nixstor
07-01 12:46 PM
Those who are just watching others call, please make the call. 200 is nothing.
If you are from Austin or SA, make that call now. It does not take more than 2 minutes.
We have meetings with Rep Smith's office(s) and all your calls will make an impact on the outcome.
If you are from Austin or SA, make that call now. It does not take more than 2 minutes.
We have meetings with Rep Smith's office(s) and all your calls will make an impact on the outcome.
wallpaper Kim Kardashian videos, photos
kak1978
06-26 09:57 AM
Damn, Mine and my wife's EAD got approved in 20 days!!(Paper filed on 6/5/2008), misssed the 2 year EAD by couple of days. :(:) I wonder, if we can call them and ask for 2 years EAD.
don't know if i had to cry or smile on this one.
don't know if i had to cry or smile on this one.
dvb123
01-11 11:00 PM
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:YQ8A5L4qUTMJ:www.shsu.edu/~kmd007/documents/WinFSHD2Userskmd007ArticlesDouglas-NationalOriginsSystem-1.pdf+supreme+court+national+origins+quota+1924&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AHIEtbT24Qc157BZXxEE8b4o6Fcrv-YXTw
Consequences of the
National Origins Act
The goal of the National Origins Act was to control
both the quantity and quality of U.S. immigrants in an
effort to prevent further erosion of the ethnic composi-
tion of U.S. society. The law accomplished this goal
using three mechanisms: capping the overall number of
immigrants allowed into the United States in a given
month and year; favoring immigrants from certain
countries; and screening out otherwise qualified immi-
grants as unsuitable to the United States during the visa
screening process. The sorting mechanism heavily
favored northern and western European countries. The
temporary formula of 2% of the foreign-born of each
nationality in the 1890 census gave 85% of the quotas
to northern and western European nations. The national
origins system fully implemented in 1929 continued
the trend of both overall restriction and nation bias.
Indeed, the act virtually halted all immigration from
southern and eastern Europe. Thus, European immigra-
tion dropped from more than 800,000 in 1921 to less
than 150,000 by the end of the decade.
In addition to controlling the volume of immigra-
tion from Europe, the National Origins Act also
allowed a mechanism for selection of immigrants as
well. In its creation of consular offices abroad, the act
provided a frontline screening mechanism for select-
ing out those deemed unsuitable for the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001981----000-.html
� 1981. Equal rights under the law
How Current is This? (a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_IX.html
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER IX > � 2000h–2Prev | Next � 2000h–2. Intervention by Attorney General; denial of equal protection on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin
How Current is This? Whenever an action has been commenced in any court of the United States seeking relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws under the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, the Attorney General for or in the name of the United States may intervene in such action upon timely application if the Attorney General certifies that the case is of general public importance.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_I.html
PART THREE
ORGANISATIONS TO CONTACT - IV CORE PLs endorse this so that a few members will help me. OTHER MEMBERS CAN FORM GROUPS AND CONTACT THESE OFFICES.
American Immigration Council
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005-3141
Tel.: 202-507-7500
Fax: 202-742-5619
Carl Shusterman
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
600 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel (213) 623-4592 Fax (213) 623-3720
National Origin, Immigration and Language Rights Program
The Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center
600 Harrison Street, Suite 120
San Francisco, CA 94107
Telephone (415) 864-8848
Fax: (415) 864-8199
TTY/TDD Line: (415) 593-0091
Email: info@las-elc.org
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004 USA
Phone: (212) 344-3005
URL: http://www.aclu.org/
Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO)
14 Pidegon Hill Drive, Suite 500
0 Sterling, VA> 20165 USA
Phone: (703) 421-5443
Fax: (703) 421-6401
E-Mail: comment@ceousa.org
URL: http://www.ceousa.org/
Primary Contact: Linda Chavez, President
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
1801 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20507
Phone: (202) 663-4900
URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Phone: (410) 521-4939
URL: http://www.naacp.org/
E-Mail: members@naacp.org
PART TWO
LEGAL RESEARCH - EVERYBODY CAN CONTRIBUTE ABOUT COURT CASES, PRECEDENTS ETC AND I WILL TRY TO CONSOLIDATE ALL THE REPLIES HERE
Different Supreme Court Decisions
http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/race-discrimination/race-discrimination-history.html
Gratz v. Bollinger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1
Bakke vs Regents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakke_v._Regents
Supreme Court Opinions
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/20.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/30.html
Articles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-04-20-supreme-court_N.htm
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/racial-discrimination#constitutional-protection-against-racial
PART ONE
This is an old topic but I thought I would post some interesting info that I found. Give me green before someone drowns me in red.
Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection)
The Supreme Court has defined these levels of scrutiny in the following way:
Strict scrutiny (if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right): the law is unconstitutional unless it is "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest. In addition, there cannot be a "less restrictive" alternative available to achieve that compelling interest.
In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race not as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic.
In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in Grutter, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny.[30]
One law firm I found dealing with Federal Litigation. There maybe many.
http://www.vblaw.com/PracticeAreas/Federal-Litigation-Appeals.asp
Should we not look at this option when Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-LT-Mexico-US-Migration.html
Antis are ahead of us in taking lawsuits to supreme court
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/tech-workers-take-h-1b-case-supreme-court-024
OPINION JULY 1, 2009 The Supreme Court Says No To Quotas
Residents in a burning building want competent firefighters. They don't care about the race of those whose job it is to save them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640586803076705.html
VERY INTERSTING ARTICLES ABOUT THIS PER COUNTRY QUOTAS
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846255,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula
The 1921 Emergency Quota Act restricted immigration to 3% of foreign-born persons of each nationality resident in the United States in 1910.
The Immigration Act of 1924 provided that for three years immigration will be restricted to 2% based on the census of 1890, and that after June 30, 1927, total immigration from all countries will be limited to 150,000 based upon national origins of white inhabitants as shown by the census of 1920.
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses
http://homepage3.nifty.com/ubiquitous/Japanese-Americans_E/Page05.htm
Consequences of the
National Origins Act
The goal of the National Origins Act was to control
both the quantity and quality of U.S. immigrants in an
effort to prevent further erosion of the ethnic composi-
tion of U.S. society. The law accomplished this goal
using three mechanisms: capping the overall number of
immigrants allowed into the United States in a given
month and year; favoring immigrants from certain
countries; and screening out otherwise qualified immi-
grants as unsuitable to the United States during the visa
screening process. The sorting mechanism heavily
favored northern and western European countries. The
temporary formula of 2% of the foreign-born of each
nationality in the 1890 census gave 85% of the quotas
to northern and western European nations. The national
origins system fully implemented in 1929 continued
the trend of both overall restriction and nation bias.
Indeed, the act virtually halted all immigration from
southern and eastern Europe. Thus, European immigra-
tion dropped from more than 800,000 in 1921 to less
than 150,000 by the end of the decade.
In addition to controlling the volume of immigra-
tion from Europe, the National Origins Act also
allowed a mechanism for selection of immigrants as
well. In its creation of consular offices abroad, the act
provided a frontline screening mechanism for select-
ing out those deemed unsuitable for the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001981----000-.html
� 1981. Equal rights under the law
How Current is This? (a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_IX.html
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER IX > � 2000h–2Prev | Next � 2000h–2. Intervention by Attorney General; denial of equal protection on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin
How Current is This? Whenever an action has been commenced in any court of the United States seeking relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws under the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, the Attorney General for or in the name of the United States may intervene in such action upon timely application if the Attorney General certifies that the case is of general public importance.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_I.html
PART THREE
ORGANISATIONS TO CONTACT - IV CORE PLs endorse this so that a few members will help me. OTHER MEMBERS CAN FORM GROUPS AND CONTACT THESE OFFICES.
American Immigration Council
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005-3141
Tel.: 202-507-7500
Fax: 202-742-5619
Carl Shusterman
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
600 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel (213) 623-4592 Fax (213) 623-3720
National Origin, Immigration and Language Rights Program
The Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center
600 Harrison Street, Suite 120
San Francisco, CA 94107
Telephone (415) 864-8848
Fax: (415) 864-8199
TTY/TDD Line: (415) 593-0091
Email: info@las-elc.org
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004 USA
Phone: (212) 344-3005
URL: http://www.aclu.org/
Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO)
14 Pidegon Hill Drive, Suite 500
0 Sterling, VA> 20165 USA
Phone: (703) 421-5443
Fax: (703) 421-6401
E-Mail: comment@ceousa.org
URL: http://www.ceousa.org/
Primary Contact: Linda Chavez, President
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
1801 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20507
Phone: (202) 663-4900
URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Phone: (410) 521-4939
URL: http://www.naacp.org/
E-Mail: members@naacp.org
PART TWO
LEGAL RESEARCH - EVERYBODY CAN CONTRIBUTE ABOUT COURT CASES, PRECEDENTS ETC AND I WILL TRY TO CONSOLIDATE ALL THE REPLIES HERE
Different Supreme Court Decisions
http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/race-discrimination/race-discrimination-history.html
Gratz v. Bollinger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1
Bakke vs Regents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakke_v._Regents
Supreme Court Opinions
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/20.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/30.html
Articles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-04-20-supreme-court_N.htm
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/racial-discrimination#constitutional-protection-against-racial
PART ONE
This is an old topic but I thought I would post some interesting info that I found. Give me green before someone drowns me in red.
Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection)
The Supreme Court has defined these levels of scrutiny in the following way:
Strict scrutiny (if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right): the law is unconstitutional unless it is "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest. In addition, there cannot be a "less restrictive" alternative available to achieve that compelling interest.
In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race not as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic.
In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in Grutter, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny.[30]
One law firm I found dealing with Federal Litigation. There maybe many.
http://www.vblaw.com/PracticeAreas/Federal-Litigation-Appeals.asp
Should we not look at this option when Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-LT-Mexico-US-Migration.html
Antis are ahead of us in taking lawsuits to supreme court
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/tech-workers-take-h-1b-case-supreme-court-024
OPINION JULY 1, 2009 The Supreme Court Says No To Quotas
Residents in a burning building want competent firefighters. They don't care about the race of those whose job it is to save them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640586803076705.html
VERY INTERSTING ARTICLES ABOUT THIS PER COUNTRY QUOTAS
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846255,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula
The 1921 Emergency Quota Act restricted immigration to 3% of foreign-born persons of each nationality resident in the United States in 1910.
The Immigration Act of 1924 provided that for three years immigration will be restricted to 2% based on the census of 1890, and that after June 30, 1927, total immigration from all countries will be limited to 150,000 based upon national origins of white inhabitants as shown by the census of 1920.
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses
http://homepage3.nifty.com/ubiquitous/Japanese-Americans_E/Page05.htm
2011 The color really suits her
walking_dude
09-20 02:20 PM
Ans - I KNOW NOTHING
....
Does any one know how much IV collets in recurring contributions? How much did we collect for the DC rally and how much did we spend?
....
Does any one know how much IV collets in recurring contributions? How much did we collect for the DC rally and how much did we spend?
more...
gcdedo
07-06 10:31 AM
Does anybody knows when this bill is going to be discussed in the House?
kondur_007
09-23 10:37 AM
I found this on shusterman's regarding obama's views on immigration. Looks like he is all for family based immigration but no mention about employment based.
http://shusterman.com/pdf/obama908.pdf
That's where the "vote bank" is my friend...
I will be little blunt here but will say this:
Ask yourself this question: (assume that you are american born person and are advisor to one of the campaigns): What will help you politically? Supporting skilled EB immigrants (140k per year, who will not be able to vote for at least next five years) or FB immigrants (860k per year, who may also not be able to vote for next five years) or no immigrants (join the part of Loo Doggs and count on may be 1-2 percent of population who may support them which would be 3-6 million votes).
In nutshell, from the perspecitive of politicians, it is never a good deal to support EB immigration; the only incentive for them is the money they get from big companies like microsoft, IBM, google etc. And this is not enough to land us anywhere. Only a very few politician (like sen Lofgren) work for their principles, rest is all vote bank; that's why horses are more important than us.
I am a little bit bitter here, but it is time to understand this reality and consider our strategy accordingly; espeicially for the possible CIR next year.
http://shusterman.com/pdf/obama908.pdf
That's where the "vote bank" is my friend...
I will be little blunt here but will say this:
Ask yourself this question: (assume that you are american born person and are advisor to one of the campaigns): What will help you politically? Supporting skilled EB immigrants (140k per year, who will not be able to vote for at least next five years) or FB immigrants (860k per year, who may also not be able to vote for next five years) or no immigrants (join the part of Loo Doggs and count on may be 1-2 percent of population who may support them which would be 3-6 million votes).
In nutshell, from the perspecitive of politicians, it is never a good deal to support EB immigration; the only incentive for them is the money they get from big companies like microsoft, IBM, google etc. And this is not enough to land us anywhere. Only a very few politician (like sen Lofgren) work for their principles, rest is all vote bank; that's why horses are more important than us.
I am a little bit bitter here, but it is time to understand this reality and consider our strategy accordingly; espeicially for the possible CIR next year.
more...
mohican
01-15 09:16 AM
Hi RajuSeattle--
You nailed it man. As i said in my post yesterday what you described so well is exactly what happened and so my explanation of just 140 substitution was not accurate.
