Jeep Cherokee 2011 Sport

images Jeep Cherokee Sport

Posts Related to Jeep Cherokee

simplistik

03-08 02:00 PM

yeah i thought it was gonna be between him, paddy, and me

LoL... I always assumed it was gonna be between you, him, paddy, and fern... I dunno that's just me. LoL :lol: :party:

---

wallpaper Posts Related to Jeep Cherokee

2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee

TheHulk

09-11 10:50 AM

I was in a similar situation with EAD

I applied for EAD in November 2008, it got Approved (Card Production Ordered etc) but never rec'd the card.

I raised numerous SR's , spoke to IO' etc. (for 9 Months)
Every IO was very sympathetic but they did not know where my card was.

At last in July 2009 , I spoke to an IO and the said that she would follow it up
The next day, I rec'd an email stating that my Card was sent in November 2008 , since I did not receive it , it might have been lost in the email and If I need EAD, I need to re-apply

After this I spoke to an IO again, she said the case closed - Card lost in email - I need to re-apply.

Anyways... I did not re-apply.

In August 2009 I received my EAD card in the mail :)

---

2011 Jeep Patriot Sport

sertasheep

03-25 11:18 AM

<EDIT>
added hyperlink to Enquiro Report
</EDIT>

Chidanand Rajaghatta is a guy who spends time in different countries and writes about his travails. Obviously, he's not completely educated on this, and I guess may be we could take this opportunity to make him and TOI aware of our efforts.

I have sent out the following email.(between asteriskes). I'll post any responses I may(will I?) receive.

**********************

Dear Mr. Rajaghatta, and Editor,

I have been a consistent reader of your articles on your travels the world over. The headline for your latest article seemed a little sensational to me, without any mention of the word "Illegal".

The NRI community(read "legal immigrants" and "legal immigrant applicants") are aware of the new Guest Worker program proposed by Mr. George Bush, but it doesn't really affect the Indian diaspora at all, because majority of us are in the US legally.

The article seemed out of context and irrelevant in a esteemed publication such as TOI. Why don't you instead write about current issues that are plaguing the NRI community? Those would be directly relevant to the concerns of affected NRIs and would draw more readers to you.

I have recently concluded a research paper(as part of my Masters program) on the inefficiencies of the US Immigration system, and its impact on applicants, especially from countries such as India and China. The outdated workflows and holes in the Immigration system have led to endless waits and affected many immigration applicants, thereby impacting US economy in terms of tax dollars, jobs lost to overseas(outsourcing), and subsequently, loss of precious foreign exchange to the home countries of these applicants.

Applicants are forced to spend precious time and effort in speculating and predicting the outcome of their immigration benefits. As per a Internet search engine study, (See Enquiro Search Engine Report, Aug 2005 http://www.enquiro.com/net-profit/Murthy-vs-Goliath.asp ), it is the website of a US Immigration Lawyer (across all practices) that gets the most eyeballs(hits), worldwide! This is testimony to the fact that several hours are spent by applicants in anticipation and speculation.

I would more than willing to collaborate and share these thoughts with you, to fuel your interest further.

May I also draw your attention to some of the grass-roots organizations fighting for these causes? One notable organization is "Immigration Voice" which is gaining great momentum.(www.immigrationvoice.org)

Best Regards

************


"Celebrate, Have Faith and Maintain Hope"--the byline of a popular immigration attorney. Isn't this quite true?

---

2011 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee

1996-jeep-cherokee-sport-front

Prashanthi

06-23 05:22 PM

you cannot work until the MTR is approved

---

more...

Jeep#39;s flagship Grand Cherokee

LongJourny

01-20 06:10 PM

Hi,

I was working for a company A and filed for h1 transfer through company b. I was able to transfer successfully. However, Company A realised that some how and fired me immediately. because of this I had to leave this company A before even I start working for Company B. As an Example, Company A termininated by job on august 23 rd and I started workin for the company B from August 31. I have filed, h1 transfer, while working for Company A and got approved.

I have been working for company for over a period of 3 years, got stamped once after wards, and also renewed my H1. Now I needs to get it stamped. I need to mention my previous employment history with dates along with employment letters in DS-156 form. Now I am afraid if they might reject my visa. Can you please help me understand my situation and offer any suggestion. thanks in advance

---

2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee

tonyHK12

10-11 12:58 PM

minor correction, the bill number is S.1085. The thread heading says S.0185, which is actually rhode island medical marij***na :)..... well, its supposed to be a good pain killer.

---

more...

2010 Jeep Liberty Sport:

mugwump

11-25 12:48 PM

that's right. if u switch to F1 now then u will pretty much throw away your GC app. Plus you can only go to school part time on H1 with explicit written permission from the employer (consult lawyer to see if additional paperwork is needed). But you can go full time on EAD.

