malibuguy007
09-11 02:57 PM
Also I have read conflicting responses e.g. some users have suggested not working and other have said you can work 180 days after EAD expires.
wallpaper gray hair styles for women
FireDrake101
06-03 08:41 PM
it may be possibal, but thats really pushing the limit of flash. I whoudnt reccomend trying it, but thats kinda up to you. You shouldnt even think about it unless your an expert at actionscripts..
cr125rider
05-14 01:28 AM
Thats pretty scary! Cool effect though!
2011 short haircuts for older women
hmehta
05-21 09:07 AM
Correct me if I am wrong, but there are no ammendments which address the EB based retrogession.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_109_2.htm
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_109_2.htm
more...
gcseeker2002
11-01 11:06 AM
sorry in advance if this seems too obvious...if anyone has first hand experience, I really appreciate your response
i am planning to travel through UK to India from US. I have a valid 5 yr tourist visa. Do I still need a transit visa?
No.
i am planning to travel through UK to India from US. I have a valid 5 yr tourist visa. Do I still need a transit visa?
No.
snowshoe
12-12 07:59 AM
When applying for the third stage you can include applications for spouse and children irrespective of the type of visa they are currently in.
more...
setpit_gc
12-17 02:05 PM
My current AP expires on July 30, 2008. I am planning to apply for renewal in Jan or Feb 2008, which is 6 months prior to expiration. I understand that nowadays it takes more than 3 months for approval.
In case of emergency, Can I travel to India with my current AP while AP renewal petition is pending?.
Thanks for your help.
In case of emergency, Can I travel to India with my current AP while AP renewal petition is pending?.
Thanks for your help.
2010 short hair styles for women
gc??
04-27 10:19 AM
unless your paperwork is shady, the fact that your company is in audit should not affect you. if you have filed for i-485 change jobs........
more...
kisana
01-31 08:20 AM
Can anyone please help me.
hair short hairstyles for older
venuk85
09-16 06:54 AM
hi,
My name is mistakenly typed in the form I-129 submitted to USCIS. In that form only, in all other forms(including i-129 supplements) it has typed correctly. So, it's reflecting in I-797 as venuKalangi(last/family Name), Venu((first Name). "venu" is repeated. My actual Name is Venu(first name),Kalangi(last/family name).
My petition is filed on apr27th'2010 and is in initial review now. Can you pls guide me what need to be done now. I'm a new applicant and my travel date is in last week of october. I heard that I need to apply for amendment, if so, by which form it need to be done and how much time it may take for correction or Can I go for stamping without amendment, is it causes any problem?
My name is mistakenly typed in the form I-129 submitted to USCIS. In that form only, in all other forms(including i-129 supplements) it has typed correctly. So, it's reflecting in I-797 as venuKalangi(last/family Name), Venu((first Name). "venu" is repeated. My actual Name is Venu(first name),Kalangi(last/family name).
My petition is filed on apr27th'2010 and is in initial review now. Can you pls guide me what need to be done now. I'm a new applicant and my travel date is in last week of october. I heard that I need to apply for amendment, if so, by which form it need to be done and how much time it may take for correction or Can I go for stamping without amendment, is it causes any problem?
more...
.jpg "short hair styles for women")
Pagal
04-23 07:40 AM
Hello,
If you have a valid dual purpose visa like H-1B, then you don't need AP to reenter US, but if your visa has expired, then you must hold AP to reenter the US. EAD is work authorization (which allows you to pursue employment without restrictions inside US), but it is not a travel authorization.
If you have a valid dual purpose visa like H-1B, then you don't need AP to reenter US, but if your visa has expired, then you must hold AP to reenter the US. EAD is work authorization (which allows you to pursue employment without restrictions inside US), but it is not a travel authorization.
hot short haircuts 2011 for older
senk1s
10-17 06:37 PM
have AP will travel ...
For adjustee's AP gives permission to travel out-in. I think it should be ok to travel (you can subscribe to case updates and you'll know the case status)
For adjustee's AP gives permission to travel out-in. I think it should be ok to travel (you can subscribe to case updates and you'll know the case status)
more...
house hair Short hairstyles can be
Blog Feeds
09-14 10:10 AM
Most people know the story of this famous Austrian family that was the subject of the musical play and film The Sound of Music. Many may not realize that after the family fled Austria, they immigrated to the United States and brought their singing talent to American audiences. They also opened a lodge in Vermont that operates to this day. Father George and mother Maria passed on many years ago, but some of the children of that large family are still with us. Oldest daughter Agatha is now 96, but just a few years ago wrote a biography. Her sister...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/09/immigrants-of-the-day-the-von-trapp-family-singers.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/09/immigrants-of-the-day-the-von-trapp-family-singers.html)
tattoo short hair styles for
skymoon
06-20 10:21 AM
In case, if we dont have a birth certificate, I understand we need to submit 2 affidavits and NA certificate from the place where we were born.
My question is, do we need them in original or copies will work?
If we need originals, getting them from India takes time...
Pl advice. Thanks
My question is, do we need them in original or copies will work?
If we need originals, getting them from India takes time...
Pl advice. Thanks
more...
pictures Keep in mind that darker hair
lifestrikes
02-26 02:49 PM
Copies of the documents will do. Original is not required for H-4 stamping.
dresses short hair styles for women
Macaca
08-16 05:40 PM
Is the Senate Germane? Majority Leader Reid's Lament (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/procedural_politics/19719-1.html) By Don Wolfensberger | Roll Call, August 13, 2007
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
more...
makeup gray hair styles for women
pd052009
03-25 12:07 PM
Countdown: 37 More days to go (Incl. today)
Required Yes Votes : 5000
Read from the below link for more details
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/2243885-post2.html (Support Thread for "I485 filing w/o Curr. PD" initiative)
Required Yes Votes : 5000
Read from the below link for more details
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/2243885-post2.html (Support Thread for "I485 filing w/o Curr. PD" initiative)
girlfriend quot;womens short hair stylesquot;
gimme_GC2006
10-09 08:44 PM
Sometime back there was a thread in IV where people predicted how many applications were processed based on the receipt numbers.
For eg, SRC-XX-XXX-XXXXX
Can anyone point me to the thread which explains what each digit means?
For eg, SRC-XX-XXX-XXXXX
Can anyone point me to the thread which explains what each digit means?
hairstyles short hair styles for women
REQUIRE_GC
06-22 01:45 AM
I have just received an email from CRIS that my I 140 has been approved.Good luck to everybody.
Country: India
EB2
PD: Dec 2005
1st I 140 approval date: June 2006
Concurrent filing I 140 and I 485 applied on 6th August 2007
2nd I 140 approval date: 30th April 2008
Congrrtulations, Nagireddi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Country: India
EB2
PD: Dec 2005
1st I 140 approval date: June 2006
Concurrent filing I 140 and I 485 applied on 6th August 2007
2nd I 140 approval date: 30th April 2008
Congrrtulations, Nagireddi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
test101
07-10 10:09 AM
or it's something not going to be done? we need to work on this
Blog Feeds
05-03 08:40 AM
Reform Immigration For America reports that 500,000 people participated in May Day protests at 80 events around the country. I was attending my 20th law school reunion this weekend in Chicago so took the opportunity to attend the event in the Windy City. The crowd was enthusiastic with lots of signs criticizing SB1070 and calling for immigration reform. And lots of US flags .
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/half-million-protest-arizona-law.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/half-million-protest-arizona-law.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment