anilsal
12-26 11:00 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2708
Anti-immigrants are not welcome.
Anti-immigrants are not welcome.
wallpaper Hello Kitty amp; Domo Kun
kaki
02-13 01:24 PM
Any clue?
kirupa
03-14 04:15 PM
Added! :)
2011 Domo kun
spicy_guy
06-22 04:17 PM
Proposed immigration measure stirs up Nebraska city - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/21/fremont.immigration.ballot/index.html?iref=NS1)
more...
Blog Feeds
08-24 02:00 PM
When she and her husband called me, she thought that she qualified for benefits under CSPA. Initially, I was skeptical. In every seminar regarding the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) that I have presented on behalf of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), my mantra has always been, if you marry, you lose whatever benefits you gained under CSPA. Still I listened to what she had to say, and in the end, I agreed with her. She and her husband were both physicians, born in India and trained in the U.S. They both would have qualified for permanent residence in...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/08/cspa-for-married-couples.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/08/cspa-for-married-couples.html)
Blog Feeds
12-18 09:40 AM
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill introduced in the House of Representatives would revamp the existing employment-based (EB) preference system in a number of important ways: 1) Recapture � Currently, 140,000 persons are permitted to immigrate to the U.S. each year under the EB preference system. If less than 140,000 visa numbers are given out by the end of the government�s fiscal year on September 30, the remaining numbers are essentially thrown away. As a result, in most years, 20,000 to 30,000 visa numbers are lost. The bill would change this system so that whatever EB visa numbers are remaining at...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/12/how-the-new-immigration-bill-would-revamp-the-eb-preference-system.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/12/how-the-new-immigration-bill-would-revamp-the-eb-preference-system.html)
more...
PraveenVadlam
02-23 08:52 AM
I have the following questions with respect to number of days I can stay out of the country for my situation.
I have been on green card since June 2010.
I have visited India from October 17' 2010 to Feb 4' 2011 (Total 111 Days).
Now I need to go back to India again for around 3 months (Approx 10th May - 10th Aug) which is about 93 Days.
My questions are:
1. As a GC holder can I make the above visits without resetting my 'Continuity of 5 Yeard of Residence' clock ? As in each calender year I will not be out of country for greater than 180 days. But, when you count from October 16 2010 - October 15 2011, I will be more than 180 days out of the country.
2. If answer to the above question is NO, do I need to file/apply for any exception to be out of country?
Thanks for your advise.
Praveen
I have been on green card since June 2010.
I have visited India from October 17' 2010 to Feb 4' 2011 (Total 111 Days).
Now I need to go back to India again for around 3 months (Approx 10th May - 10th Aug) which is about 93 Days.
My questions are:
1. As a GC holder can I make the above visits without resetting my 'Continuity of 5 Yeard of Residence' clock ? As in each calender year I will not be out of country for greater than 180 days. But, when you count from October 16 2010 - October 15 2011, I will be more than 180 days out of the country.
2. If answer to the above question is NO, do I need to file/apply for any exception to be out of country?
Thanks for your advise.
Praveen
2010 Hello Kitty amp; Domo-Kun
diptam
06-29 09:08 AM
1) If A# is not available so we need to populate it with I-94# ? I got
this weird idea from Point 10 of I-765 form where it says A# or I-94#
Of course in other places it just asks A# ( specially in I-131 form)
2) For I-131 there are lot of doubts - want to double check
a) Class of Admission - ?
b) A# is the very first Information sought !!
c) Date of Intended Departure and Expected length of Trip
d) For how many Trips you intend to use
3) In G-325A Bigraphic form also at the end - it again asks for
ALIEN REGISTRATION NUMBER - what is the that ??
Thanks,
Diptam
this weird idea from Point 10 of I-765 form where it says A# or I-94#
Of course in other places it just asks A# ( specially in I-131 form)
2) For I-131 there are lot of doubts - want to double check
a) Class of Admission - ?
b) A# is the very first Information sought !!
c) Date of Intended Departure and Expected length of Trip
d) For how many Trips you intend to use
3) In G-325A Bigraphic form also at the end - it again asks for
ALIEN REGISTRATION NUMBER - what is the that ??
Thanks,
Diptam
more...
greyhair
07-15 11:19 AM
Did anyone notice that Compete America seem to have changed its website recently? I visited their website after sometime and it seems that they changed it recently.
