ItIsNotFunny
07-18 01:26 PM
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/
Flowers have come out as a very good weapon for us. Lets not waste it using everywhere.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/atlanta-perm/4827173/last-page/
Flowers have come out as a very good weapon for us. Lets not waste it using everywhere.
wallpaper White mk3 Jetta
sammyb
11-16 04:21 PM
Oh, I nearly forgot, AND pigs must fly!
yes thats true .... but I guess only pig is not enough ... we need the whole animal kingdon fly before ....:D
yes thats true .... but I guess only pig is not enough ... we need the whole animal kingdon fly before ....:D
gvenkat
02-26 01:07 PM
- My 485 is filed more than 6 months ago
- My is 140 not approved yet
- I get laid off
- My employer doesn't revoke my 140
- I'm already in the 8th year of my H
So, I can go find another employer since I have my EAD and my 485 is filed for more than 180 days. Now, if my 140 is approved, no problem. If, however, my 140 gets an RFE or if my 140 is not too strong, I can find out alternatives including (but not limited to :-)) finding a decent job in my home country while I still have a job here in the US.
Is it logical or should I go take a nap? :p
Maverick_2008
please go take a nap.. 140 approval is key when u have long waits... :eek:
- My is 140 not approved yet
- I get laid off
- My employer doesn't revoke my 140
- I'm already in the 8th year of my H
So, I can go find another employer since I have my EAD and my 485 is filed for more than 180 days. Now, if my 140 is approved, no problem. If, however, my 140 gets an RFE or if my 140 is not too strong, I can find out alternatives including (but not limited to :-)) finding a decent job in my home country while I still have a job here in the US.
Is it logical or should I go take a nap? :p
Maverick_2008
please go take a nap.. 140 approval is key when u have long waits... :eek:
2011 Vw Mk3 Jetta - Audi Tuning
David C
November 25th, 2005, 01:11 AM
Both compositions have different things going for them - I think I lean slightly towards the dark one... Though I also feel the first one would have looked better to me if it had been a bit sharper in the centre (and the second, which does seem sharp enough at the top of the bloom, if the DOF had been a little wider) ??
more...
pappu
03-06 05:47 PM
Pankaj, can you organize the conf call and start activities. Others will join and help you.
howzatt
11-14 02:22 PM
As per my family experience: for my husband and daughter they issued EADs without
FP 3 weeks befor FP app-t, but mine EAD was ordered, as I've been informed by e-mail,
in a 4 days after FP was done.
So, even if Biometricals are not mandatory for EAD, but EAD Card has place for FP on it,
in some cases they(USCIS) may pretend that there are a requirements( depends from officer)
Does it have anything to do with how recently you travelled out of the country? or How recently you came into this country? My wife came to US only 6 months back and I am not sure if this has got to do anything with the whole biometrics thing?
It is probably just this IO who has a different intepretation of the rules.
FP 3 weeks befor FP app-t, but mine EAD was ordered, as I've been informed by e-mail,
in a 4 days after FP was done.
So, even if Biometricals are not mandatory for EAD, but EAD Card has place for FP on it,
in some cases they(USCIS) may pretend that there are a requirements( depends from officer)
Does it have anything to do with how recently you travelled out of the country? or How recently you came into this country? My wife came to US only 6 months back and I am not sure if this has got to do anything with the whole biometrics thing?
It is probably just this IO who has a different intepretation of the rules.
more...
prem_goel
12-03 10:15 PM
Many congratulations. I will appreciate if you can share your experience in detail.
1)The documents you carried along with you.
2)Hotel where you stayed
3)Did you have the tourist visa for mexico?
4)Did you get H1B for 3 years or less?
5)Questions VO asked.
Thanks.
1> just carried the usual documents required, job letter, tax returns, I-129, LCA, Paystubs etc. I also carried whatever documentation I could find for my previous employers like experience letter, last few paystubs etc. Also original of degrees/transcripts.
2> I stayed at Hotel Real Del Rio which is less than a minute walk from the consulate. It's right behind the consulate infact. Very nice hotel; courteous staff. Recommended you do booking through expedia ($70), although expedia will not charge your credit card but you can carry the printout which will get you that rate. If you book directly with the hotel, the rate's much higher (close to $100)
3> YEs, I got the tourist visa for mexico. Although nobody checked it anywhere, but I believe entering any country without valid visa/paperwork is illegal. Getting a mexican visa was very easy. You just go to the consulate/embassy, tell them you want to go to the US consulate in Tijuana for H-1b stamping. They issue you within the hour stamped. Cost about $36. Just get your H-1b petition with you for proof, and the appointment confirmation.