You do not need any permission from your employer. As long as you put in 40 hours per week, i dont think anyone cares for what you do with the rest of your time (as long as you dont hold another job).

And as far as going to school full time is concerned, i use the same logic. I was full time in Fall 2006 while being on H1b (and my GC was being processed). i am currently enrolled part time but will be enrolling full time next spring. I am currently working with the same employer. Dont think it will be an issue and dont plan on taking any permissions.

---

2010 2011 Jeep Patriot Sport

Jeep Cherokee Sport

pnjbindia

12-11 12:44 PM

guys,
I have hired as an "Auditor" in 2002, which is also the title of my position in my LC. If I use AC21 for AUdit manager, which is considered to be in the same occupational classification, will it be a problem? My salary will probably be double of what is on the LC application.... your thoughts are appreciated..

I heard that a major change in salary with regards to AC21 can be a problem..and the the title "manager" will always excite IOs ...for RFEs...

---

more...

Jeep Cherokee Sport 2009.

Akia

03-24 11:00 AM

It's complicated. An employer cannot ask you to repay any of the Training Fee ($1500 or $750 if under 25 employees). You cannot pay any of the rest of the costs if paying those costs brings your salary below the "prevailing wage" or "actual wage" for the position.

As regards whether a reimbursement agreement is enforceable - it depends on state law.

Does this mean that if my salary is higher than the "prevailing wage" by more than $320, the employer can legally ask me to reimburse the $320 filing fee? I have searched very hard but could not find any memo/doc regarding this.

---

hair 1996-jeep-cherokee-sport-front

2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee Sport

wandmaker

12-19 01:23 AM

Is it true it is must to use EAD to invoke AC 21? I am not sure but people said I cannot use H1 but EAD to invoke Ac 21........
if you invoke AC21 means you have to use EAD not H1B......

AC21: You are letting USCIS know that you will not be working for GC sponsoring employer as you have found a new similar/same job with some one else.

EAD/H1B: EAD is an work authorization, which allows to you work for any one. H1B is allows to you work for an sponsoring employer. If your new employer agrees you take you on board then do an H1 transfer, your title will be "similar/same position".

---

more...

2011 Jeep Compass Car 4WD

HereIComeGC

03-25 02:58 PM

Has anyone gone to Vancouver for H1B stamping? Please share your experience and any pointers. It will be a great help.

Also, I found this on Vancouver consolate website:

"Passports and visas will be returned to the applicants with Canadian addresses by Canada Post, generally within three to five business days after the visa is approved. In person pick up will be available only in a legitimate emergency (as determined by the Consulate). "

This is disconcerting. I do not have luxary to wait 3-5 days to get my stamped passport via mail. Is this a standard process? Will they allow in-person pick up the same day?

Thank you.

---

hot Jeep#39;s flagship Grand Cherokee

JEEP CHEROKEE 2.8 CRD Sport

rajsand

10-17 09:21 PM

I finally got my receipts today for my wife and me.

I got only my receipt number for I-765 on sep 18th and rest of it today.

I called the USCIS and the IO said all the receipts are there today.

Thanks for all the valuble information.

---

more...


house Jeep Grand Cherokee – 2011

Jeep Cherokee Sport

natrajs

03-06 02:58 PM

yes EB3 India. I think when I look back, its just a matter of luck. Once it was RFE, second time I got a second finger printing and third time they just did'nt pick it up. But USCIS has been very promptful in approving my EADs and AP. I could be very well one of the oldest processing case sitting in the TSC shelf.
(1700 days)

Since the Name check mess is cleared, You will get it soon

---

tattoo 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee

2011 Jeep Cherokee Overland

go_guy123

08-24 04:52 PM

ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)

Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta

As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).

Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.

Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.

A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.

In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.

At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�

The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8

Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.

Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10

�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�

Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:

1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�

It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.

---

more...


pictures 2010 Jeep Liberty Sport:

Jeep Cherokee Sport 2004.

saimrathi

08-22 03:10 PM

sukhwinderd, any idea what the address will be of Legal & Regulatory Affairs Unit
Motor Vehicle Commission if I was applying in PA? Any ideas for H4 DL renewal in similar fashion?

---

dresses JEEP CHEROKEE 2.8 CRD Sport

Jeep Introduces 2011 Grand

reddymjm

04-17 03:48 PM

As per today I have an H1b visa, I have my I140 approved, and my 6th year ends on April 25, 2008. My actual employer have gave me a contract that says that upon I become a permanent resident i will have to work for him for 5 years, then if I quit after the 5th year or before I will not able to work on the same industry on all the united states, also mention what my salary would be but there is no mention of increase. Since I will have to wait until my residence at least 3 more years, that means that I will have to work on these conditions for 8 or 9 years.!!!!