It is good to see Bill Gates and Eric Schmidt bring the focus back on green card wait times -
EB Green Card Facts at a Glance | CompeteAmerica (http://competeamerica.org/advocacy/eb-green-cards)
I am not sure if my current employer is still part of Compete America. They used to be part of it earlier.
It is good to see Bill Gates and Eric Schmidt bring the focus back on green card wait times -
EB Green Card Facts at a Glance | CompeteAmerica (http://competeamerica.org/advocacy/eb-green-cards)
I am not sure if my current employer is still part of Compete America. They used to be part of it earlier.
hair Hello Kitty ♥ Domo Kun
misanthrope
11-12 01:46 PM
Onion is a "news" website focused on delivering laffs.
more...
microsai
08-31 02:11 PM
Hello All,
I live in the Bay Area, California and wanted to travel to Canada for getting my H1 stamping done. Has anybody done the stamping recently in Canada? How was the experience? Also, we were thinking of Mexico initially but changed our minds due to border issues/swine flu fears. Anyone done it through Mexico recently? Please share your experiences.
Thanks!!
I live in the Bay Area, California and wanted to travel to Canada for getting my H1 stamping done. Has anybody done the stamping recently in Canada? How was the experience? Also, we were thinking of Mexico initially but changed our minds due to border issues/swine flu fears. Anyone done it through Mexico recently? Please share your experiences.
Thanks!!
hot Domo Kun Figures Phonestrap
rgovard11
11-16 01:56 PM
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/2009_Annual_Report.pdf
more...
house Paul Frank or Hello Kitty
glus
01-02 12:15 PM
Message to admins:
My attorney has expressed she wanted to help us out. She asked me how she could help our efforts. The attorney is extremely good person and professional. She is not money-driven attorney as many others. Please contact me via private email so we could arrange something. I am sure she could do something for us.
Regards,
My attorney has expressed she wanted to help us out. She asked me how she could help our efforts. The attorney is extremely good person and professional. She is not money-driven attorney as many others. Please contact me via private email so we could arrange something. I am sure she could do something for us.
Regards,
tattoo porn hello kitty domo-kun
indyanguy
09-03 12:07 AM
Theoretically, it's possible. However, if there is a Ability 2 Pay issue during 485 adjudication, would you be able to take care of it?
more...
pictures Domo-kun had to admit that
Blog Feeds
05-17 01:40 PM
Vivek Wadhwa always has interesting things to say about skilled immigrants. Here is a snippet from his recent Business Week commentary: I have a suggestion for Grassley and Durbin. Pass a bill to deregulate the H-1B visa program, and eliminate the restrictions that make it difficult for H-1B holders to travel, switch jobs, or get promoted. Create a fast-track status to U.S. citizenship for H-1B holders providing they launch a company that employs more than 10 American workers within three years. And grant residency to the nearly 1 million H-1B holders and their families waiting in limbo to obtain permanent...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/wadhwa-free-h1b-workers.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/wadhwa-free-h1b-workers.html)
dresses Hello kitty amp; Domo-kun lt;3
chanduv23
03-21 10:10 PM
I would also like someone to volunteer the meeting lawmaker and other efforts, as I will not be able to do that kind of stuff. I will definitely help mobilize more people into the group.
more...
makeup Hello Kitty ♥ Domo Kun
ariedia
07-24 10:54 AM
I am an EB3 (rest of the world) -
My I485 has a receipt date of 7/24/2007.
The processing date TSC is showing is 7/16/2007.
When my date comes up inside the Processing dates range, will the category be relevant for the approval? I am asking this question because I have a friend that is an EB2 and a receipt date of Sept 2007, and got his GC on December 2007...
If the categories are relevant, how can we monitor the process (the processing dates then become irrelevant)...
My I485 has a receipt date of 7/24/2007.
The processing date TSC is showing is 7/16/2007.
When my date comes up inside the Processing dates range, will the category be relevant for the approval? I am asking this question because I have a friend that is an EB2 and a receipt date of Sept 2007, and got his GC on December 2007...
If the categories are relevant, how can we monitor the process (the processing dates then become irrelevant)...
girlfriend The Domo-kun WobblyBot comes
bmoni
03-26 08:28 PM
Please take a minute to upvote the the following immigration idea at
http://www.homelandsecuritydialogue.org/dialogue2/immigration/ideas/light-green-card-for-eligible-legal-immigrants-waiting-for-visa-numbers
Also I would like to see a comprehensive idea posted from IV and drive our members to upvote the idea so it will be on the top as top rated , most commented idea.