4> The validity of H-1b depends on the validity of the petition I-797. Whatever period you have that for, will be stamped.
5> He just asked me for job letter, asked me if I've applied for GC (I have), asked me that don't I have to work with them for a certain time (to which I replied I did and after I was eligible I changed employers using AC-21). He just read the job duties in my H-1B petition (most likely to check for any TAL related stuff). He remarked that inspite of my experience, my close-to-six-figure salary is a bit above slavery (to which I replied that I do get other benefits such as 401k, paid time-off, health/medical insurance etc.). He just asked some other questions such as what was my major in masters, how long I've been in US, had I worked in India, if so how long. I replied all of them. It appears he put that in the comments screen on his PC. And then he said he's approving it.
It was basically a bar-like casual conversation I had with him. Within a few seconds of my start of the interview with IO, I knew he'll approve my visa. so it was pretty cool all along the way.
1)The documents you carried along with you.
2)Hotel where you stayed
3)Did you have the tourist visa for mexico?
4)Did you get H1B for 3 years or less?
5)Questions VO asked.
Thanks.
1> just carried the usual documents required, job letter, tax returns, I-129, LCA, Paystubs etc. I also carried whatever documentation I could find for my previous employers like experience letter, last few paystubs etc. Also original of degrees/transcripts.
2> I stayed at Hotel Real Del Rio which is less than a minute walk from the consulate. It's right behind the consulate infact. Very nice hotel; courteous staff. Recommended you do booking through expedia ($70), although expedia will not charge your credit card but you can carry the printout which will get you that rate. If you book directly with the hotel, the rate's much higher (close to $100)
3> YEs, I got the tourist visa for mexico. Although nobody checked it anywhere, but I believe entering any country without valid visa/paperwork is illegal. Getting a mexican visa was very easy. You just go to the consulate/embassy, tell them you want to go to the US consulate in Tijuana for H-1b stamping. They issue you within the hour stamped. Cost about $36. Just get your H-1b petition with you for proof, and the appointment confirmation.
4> The validity of H-1b depends on the validity of the petition I-797. Whatever period you have that for, will be stamped.
5> He just asked me for job letter, asked me if I've applied for GC (I have), asked me that don't I have to work with them for a certain time (to which I replied I did and after I was eligible I changed employers using AC-21). He just read the job duties in my H-1B petition (most likely to check for any TAL related stuff). He remarked that inspite of my experience, my close-to-six-figure salary is a bit above slavery (to which I replied that I do get other benefits such as 401k, paid time-off, health/medical insurance etc.). He just asked some other questions such as what was my major in masters, how long I've been in US, had I worked in India, if so how long. I replied all of them. It appears he put that in the comments screen on his PC. And then he said he's approving it.
It was basically a bar-like casual conversation I had with him. Within a few seconds of my start of the interview with IO, I knew he'll approve my visa. so it was pretty cool all along the way.
2010 Pacific Waterland Mk3 Jetta
chris9902
06-12 07:41 PM
about as much as i want aids
more...
permfiling
12-22 09:56 AM
Non production of green cards needs to be taken up IV as a action item with USCIS
hair Re: VW Jetta Mk3/Vento
hibhagya
05-15 12:03 PM
Great job and hope the current immigrations bill will pass this year.
more...
krithi
02-04 08:11 AM
I am in similar situation but the only difference is I applied for 485 after graduating and currently working on EAD, can I visit India and come back on AP with no isses? and BTW what did ur attorney say exactly? appreciate ur help.
krithi
krithi
hot EGR H/G Vw Jetta Mk3
coopheal
11-26 03:11 PM
I am contributing $100 monthly. I will contribute additional $100 for the rally.
We are expecting our baby in March end so will not be able to come to DC.
We are expecting our baby in March end so will not be able to come to DC.
more...
house VW never made a mk3 jetta
Humhongekamyab
07-15 02:14 PM
All,
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Congrats buddy.
What is your priority date?
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Congrats buddy.
What is your priority date?
tattoo vw jetta mk3.
gc28262
07-16 06:44 PM
If you have an appointment letter and a relieving letter from your past employer, that should prove that you worked for that employer.