Please note the response I got from the attorney of my previous employer (the one who revoked)
This is exactly what I previously explained and what XX verified for you. The I-140 was revoked/withdrawn and the labor certification was substituted. If only the I-140 had been revoked/withdrawn then you would still be portable. However, as XX confirmed, the company used the case to substitute another employee.
Clearly the ex-employer and USCIS are at fault. I have the approved I140 and to date on my uscis portfolio it states that my I140 was approved in Feb 2005. I changed jobs in June 2006.
I am so &^^%$#@ tired, that if this does not work....I am going back. Enough is enough.
Mohican,
From your I-485 denial notice and reading some of your posts in this forum it appears that the underlying I-140 petition has been revoked by your previous employer.
I dont think they substitute it for some other employee, their is no such concept as using the approved I-140 of a individual employee to use it for another employee.
Theis is the possibility that they revoked your I-140 and used the underlying approved Labor certification for another employee, or if they have any grudge
or for some other reason revoked your approved I-140.
If you were holding an approved I-140 and changed your job after 180 days of filing your I-485, then you have good chances of winning MTR.
Please consult attorney Murthy or Rajeev Khanna. I heard they are good at handling these type of situations.
Make sure you have the valid job in a similar profession as what your labor states and your are in legal status (H1B) with the current employer.
Technically you can not use EAD until they restore your I-485 petition.
Wish you good luck and hope you will have a successful outcome.
You nailed it man. As i said in my post yesterday what you described so well is exactly what happened and so my explanation of just 140 substitution was not accurate.
Please note the response I got from the attorney of my previous employer (the one who revoked)
This is exactly what I previously explained and what XX verified for you. The I-140 was revoked/withdrawn and the labor certification was substituted. If only the I-140 had been revoked/withdrawn then you would still be portable. However, as XX confirmed, the company used the case to substitute another employee.
Clearly the ex-employer and USCIS are at fault. I have the approved I140 and to date on my uscis portfolio it states that my I140 was approved in Feb 2005. I changed jobs in June 2006.
I am so &^^%$#@ tired, that if this does not work....I am going back. Enough is enough.
Mohican,
From your I-485 denial notice and reading some of your posts in this forum it appears that the underlying I-140 petition has been revoked by your previous employer.
I dont think they substitute it for some other employee, their is no such concept as using the approved I-140 of a individual employee to use it for another employee.
Theis is the possibility that they revoked your I-140 and used the underlying approved Labor certification for another employee, or if they have any grudge
or for some other reason revoked your approved I-140.
If you were holding an approved I-140 and changed your job after 180 days of filing your I-485, then you have good chances of winning MTR.
Please consult attorney Murthy or Rajeev Khanna. I heard they are good at handling these type of situations.
Make sure you have the valid job in a similar profession as what your labor states and your are in legal status (H1B) with the current employer.
Technically you can not use EAD until they restore your I-485 petition.
Wish you good luck and hope you will have a successful outcome.
2010 new hair color is great.
ramboom1
03-17 08:51 AM
H4 - must be allowed to work. American economy does not differenciate between an American and a legal alien. We all pay the same rent, same tax, same price for car. When our H4 spouses cannot work, we have to totally depend on one salary. In case of emergencies we hit rock bottom economically. Quite obviously our quality of life is compromised.
But what do we do about it?
Is this one of the goals of IV?
But what do we do about it?
Is this one of the goals of IV?
more...
gc_on_demand
05-17 11:58 AM
It took 30 sec with saved browser data.. Nice job.. I will forward to all my friends.
hair kim kardashian hair color. kim
Almond
07-05 11:44 AM
I agree..calling USCIS customer service doesn't make any sense.They are all front desk people who have no clue of what's happening inside.
Of course it makes sense, that is why they are called "Customer Service". Continuing to call them at this time when we know they know NOTHING doesn't make sense. But it sure is funny to hear the crap they have to say:D
Of course it makes sense, that is why they are called "Customer Service". Continuing to call them at this time when we know they know NOTHING doesn't make sense. But it sure is funny to hear the crap they have to say:D
more...
h4visa
03-16 04:04 PM
I totally agree with you. Infact the link posted (http://groups.google.com/group/misc.immigration.usa/browse_thread/thread/41098d828d41ad3a/6c4782cc627fd7ad?lnk=st&q=sinum70&rnum=1&hl=en#6c4 782cc627fd7ad) is quite interesting. The problem is, most of the women population on H-4 here have never thought of taking it up. Infact they should take the initiative and the husbands should cooperate. Its a genuine and serious topic. when u have talent in the country, then why not use it...? One should post these discussions in Murthy.com or many other sites as well which has got good number of hits... so that its raised today or tomorrow...
hot kim kardashian hair color 2011. kim kardashian hair color 2011
alterego
11-07 10:28 PM
Looks like the Leadership of the house is changing.