Whether DHS will follow through or not at the least we will be educating more people on our legal immigration woes.
http://www.homelandsecuritydialogue.org/dialogue2/immigration/ideas/light-green-card-for-eligible-legal-immigrants-waiting-for-visa-numbers
Also I would like to see a comprehensive idea posted from IV and drive our members to upvote the idea so it will be on the top as top rated , most commented idea.
Whether DHS will follow through or not at the least we will be educating more people on our legal immigration woes.
hairstyles Hello Kitty Iphone
Blog Feeds
07-30 06:30 PM
Amid all the pre-election hurling this week of vituperative, partisan accusations over a Federal Court's partial injunction against AZ SB 1070 (Arizona's foray into federal immigration enforcement), you would be forgiven if you overlooked two small but significant creatures in the immigration ecosystem. A pair of remedial immigration bills, passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, await a vote in the Senate. Their significance is not merely because they are examples of a rara avis -- that nearly extinct form of billmaking distinctive for its bipartisan features. Nor are they significant for the hopeful promise suggested by their titles -- The...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/07/my-entry-2.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/07/my-entry-2.html)
Macaca
10-30 08:54 PM
Honey, They Shrunk the Congress (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/opinion/30tues4.html) By ADAM COHEN | New York Times, October 30, 2007
President Bush�s nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, was asked an important question about Congress�s power at his confirmation hearing. If witnesses claim executive privilege and refuse to respond to Congressional subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal � as Karl Rove and Harriet Miers have done � and Congress holds them in contempt, would his Justice Department refer the matter to a grand jury for criminal prosecution, as federal law requires?
Mr. Mukasey suggested the answer would be no. That was hardly his only slap-down of Congress. He made the startling claim that a president can defy laws if he or she is acting within the authority �to defend the country.� That is a mighty large exception to the rule that Congress�s laws are supreme.
The founders wanted the �people�s branch� to be strong, but the Bush administration has usurped a frightening number of Congress�s powers � with very little resistance. The question is whether members of Congress of both parties will do anything about it.
Congress is often described as one of three coequal branches, but that is not entirely true. As Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale law professor, observed in �America�s Constitution: a Biography,� Article I actually makes Congress �first among equals, with wide power to structure the second-mentioned executive and third-mentioned judicial branches.�
Article I, which describes Congress�s powers, is the Constitution�s first, longest and most generously worded article. It gives Congress a wide array of specific powers, but also broad authority to pass laws that bring to life �all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.�
It would be hard to recognize that powerful Congress today. In part, that is because Congress has been unwilling or unable to enact laws on the most important issues facing the nation � Iraq, immigration reform, health care.
Just as troubling, though, is how it has allowed its institutional power to erode. President Bush has regularly issued signing statements � including on critical issues like the ban on torture � that assert his right to ignore new laws at the same time as he signs them. These signing statements are not just talk. A report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office states that in nearly one-third of the cases it looked at, after President Bush issued a signing statement objecting to a provision of a new law, his administration did not implement it as written.
The Senate has routinely confirmed judicial nominees who make no secret of their belief that the president�s power should be sweeping, and Congress�s sharply cut back.
The Senate confirmed Jeffrey Sutton to a federal appeals court judgeship even though Patrick Leahy, now the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, observed that as a lawyer Mr. Sutton �aggressively sought out cases to limit the power of Congress to enact laws protecting individual rights.� It confirmed Janice Rogers Brown to the powerful United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit even though she had suggested that much of the legislation passed during the New Deal � including the Social Security Act � was unconstitutional.
There are things Congress can do. It can start by speaking out about the importance of Congressional power the way the administration has talked about deferring to the commander in chief. Congress should pass laws that support its own power � like a bipartisan one that Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, has introduced to nullify the impact of signing statements.
The Senate should refuse to confirm nominees who do not take Congressional power seriously. And Congress should make clear that if the executive branch will not enforce its subpoenas, it will use its own �inherent contempt� powers to do so.
Right now, standing up for Congress may appeal more to Democrats than Republicans. The issue of reining in presidential power is beginning to gain traction among conservatives, however, as they contemplate the possibility of a Democrat � particularly Hillary Clinton � as president.
Defending Congressional authority should not be a partisan issue. The founders wanted a strong Congress because they understood the importance of ensuring that the most democratic branch have a strong say in how the nation is run.
President Bush�s nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, was asked an important question about Congress�s power at his confirmation hearing. If witnesses claim executive privilege and refuse to respond to Congressional subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal � as Karl Rove and Harriet Miers have done � and Congress holds them in contempt, would his Justice Department refer the matter to a grand jury for criminal prosecution, as federal law requires?
