates. They are telling us that they simply cannot tell what the current processing dates are. All they can tell us is that what applications they were processing on July 31.
What can we deduce from this? Is it good? Is it bad? Or no relevance?
It could be good as CIS might be processing July 2007 485 applications as of today? Or may be not.
Simply more confusion, as if as it is we were not confused enough.
Its hard to gauge what they are trying to do here by mentioning that the processing dates are accurate only as of July 31, 2008. But just attempting to make a few guesses. I might be totally wrong though
- May be they are trying to cover up their silly, non-backable acts of swinging Processing Dates back and forth as a pendulum. And hence keep the web posting data perpetually at a older date, so that if some official corners them they can say "Oh, forget the web data, it is out of date. Here's the more updated *internal* info" . But at the same time to the general public , they can point to "Go look at the web data, I can't open a service request for you based on where the processing dates are at" and thus avoid all accountability and head aches of opening service requests etc.
- May be they are going to fast forward the dates now that the PDs are retrogressed and people can't file service requests left and right based on processing dates outside normal processing times.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. New Video Nicki Minaj – Bigger
dilbert_cal
07-05 03:11 PM
You need to trust your company lawyer. Apprise him of the entire situation and he will guide you on how to proceed. In my opinion, until you get a RFE, you wont have to do anything.
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. nicki minaj and amber rose
Porch
08-28 02:29 PM
DO we need the latest pay stubs to extend the h1b from company A? Since I'm working for company B now, I'm little confused.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Minaj has generally remained
STAmisha
11-17 07:28 AM
Please share your experiences with this conversion?
what is the procedure?
what is the procedure?
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. rainbow eye makeup pics only!
pappu
12-13 01:05 PM
After giving the call for the meeting only one member responded and met me. If there is no active interest by members how can we all get things done. We need every member to participate in the effort. Together we can do it!!
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Massive Attack 10. Rise Up
Pagal
09-22 09:17 AM
Hello,
The cards and notices for my family did multiple rounds of 'undelivered' mail .... it is quite frustrating as the USPS doesn't fail to deliver any and all junk mail, but doesn't blink twice before sending back the USCIS communication as undeliverable ... wish they were equally prompt with junk mail as well! :rolleyes:
It took about 4-6 weeks to resolve the drama ... didn't open SR, just called the standard USCIS number and changed the address to that of my lawyer ... lawyer received one card, other came to my home address and some notices were sent to an address that I had in 2005!!! Didn't bother with returned notices (welcomes and card production ordered etc) ... have our cards now and have also traveled abroad and returned to US with new cards without any issue...
In short, it is a hit and miss game ... but normally, it all works out fine in the end...
The cards and notices for my family did multiple rounds of 'undelivered' mail .... it is quite frustrating as the USPS doesn't fail to deliver any and all junk mail, but doesn't blink twice before sending back the USCIS communication as undeliverable ... wish they were equally prompt with junk mail as well! :rolleyes:
It took about 4-6 weeks to resolve the drama ... didn't open SR, just called the standard USCIS number and changed the address to that of my lawyer ... lawyer received one card, other came to my home address and some notices were sent to an address that I had in 2005!!! Didn't bother with returned notices (welcomes and card production ordered etc) ... have our cards now and have also traveled abroad and returned to US with new cards without any issue...
In short, it is a hit and miss game ... but normally, it all works out fine in the end...
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. “Your Love” – Nicki Minaj
alterego
05-28 09:49 AM
As a quadruple renewer, let me share with you that the date on the EAD is from the point at which it is approved. You lose some time each year. Between myself and my wife we have had 8 and it has been the same each time.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Nicki Minaj (quot;Massive
Prashanthi
03-26 05:46 PM
The law is very clear in this matter, you can travel while an extension is pending you cannot travel if you have filed for a change of status.
Travel outside the United States while an extension of stay application is pending with the Service is not considered an abandonment of the application, and, as a result, the extension request may be granted notwithstanding the trip abroad. Keep in mind that the extension applicant may have problems returning to the U.S. if his or her visa has expired. In this cases, he or she will need to obtain a new H-1B nonimmigrant visa abroad before returning to the United States.
Travel outside the United States while an extension of stay application is pending with the Service is not considered an abandonment of the application, and, as a result, the extension request may be granted notwithstanding the trip abroad. Keep in mind that the extension applicant may have problems returning to the U.S. if his or her visa has expired. In this cases, he or she will need to obtain a new H-1B nonimmigrant visa abroad before returning to the United States.
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Nicki Minaj Drops By the “Late
sbmallik
06-12 03:30 PM
Yes, you can stay in US as long as your I-485 is pending. In order to work, you need EAD, which you can file at any point of time (even if the previous one gets expired). Please note that you have to wait for the I-765 approval before stating to work on EAD.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. nicki minaj and amber rose
akred
04-10 12:44 AM
Try Wells Fargo or Chase. They have been quite good about lending me money for a couple of rental properties.
Also ask them for rebates as they are eager to get business.
Another one I came across was Penfed.org. They may work for you since you seem to be borrowing for a primary residence.
Also ask them for rebates as they are eager to get business.
Another one I came across was Penfed.org. They may work for you since you seem to be borrowing for a primary residence.
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Massive Attack
missourian
11-05 08:08 PM
Texas IV group Goooooo!!!
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Above, from left: Nicki Minaj
raysaikat
12-19 08:16 PM
Thank you for replying.
I believe when I was young I entered with family visit visa, then I re-entered the country using a re entry visa. I assume both has expired for awhile now, although my I 94 doesn't state an expiration date, it stats "ans or status" Could you explain what that means?
You are probably reading the notation wrong - it is probably "and/or status".
In US immigration, there is a notion of "status" which basically means you do/live in US the way you promised the immigration officer at the time of entry. If you were entered as an F-1 student, then you remain a student in good standing; if you were entered as H1-B, you remain gainfully employed in the position (or a similar one) for which the H1-B was issued, etc.
The second notion is "unlawful presence", which basically means you are staying in US beyond the time the immigration officer allowed you to -- i.e., the date on I-94.
So it is possible to be out-of-status, but not unlawfully present (i.e., someone who entered on H1-B VISA stopped working even though his/her I-94 was valid for 6 more months).
If you remain in US "unlawfully" (i.e., after the date written on your I-94) for more than 6 months but less than 1 year, you get a 3 year ban on reentering US. If you stay in US unlawfully for more than 1 year, then you get a 10 year ban on reentering.
In your case, your I-94 seems to say the stay was valid until a date "X" and/or until you were in status. I am assuming that there is a date on I-94 even though you did not specify one. I am not familiar with that notation, so I am guessing. If the guess is correct, then that would mean that you started accruing "unlawful presence" from the date you became out-of-status and you were "old enough". As far as I remember, the "old enough" is 18 years old, but I could be wrong and it could be 21 years old.
To determine when you became out of status, you need to know what was the required status at the last entry. If your sole status was parolee (i.e., you used advanced parole based on your submitted I-485), then you became out-of-status whenever the I-485 was rejected. As far as I know, the appeals process allows you to live in US, but if the appeal fails, as it was your case, the date when the status became invalid does not advance.
So if you have no other VISA status as a dependent, then you are out-of-status. Assuming the I-94 expired long back, and that USCIS starts counting unlawful presence from your 18th birthday, then you have accrued unlawful days equal to your age in days minus 6574 days (counting leap-years ;) ).
You can apply for a college, and the college may give you I-20, based on which you can get an F-1 VISA. However, you would have to go to your "home country" to get the F-1 VISA stamp on your passport (and they may ban you depending on the number of days you were unlawfully present). Basically, the only way I know of for you to get a legal immigration status is to go out of the country and get back with a legal visa (and of course, risk being banned, or denied VISA for any other reason).
Your case is complex enough that you must seek advice from an immigration attorney before making any decision.
I believe when I was young I entered with family visit visa, then I re-entered the country using a re entry visa. I assume both has expired for awhile now, although my I 94 doesn't state an expiration date, it stats "ans or status" Could you explain what that means?
You are probably reading the notation wrong - it is probably "and/or status".