I do not know what to do , this is almost illegal (I think !), do I have time to change employer and do again my visa, and I140, so I don't lost status ??
If you have a copy of ur LC and I140 you are good to go. Any one can get a 3 year extension on an approved I140. If the rule comes in that you should use ur labor within 45 days of approval. There is nothing ur employer can do to you. If you do not have a copy try getting a copy of your labor and I140.

---

more...


makeup Jeep Cherokee Sport 2009.

Jeep Grand Cherokee – 2011

desidude

07-22 12:12 AM

sundarpn,

I had the same questions and clarified with my attorney.

1. Yes, you can change your job after 180 days, as you get the portability. Your 485 will remain good standing.

2. Yes, you can extend.

3. Doesn't matter who your new employer is, you can still sponser your wife when dates are current in the future, provided your wife should be living in US then.


Nave_Kum,
I don't understand your post. can you explain?

I too want to change jobs after 6 months of filing 485 and want to continue on H1 despite having EAD so that I can get my future spouse on H4. (then add/file her 485 when dates become current)

If I change to a new employer after 6 months (on H1b transfer):
1. Will my 485 remain in good standing

2. Can I get 3 yr extension of H1b from the new employer(as I have I-140 copy).

3. Can I file my spouses 485 when the dates become current (despite working for a new employer on H1b.)


If u dont use ur EAD for the first 6 months, then u can join the new employer any time using ur H1B. But immediately after the date of EAD activation, u will need to stick with the corresponding employer for the next 6 mnths.[/QUOTE]

---

girlfriend 2011 Jeep Cherokee Overland

The 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee

jack_suv

07-20 10:49 AM

After analyzing the normal benefits of filing 485 are:

1. get Advance Parole so no need to go for visa stamping
2. get EAD for spouse so spouse can start working

Other benefits but rarely used.

3. AC21 portability. This is rarely used as it may generate unnecessary RFE from USCIS.


For unmarried both the normal benefits are not applicable since you need to be on H1 to bring spouse on H4; and since no spouse no need for EAD for spouse.

The only true benefit for unmarried is AC21 portability with H1 transfer under layoffs or low salary.

The big negative is spouse loses H4 on GC approval if your PD is not current before GC approval unless a status change had already been made.

---

hairstyles 2011 Jeep Compass Car 4WD

2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee

franklin

06-14 08:04 PM

I was told that as long as your priority date is current, you can file for AOS.

As soon as your application gets to the service center, and assuming your PD is current, it makes no difference what it ACTUALLY is. At this point, it goies to "whatever system they want to use" and has no relation to PD, but more to the RD of application

---

invincibleasian

02-06 05:09 PM

I dont have EAD so I cannot comment!

---

manand24

10-15 02:13 PM

Well put logiclife....

LuDs are trivial. Sometimes there are LuDs on cases for no apparent reason.

I have had LuDs on my approved 140 even when there was nothing to begin with. Nothing pending since 140, no 485, no H1 extension. Even then there was LuD on 140.

No one really knows what LUD really indicates. Because there is really no pattern in LUDs on cases. NONE.

Rather than asking other blind men to lead you, why dont you take it upon yourself and find out for once and for all.

Let's say LUDs, or lack thereof are bothering you so much that you are losing sleep over it. You are trying to connect dots over LUD, fingerprinting and EAD etc. If you really want something so badly, why dont you stand up and fight for it and ask for it. I am not asking you to help IV or contribute funds or join state chapters. If you dont want to join state chapters, then dont. But atleast, for your own good, if something bothers you so much, then do something for yourself. Get an appt with ASC and find out what LUD means. Fly to Washington DC, go to directors of operations at USCIS headquarters and ask them what LUD means and why isnt there more transparency in online status. Why do we have to connect dots with LUDS and whey cant there by step-by-step update of each petition. GO AND FIGHT FOR YOURSELF.

Sitting here and asking other people, who dont know anything more than you do, is the same thing as one blind man asking another blind man to cross the street because the blind man is too lazy and to shy to ask someone with eyesight for a favor.

Again, I am not doing this to goad you into state chapter or funds. Or joining IV. Dont want to do what IV asks, then dont. But atleast do something FOR YOURSELF. Drive to DC, sit in USCIS HQ and ask them for something better than LUDs.

---

Well done! you have successfully gained access to Decrypted Link.

Tomorrow's top smartphone? That'll probably be a 5G phone, like the Galaxy S10 5G, and then, eventually, a foldable phone with 5G, starting with the Huawei Mate X and Samsung Galaxy Fold. But foldable phones are unproven and 5G in the US isn't in enough cities around the country to recommend. Our list will remain practical.

Our pick for best phone isn't just crowning the newest iPhone and calling it a day, though our list does have a lot of familiar names: Apple, Samsung, Google, Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo and LG, all in the top 15. Newer companies in the US like Huawei and OnePlus make the list, too, though their limited availability is noted.