Mr. Mukasey suggested the answer would be no. That was hardly his only slap-down of Congress. He made the startling claim that a president can defy laws if he or she is acting within the authority �to defend the country.� That is a mighty large exception to the rule that Congress�s laws are supreme.
The founders wanted the �people�s branch� to be strong, but the Bush administration has usurped a frightening number of Congress�s powers � with very little resistance. The question is whether members of Congress of both parties will do anything about it.
Congress is often described as one of three coequal branches, but that is not entirely true. As Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale law professor, observed in �America�s Constitution: a Biography,� Article I actually makes Congress �first among equals, with wide power to structure the second-mentioned executive and third-mentioned judicial branches.�
Article I, which describes Congress�s powers, is the Constitution�s first, longest and most generously worded article. It gives Congress a wide array of specific powers, but also broad authority to pass laws that bring to life �all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.�
It would be hard to recognize that powerful Congress today. In part, that is because Congress has been unwilling or unable to enact laws on the most important issues facing the nation � Iraq, immigration reform, health care.
Just as troubling, though, is how it has allowed its institutional power to erode. President Bush has regularly issued signing statements � including on critical issues like the ban on torture � that assert his right to ignore new laws at the same time as he signs them. These signing statements are not just talk. A report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office states that in nearly one-third of the cases it looked at, after President Bush issued a signing statement objecting to a provision of a new law, his administration did not implement it as written.
The Senate has routinely confirmed judicial nominees who make no secret of their belief that the president�s power should be sweeping, and Congress�s sharply cut back.
The Senate confirmed Jeffrey Sutton to a federal appeals court judgeship even though Patrick Leahy, now the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, observed that as a lawyer Mr. Sutton �aggressively sought out cases to limit the power of Congress to enact laws protecting individual rights.� It confirmed Janice Rogers Brown to the powerful United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit even though she had suggested that much of the legislation passed during the New Deal � including the Social Security Act � was unconstitutional.
There are things Congress can do. It can start by speaking out about the importance of Congressional power the way the administration has talked about deferring to the commander in chief. Congress should pass laws that support its own power � like a bipartisan one that Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, has introduced to nullify the impact of signing statements.
The Senate should refuse to confirm nominees who do not take Congressional power seriously. And Congress should make clear that if the executive branch will not enforce its subpoenas, it will use its own �inherent contempt� powers to do so.
Right now, standing up for Congress may appeal more to Democrats than Republicans. The issue of reining in presidential power is beginning to gain traction among conservatives, however, as they contemplate the possibility of a Democrat � particularly Hillary Clinton � as president.
Defending Congressional authority should not be a partisan issue. The founders wanted a strong Congress because they understood the importance of ensuring that the most democratic branch have a strong say in how the nation is run.
Canadianamerican
09-28 11:50 AM
Hello,
I am a canadian of Indian Origin.I was granted US Immigrant visa under the EB3 category at the Montreal US consulate in 2004.At that time I could not take my family for the interview and we chose to take their Visa later.after 5 years now we have decided to move to US (I am on commuters GC now) and has been trying for an appointment for my family at the consulate in Montreal.The consulate has informed me couple months back that there is no visa number available and my priority date is also not current (our priority date is Mar 2002).Is there any way out of this as I read now that the priority date is stuck in 2001 for a few years now and there is no real chance of moving ahead any time soon.I realise now that maybe we should all have taken the visa at that time instead of just me.Now I am stuck , is there no special case for my type of case as I had already been granted Visa earlier or since My case was already approved in 2004? I will appreciate any help or advise.
Thank You
CanadianAmerican.
I am a canadian of Indian Origin.I was granted US Immigrant visa under the EB3 category at the Montreal US consulate in 2004.At that time I could not take my family for the interview and we chose to take their Visa later.after 5 years now we have decided to move to US (I am on commuters GC now) and has been trying for an appointment for my family at the consulate in Montreal.The consulate has informed me couple months back that there is no visa number available and my priority date is also not current (our priority date is Mar 2002).Is there any way out of this as I read now that the priority date is stuck in 2001 for a few years now and there is no real chance of moving ahead any time soon.I realise now that maybe we should all have taken the visa at that time instead of just me.Now I am stuck , is there no special case for my type of case as I had already been granted Visa earlier or since My case was already approved in 2004? I will appreciate any help or advise.
Thank You
CanadianAmerican.
No comments:
Post a Comment