In US immigration, there is a notion of "status" which basically means you do/live in US the way you promised the immigration officer at the time of entry. If you were entered as an F-1 student, then you remain a student in good standing; if you were entered as H1-B, you remain gainfully employed in the position (or a similar one) for which the H1-B was issued, etc.
The second notion is "unlawful presence", which basically means you are staying in US beyond the time the immigration officer allowed you to -- i.e., the date on I-94.
So it is possible to be out-of-status, but not unlawfully present (i.e., someone who entered on H1-B VISA stopped working even though his/her I-94 was valid for 6 more months).
If you remain in US "unlawfully" (i.e., after the date written on your I-94) for more than 6 months but less than 1 year, you get a 3 year ban on reentering US. If you stay in US unlawfully for more than 1 year, then you get a 10 year ban on reentering.
In your case, your I-94 seems to say the stay was valid until a date "X" and/or until you were in status. I am assuming that there is a date on I-94 even though you did not specify one. I am not familiar with that notation, so I am guessing. If the guess is correct, then that would mean that you started accruing "unlawful presence" from the date you became out-of-status and you were "old enough". As far as I remember, the "old enough" is 18 years old, but I could be wrong and it could be 21 years old.
To determine when you became out of status, you need to know what was the required status at the last entry. If your sole status was parolee (i.e., you used advanced parole based on your submitted I-485), then you became out-of-status whenever the I-485 was rejected. As far as I know, the appeals process allows you to live in US, but if the appeal fails, as it was your case, the date when the status became invalid does not advance.
So if you have no other VISA status as a dependent, then you are out-of-status. Assuming the I-94 expired long back, and that USCIS starts counting unlawful presence from your 18th birthday, then you have accrued unlawful days equal to your age in days minus 6574 days (counting leap-years ;) ).
You can apply for a college, and the college may give you I-20, based on which you can get an F-1 VISA. However, you would have to go to your "home country" to get the F-1 VISA stamp on your passport (and they may ban you depending on the number of days you were unlawfully present). Basically, the only way I know of for you to get a legal immigration status is to go out of the country and get back with a legal visa (and of course, risk being banned, or denied VISA for any other reason).
Your case is complex enough that you must seek advice from an immigration attorney before making any decision.
more...
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Nicki Minaj hairstyle makeup
prabasiodia
05-25 01:49 PM
Also ask/inquire about whistleblower protection while filing your complaint. There should be valid reasons for lay-off but filing complaint against the employer with DOL is definitely not one among them.
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Yesterday, Nicki Minaj hit up
sku
12-31 12:43 AM
Bump
nicki minaj massive attack makeup. Nicki Minaj Bedrock Makeup
ultimate_champ
11-29 11:14 AM
After showing all the documentation and the AC21 law links to USCIS site, my lawyer and immig dept agree that 03-Aug-2007 is my receipt date.
so my 180 days start from 03-Aug-2007. Quite a relief for me.
On the other side, I already lost out on 1 opportunity coz they took so much time to get back with the answer. I hope something clicks in the near future.
Thanks for the forum feedbacks and answers. This really helped.
so my 180 days start from 03-Aug-2007. Quite a relief for me.
On the other side, I already lost out on 1 opportunity coz they took so much time to get back with the answer. I hope something clicks in the near future.
Thanks for the forum feedbacks and answers. This really helped.
shined129
07-19 09:36 PM
Now that the immigration reform for undocumented workers has broken down, is there any way that we can lobby congress to turn their attention to the plight of the skilled worker? The mess created by DOS will result in the worse backlog ever and the longest wait for post June filers. Congress can at least take steps to resolve this by raising the cap for the employment based visas and making it possible for unused visas in previous years to roll over. I also hope that USCIS will increase the human resource base with their higher fees to accomodate the flurry of applications flying in now. How do we get congress to pay attention? Please let discuss this and act.
LostInGCProcess
11-14 02:57 PM
Another example of how inefficient USCIS is. I have applied my EAD in Aug 28th, did the FP in Sept 22, case still pending. I sent to Texas Service center.
Which center did you file your EAD?
Which center did you file your EAD?
No comments:
Post a Comment