girl with brown hair and highlights

images girl with rown hair and

girl with rown hair and

singhsa3

08-01 11:43 AM

I am pleasantly surprised and would like to thank Sen Menendez on behalf of all the IV members in his constituency for sponsoring visa recapture bill in Senate. Few days back when we called his office, his position was different. But because of we all calling and requesting for his support, he graciouly has agreed to take up our case. Speaking with his staff, I came to know that more than thousand calls were made to his office in support of the visa recapture bill.

---

wallpaper girl with rown hair and

girl with rown hair and highlights. Girl With Brown Hair And

Sunx_2004

10-17 07:16 PM

July 17th no receipt yet

Just chill
;)

My application was filed on 19th July .However I have not received my receipts yet. Has your friend contacted the USCIS and inquired since 90 days are over?

Thanks,

Kapil

---

girl with rown hair and

h1bemployee

06-25 01:57 PM

Hi Prasanthi,

In the denial letter they stated that
"The beneficiary may remain in the current immigration status until date indicated on Form I94.. ". My I-94 is valid till sep 30 2009 .... so even though my H1b transfer got denied ,will that save me from being out-of-status?

---

2011 girl with rown hair and highlights. Girl With Brown Hair And

girl with rown hair and

spicy_guy

09-15 01:27 PM

If you have not been happy with your employer, kick your employer's butt! :D

---

more...

girl with rown hair and

aamchimumbai

07-23 12:05 AM

All,

I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!

Here is my situation -

Previous Employer -
EB3,PD-Jan'04,I-140 cleared. Switched in June 2007 and wasn't able to file I-485 in July 2007

New Employer -
EB2, PD-Dec'-07, I-140 (Feb'08 - pending)

Question -

Based on Jun'08 Visa bulletin the dates for EB2-India were at Apr'04. Filed for I-140/485 based on my old priority date for EB3 labor (Jan'04). Explaining USCIS for PD transfer.

Well, folks at NSC did not understand the PD transfer concept and send my application back. Unclear as to what do now. I guess need to wait until the dates for EB2-India reach Dec'07 such that I can file.

Any "Creative" thoughts on how to approach USCIS moving forward.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

Aamchimumbai

---

giving the girl brown hair

tonyHK12

10-04 02:21 PM

I contribute no more than 10% of my pay towards my 401K. I would not contribute more than this because I don't intend to stay here for a very long time. .
I contribute just 2-4% as I don't get company match. Regardless if you get a match, I know some friends who prefer to put it in India/mother's fixed deposit accounts for 8-10% interest, or if you have a PF account still open its an option. Property prices there too may shoot up in some areas, giving a good return, while here they may stay stagnant for many years.
Some banks allow NRIs to trade stocks or mutual funds in India too.
The only reason for 401K is if you plan to retire here.
Liquidity is a big problem as you have to quit the company for withdrawal from 401K. Some 401Ks give you loan at 2-3% interest. Its kind of strange because its your own money.

---

more...

girl with rown hair and highlights. rown hair styles with

bigtiger

06-30 05:33 PM

Hi All,

By reading the AILF pdf:

http://www.murthy.com/current485/VisaBulletinFAQ6-29-07.pdf

I get this impression that they primarily mean the "Other Worker" category AOS rejections done in June 2007...I don't know what rules govern that category, but rejections did happen despite visa bulletin indicating current status for that category and AILF is considering this lawsuit. Now they are assuming that this might happen for EB2, EB-3 categories also. Plus we have this $4.4 billion CIR failure theory. There is no document date mentioned in this doc. So, I don't know how AILF is so confident that this will happen for EB2, EB-3 categories, for the rejections of applications has not even happened yet.

---

2010 girl with rown hair and

girl with rown hair and

dionysus

01-28 08:31 PM

I just applied for a PIO card for my daughter. I did not even know that there was any other option available.

---

more...

girl with rown hair and

coolest_me

01-14 04:50 PM

I used this charity to donate. It accepts only paypal.

Hope for Haiti, (http://www.hopeforhaiti.com/)

---

hair girl with rown hair and

Play Doll - Girl - rown

Anders �stberg

May 1st, 2005, 11:57 PM

Thanks guys!

I like that edit Fred! Make it a little more subtle and it would work really well.

Re. dust; yes it was very dry, I was there for maybe a half hour but there was a thin layer of dust all over me and the gear. I don't like it when the teeth crunch on sand from the air. The dust adds to the shots though, much like fog.

---

more...

pretty emo girl hair

tnite

10-31 10:26 AM

4 months from now, there will be another rush for applications for EADs and people will be spending money for it. Everyone will be back on the forums talking about notices and late processing for these applications. Lot of people will have heartburns and their jobs can be in trouble if their EADs do not arrive on time.

We do not seem to look at the bleak picture ahead in future and are worrying about EADS, AP and notices now. The real problem is retrogression and not if TSC is slower than NSC or vice versa or receipt notices. (You will be surprised that people write to us telling us to focus lobbying efforts on making TSC faster than NSC since that is a big problem faced by millions of people)

The end result of this constant renewals of EAD and AP is heartache, frustration and loss of money for us. We ultimately lose if we do not wake up now and do something.

Unless this community is ready to raise its voice, nothing WILL be done for us in the near future.

You're right pappu, most folks only care about a short term solution to this problem. Even without this mess folks who had applied for EAD or AP sometimes got their documents late and they ended up taking unpaid leave from work to make sure they are not working illegally.

With so many apps in the pipeline, I just cant imagine the delays.Not that I am pessimistic but trying to be prepared for the worst.