A detailed experience certificate as mentioned above could prove your experience in the specified skillset.
Here is another notarized affidavit format
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFFIDAVIT FROM CO-WORKER
I COLLEAGUE residing at COLLEAGUE''s ADDRESS being first duly sworn, depose and state that:
I was an employee of COMPANY NAME, COMPANY ADDRESS from Month-Day-Year to Month-Day-Year.
YOUR NAME was also an employee of company as a YOUR DESIGNATION around this time and I am aware of YOUR NAME�s responsibilities as we were colleagues.
His/Her duties during this period included YOUR SKILL SET HERE
If you need any more information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Colleagues� Name & Signature
Sworn to before me this on MM/DD/YYYY
(Notary Public's signature & seal)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A detailed experience certificate as mentioned above could prove your experience in the specified skillset.
Here is another notarized affidavit format
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFFIDAVIT FROM CO-WORKER
I COLLEAGUE residing at COLLEAGUE''s ADDRESS being first duly sworn, depose and state that:
I was an employee of COMPANY NAME, COMPANY ADDRESS from Month-Day-Year to Month-Day-Year.
YOUR NAME was also an employee of company as a YOUR DESIGNATION around this time and I am aware of YOUR NAME�s responsibilities as we were colleagues.
His/Her duties during this period included YOUR SKILL SET HERE
If you need any more information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Colleagues� Name & Signature
Sworn to before me this on MM/DD/YYYY
(Notary Public's signature & seal)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
more...
pictures vw mk3 jetta
siddar
09-04 11:09 AM
That means, after the forms signed, you got one year to apply for 485. Once applied, USCIS may request for another medical after 18 months.
This is my understanding....
This is my understanding....
dresses Jetta/Golf Mk1, Mk2, Mk3
Madhuri
02-25 11:11 AM
You can get EAD and AP when you apply for I 485. After you get EAD you can apply for SSN. Looks like you and your mom have not yet applied for I-485. If that's the case, then unfortunately you won't be eligible for FAFSA as per my knowledge. I may be wrong.
more...
makeup VW Jetta VR6 2.8L Mk3 Tuning
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
girlfriend rod#39;s Volkswagen Jetta
gsc999
01-25 08:18 PM
Great!
THAT is the spirit, thank you my friend!
The drive will happen on
all weekday evenings (5pm - 7pm)
between
Tuesday 1/29/2008- Friday 2/8/2008
Are you a part of the NorCal yahoogroup?
Thanks again!
THAT is the spirit, thank you my friend!
The drive will happen on
all weekday evenings (5pm - 7pm)
between
Tuesday 1/29/2008- Friday 2/8/2008
Are you a part of the NorCal yahoogroup?
Thanks again!
hairstyles Re: VW Jetta Mk3/Vento
glus
03-19 11:31 AM
GC is for future employment but I-140 is not GC. I-485 is Adjustment of status to Permanent resident (GC).
If you leave the company prior I-140 approval. I-140, I-485, EAD & AP are canceled.
If your I-140 is approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days, then and only then, you can switch company using AC21 while still keeping your I-485 pending.
Mind you, I-140 is not your application, it is employers!
See my previous statement. There is nothing in the law that states one needs to 'work' for a company when I140 is being processed. Period.
If you leave the company prior I-140 approval. I-140, I-485, EAD & AP are canceled.
If your I-140 is approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days, then and only then, you can switch company using AC21 while still keeping your I-485 pending.
Mind you, I-140 is not your application, it is employers!
See my previous statement. There is nothing in the law that states one needs to 'work' for a company when I140 is being processed. Period.
ItIsNotFunny
12-03 12:03 PM
Bump ^^^^
psam
03-09 07:31 PM
Hopefully you get a different officer. In my case they officer stamped I-551 on passport which was valid for six months for travel purpose and 1 year for employment.
Other online links suggest to talk with your congressperson so see if you get lucky.
Green Card Lost in the Mail - What to do When Your Green Card is Lost in the Mail (http://immigration.about.com/od/greencards/a/GreenCard_Lost.htm)
Other online links suggest to talk with your congressperson so see if you get lucky.
Green Card Lost in the Mail - What to do When Your Green Card is Lost in the Mail (http://immigration.about.com/od/greencards/a/GreenCard_Lost.htm)
No comments:
Post a Comment