Interestingly I heard one of the republican commentators comment that whatever happens, including if the republicans lose there will be a change in the house minority republican leadership, he was putting forward people like Pence and Shadegg as the new leaders(they have been pro SKIL bill). In other words, No Hastert, No Sensenbrenner etc in the committees.
Interestingly in the districts that republicans ran anti-immigrant platform, they lost badly. One of the bellweathers districts for that in Arizona, Candidate Graf(who got the republican nomination by his very hard anti illegal immigration platform) lost heavily to a democrat who is pro CIR. There are many more such examples (Sen. Santorum is another example). Thse results bode well for legislation as long as the issue comes up for debate again in this congressional year.
Who knows, now the house republicans might even be willing to consider it in the lame duck session, as atleast they will get to have some say in it. Will be interesting in the next few months.
Interestingly I heard one of the republican commentators comment that whatever happens, including if the republicans lose there will be a change in the house minority republican leadership, he was putting forward people like Pence and Shadegg as the new leaders(they have been pro SKIL bill). In other words, No Hastert, No Sensenbrenner etc in the committees.
Interestingly in the districts that republicans ran anti-immigrant platform, they lost badly. One of the bellweathers districts for that in Arizona, Candidate Graf(who got the republican nomination by his very hard anti illegal immigration platform) lost heavily to a democrat who is pro CIR. There are many more such examples (Sen. Santorum is another example). Thse results bode well for legislation as long as the issue comes up for debate again in this congressional year.
Who knows, now the house republicans might even be willing to consider it in the lame duck session, as atleast they will get to have some say in it. Will be interesting in the next few months.
more...
house kim kardashian hair color brown. kim kardashian hair color
ramus
06-19 05:53 PM
Do we have any action plan yet? What can we do to include amendments for us? Is this too late now and all we need to do is to oppose CIR?
I know everybody is busy with 485 and so am I but we need to react now before it is too late.
I know everybody is busy with 485 and so am I but we need to react now before it is too late.
tattoo wallpaper Blonde Hair Colors
nogc_noproblem
05-22 03:05 PM
I am preparing I131 (AP) renewal application for me and my family. For my son, who is 8 years old, do I need to fill "Part 9. Signature of Person preparing the form, if other than the applicant" since I am preparing this form? OR can I just sign Part 8 on-behalf of my son?
G-28 form says it needs to be filled in case if you use Attorney or Representative. Just wondering whether I need to fill a G-28 form for the above AP renewal application for my son since I am filling Part 9 in his application.
Can somebody clarify? Thanks for your help.
G-28 form says it needs to be filled in case if you use Attorney or Representative. Just wondering whether I need to fill a G-28 form for the above AP renewal application for my son since I am filling Part 9 in his application.
Can somebody clarify? Thanks for your help.
more...
pictures Khloe Kardashian known as the
gk_2000
03-28 08:38 PM
I told you smart ass. there is no point in fighting here and insulting anyone. just give your informatiion, i can contact you and willing to tell you how good or bad I am.
Now just relax.
MC
You really want to start going over the scores here? You can shove your warnings as I dont care for them. If anything pisses me off about this forum is you guys' habit of giving warnings.
Now just relax.
MC
You really want to start going over the scores here? You can shove your warnings as I dont care for them. If anything pisses me off about this forum is you guys' habit of giving warnings.
dresses kim kardashian hair color 2011. kim kardashian hair colour
NolaIndian32
04-28 10:18 AM
Thanks for your support M306m and Surabhi!!!
Go IV
Go IV
more...
makeup Kim Kardashian is well known
TheOmbudsman
11-08 11:27 AM
Yes, I mean, eventually they would get their citizenship. It takes few years, but they will get there.
Are you sure it is possible to sponsor your nieces, uncles etc if you are permanent resident? Don't you have to be a citizen to do that? I always thought you have to be a citizen to do that.