And add to that the financial burden of applying ever year (approx $700) for applicant and derivative.That's something you could have saved, spent on your family instead ended up renewing the EAD/AP.

Just my 2 cents

---

hot girl with rown hair and

house highlights for rown hair

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...


house girl with rown hair and highlights. rown hair with blonde

girl with rown hair and highlights. Mackenzie Jackson: http://3.

GreenMe

01-21 01:47 PM

My wife and I work for Consulting firm. We both had to travel to India for Visa Stamping.

My wife appeared on 4th Dec 2010. The Consular asked all regular work questions to her and then issued her a blue 221(g) form asking for additional documents from employer. The documents asked were Employer tax returns, each state tax returns, employee list with their salaries and position.

My wife went to Mumbai Consulate again on 17th Jan with all additional documents. To our surprise she was interviewed same day by the same Consular and issued a visa. Typically in the past, the consulate would take the paper and would ask the candidate to wait for the email from consulate.

I appeared for my Visa interview on 23rd Dec and was issued yellow 22(g) form without checking any of my documents. I was asked how I am working on 7th year of my H1 and then issued a yellow form to verify my details. I was told to wait for email from consulate. Luckily I received email on 3rd business day. Typically these cases take anywhere from1 to 3 months.

At VFS center I met 3 more people who received yellow 221(g) and got reply from consulate with 2-3 business days.

My observation is that the Mumbai consulate was issuing 221(g)s to many folks. And this is not just limited to IT consultants but also affects Fulltime non-IT folks too. One of my friend from Manufacturing received yellow 221(g) last month but got email from consulate after 10 business days.

So to conclude, I think Mumbai consulate is issuing these 221(g)s a lot but at the same time the turn around time is also quick.

---

tattoo giving the girl brown hair

Summer Hair Highlights

psn1975

11-05 08:06 PM

Hi

I my PD is July 2003 EB3 (India).

My I140 was approved in 2006 and had applied for 485, EAD, A/P in July 2007 like most of you. Yesterday LUD on my approved I140 and 485, EAD, A/P applications in USCIS changed after months. But now my approved I140 status has changed to Case received and pending.
What is even more surprising is that it also says On April XX, 2008, we received this I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER... This is incorrect since i got the approval notice in Nov 2006.

I have NOT done any labor substitution or anything like that.

As usually our corporate lawyer and HR were useless and think this is just some system issue at USCIS. Did anyone else see this before? I was looking for other threads but couldn't find anyone else having similar issues.

Immigration gurus - any suggestions/comments? Is this normal?

Thanks!

---

more...


pictures girl with rown hair and highlights. rown hair styles with

girl with rown hair and

newuser

02-11 08:16 PM

Petition signed

---

dresses house highlights for rown hair

girl with rown hair and highlights. Blue Highlights; Brown Hair

nagrajram

12-17 11:23 AM

Now the biggest hurdle of Apr 30, 2001 is crossed. I am sure that not many people has filed between Sep 2001 and February 2002. Also if you look into PD for China and Phillipines, the dates moved very fast after June 2001. Lot of people applied in late 2002 and early 2003. My guess would be that it will take about 3 to 4 years to clear all the backlogs of 2003. For 2004 it may be over 5 years.

---

more...


makeup girl with rown hair and

girl with rown hair and highlights. rown hair with blonde

rvr_jcop

02-17 09:46 PM

You did your GC for future employement and never worked for them. Now you want to use AC21. Do you think this as a fraud. You will get into trouble sooner or later.


I agree with snathan.
This is really a grey area., and totally depends on the adjudication officer. All they look for is the intention to work for that employer at the timing of I-140. That is hard to prove if you never worked for them. And thats easier for the officer to prove you never had any intentions of working for that employer. So who has better advantage here? Not the beneficiary for sure...

---

girlfriend Summer Hair Highlights

highlights for rown hair and

Bpositive

02-22 05:17 PM

Talk to a good lawyer...you should be able to sort it out..Congrats on getting into the Phd program at MIT. No mean task...

---

hairstyles pretty emo girl hair

girl with rown hair and highlights. Brown Hair With Caramel Highlights

belmontboy

05-22 07:35 PM

I want to apply labour with another employer based on future employment and when that labour get approved for how many days it is valid, can i apply I 140 for that labour .

Do i have to take transfer in order to apply for I 140 ?

Can two I 140 process parallel ?

Thanks for you all support..

Keep up the Good job

what is the rationale behind applying two I140's?

---

Canadian_Dream

07-31 05:00 PM

Can we come back to US and plan for our india travel or we have to leave to india from there itself?

You cannot come back to US because VO first cancels the existing valid visas before making a decision to grant a new one. You will have to return to your home country.

http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1441.html

As currently implemented, neither the alien''s country of citizenship nor the question of whether s/he had applied for a new visa while outside the U.S. affects the ability of the alien to re-enter the United States. The amended regulation, which was published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2002 and will be effective as of April 1, will prohibit the re-entry using an automatically revalidated visa of any alien who has applied for a new visa while outside the United States.


Hi All,

We are planning to goto canada for our H1 visa extension (actually i changed my job to new employer also). My H1 visa expires on Sept 31st 2007.
We are planning to go in August 2007 itself.

Lets say if our h1 extension is rejected or some issue what will be our status?
Can we come back to US and plan for our india travel or we have to leave to india from there itself?

I heard that mexico has different rules?

Thanks for your help.

---

reverendflash

10-21 02:06 AM

maybe Santa will bring you one? :bandit:

maybe Kirupa will give one as a prize for a contest :q:

maybe a miracle...


too many Dead Shows... :ninja:

Rev:elderly:

---

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.