Are you sure it is possible to sponsor your nieces, uncles etc if you are permanent resident? Don't you have to be a citizen to do that? I always thought you have to be a citizen to do that.
girlfriend kim kardashian hair 2011.
jonty_11
11-08 12:18 PM
Yes immigration reform was on many of their lips....all we can do is hope they consider it sooner rather than later...but who on earth trusts politicians. I am still thinking that the embittered Democrats will try to strike hard blows to pave way for a Democratic President in 2008...that is going to be there main agenda - by repealing tax cuts, calling committees on War, etc to take the Pres to task....They have called that out too many times...for us to ignore that it will be their # 1 priority.
hairstyles Look at this hair color and
bigboy007
06-10 12:20 PM
everybody is quoting SFGate article can you prove the same , these ideas are addressed in article even kennedy says "Oh this bill will bring many issues of legals in to light " but not in numbers in CIR bill , if one reads the article he will think heaven is going to fall in CIR bill but reality is Its not heaven its hell as you the actual CIR.
Only time has to decide this week will decide whether indeed CIR resurrects ( chances are more than 80% if so current EB issue be addressed ?) lets see.
Only time has to decide this week will decide whether indeed CIR resurrects ( chances are more than 80% if so current EB issue be addressed ?) lets see.
sirinme
01-22 05:21 PM
Hi, I have a question about which service center to use when e-filing for AP renewal. Here is my situation:
- I live in California, but my I-485 has been rotting in Texas Service Center.
- When e-filing, one of the questions on the USCIS website was which service center my I-485 application has been pending at. I answered it as Texas Service Center, and went through with rest of the e-filing process.
- After submitting the form, I got the receipt number that starts with "SRC", which I am assuming ties my application with Texas Service Center. The cover letter of the PDF (which was generated right after submission) even said to mail supporting documentation to TSC.
Now, the problem is, I was reading through the instructions for I-131 filing and the PDF (I-131instr.pdf, which I downloaded from USCIS website) says on Page 7 that I should file my AP renewal with Nebraska Service Center, because I am a California resident.
Given that I already filed my AP renewal with Texas Service Center, am I in trouble here? I don't remember the USCIS website asking me or prompting me to file the renewal application with Nebraska Service Center, so I am a bit baffled by how I ended up in this situation. Is there anything I could do to correct it now? Has anyone run into this situation before?
Thanks!
- I live in California, but my I-485 has been rotting in Texas Service Center.
- When e-filing, one of the questions on the USCIS website was which service center my I-485 application has been pending at. I answered it as Texas Service Center, and went through with rest of the e-filing process.
- After submitting the form, I got the receipt number that starts with "SRC", which I am assuming ties my application with Texas Service Center. The cover letter of the PDF (which was generated right after submission) even said to mail supporting documentation to TSC.
Now, the problem is, I was reading through the instructions for I-131 filing and the PDF (I-131instr.pdf, which I downloaded from USCIS website) says on Page 7 that I should file my AP renewal with Nebraska Service Center, because I am a California resident.
Given that I already filed my AP renewal with Texas Service Center, am I in trouble here? I don't remember the USCIS website asking me or prompting me to file the renewal application with Nebraska Service Center, so I am a bit baffled by how I ended up in this situation. Is there anything I could do to correct it now? Has anyone run into this situation before?
Thanks!
go_guy123
02-10 06:02 PM
And there is an important lesson to be learned from the health industry lobby. They just did not say they want CIR or skil and then went back when both cir and skil failed. They started chipping away at individual items like 50000 visas for Schedule A last year and 90000 this year from unused\recaptured visas. We should also be asking for our individual line item, 485 measure. This is how a war is won, one battle at a time. It is unrealistic to have an "all or nothing" attitude that people opposing 485 measure have. If the health industry lobby had such "all or nothing" attitude they would not have got the 50000 visas last year nor would they have been trying to get the 90000 this year. Hope we learn from them.
H1B was misused and abused so much by the industry that the local
population has become hostile to the whole concept of foreign engineers/IT workers. Companies like Infosys, TCS hire 100% IT staff from India etc.
(saying that no US citizen/GC available...thats like lying in broad daylight)
Nurses came on Green cards and were free to change jobs etc. so
they affected the local job market to a far lesser degree so the opposition
is less.
H1B was misused and abused so much by the industry that the local
population has become hostile to the whole concept of foreign engineers/IT workers. Companies like Infosys, TCS hire 100% IT staff from India etc.
(saying that no US citizen/GC available...thats like lying in broad daylight)
Nurses came on Green cards and were free to change jobs etc. so
they affected the local job market to a far lesser degree so the opposition
is less.
No comments:
Post a Comment