fcres
08-01 09:34 AM
The other one got approved yesterday.
wallpaper long londe hairstyle with
blog30
12-14 07:11 AM
Hello,
I have just got my green card and I am filling out I-130 form for my older son who was 21 when I submitted my I-140.
My question goes to point 16, "Has your relative ever been under immigration proceedings?" as I am not sure what to check over not knowing the terms (Removal, Exclusion/Deportation, Rescission and Judicial Proceedings).
I am asking that as my son has been denied admission in the US last summer. He had an F-1 visa (through 2014) but changed schools, got another I-20, went to the US Embassy in my country, the Embassy denied him a new F-1 visa but they didn't stamp with "Cancelled" the F-1 visa in his passport so he thought the visa is still valid, returned to the US but in airport he was not admitted entrance and had to fly back to our country.
Sorry for my long explanation I just want to find out if what happened to him falls under one of the 4 Immigration proceedings under article 16 in I-130 form.
I want to get him here not have him banned for ever for not knowing correctly the terms.
Thanks in advance
I have just got my green card and I am filling out I-130 form for my older son who was 21 when I submitted my I-140.
My question goes to point 16, "Has your relative ever been under immigration proceedings?" as I am not sure what to check over not knowing the terms (Removal, Exclusion/Deportation, Rescission and Judicial Proceedings).
I am asking that as my son has been denied admission in the US last summer. He had an F-1 visa (through 2014) but changed schools, got another I-20, went to the US Embassy in my country, the Embassy denied him a new F-1 visa but they didn't stamp with "Cancelled" the F-1 visa in his passport so he thought the visa is still valid, returned to the US but in airport he was not admitted entrance and had to fly back to our country.
Sorry for my long explanation I just want to find out if what happened to him falls under one of the 4 Immigration proceedings under article 16 in I-130 form.
I want to get him here not have him banned for ever for not knowing correctly the terms.
Thanks in advance
Blog Feeds
08-11 10:10 AM
USCIS continues to streamline its processing of applications and petitions with the recent change in filing locations for several forms. The following forms should be mailed to USCIS lockbox facilities rather than directly to USCIS Service Centers:
* I-129F
* I-130
* I-140
* I-526
* I-539
* I-817
The updated filing instructions can be found on the latest versions of each form, which are available for free from USCIS.
This change became effective August 3, 2010.If you recently mailed an application. Applications already en route to the Service Centers will be automatically forwarded to the appropriate lockbox for a period of 45 days. After September 17th, packages (including fees) will be returned to the applicant along with a note explaining the new filing instructions.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/08/uscis_updates_filing_instructi.html)
* I-129F
* I-130
* I-140
* I-526
* I-539
* I-817
The updated filing instructions can be found on the latest versions of each form, which are available for free from USCIS.
This change became effective August 3, 2010.If you recently mailed an application. Applications already en route to the Service Centers will be automatically forwarded to the appropriate lockbox for a period of 45 days. After September 17th, packages (including fees) will be returned to the applicant along with a note explaining the new filing instructions.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/08/uscis_updates_filing_instructi.html)
2011 Medium Blonde Hairstyle For
B+ve
08-28 04:33 PM
Anybody else has any clue ???
more...
Guest007
06-28 10:50 PM
No worries. As you 140 was approved uscis gave 3year extension. It is not a mistake
issue08
04-20 09:18 AM
what if the non protonc is also denied. My case is also the same, applied non protonc but that got also denied.
more...
navkap
05-20 03:59 PM
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_109_2.htm
2010 Kategori : Blonde Hairstyles
Blog Feeds
04-05 09:40 AM
A Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General report has been released which paints a very troubling picture of the 287(g) program which allows local and state law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws. The report doesn't mince words:We observed instances in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement and participating law enforcement agencies were not operating in compliance with the terms of the agreements. We also noted several areas in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement had not instituted controls to promote effective program operations and address related risks. Immigration and Customs Enforcement needs to (1) establish appropriate performance measures and...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/dhs-report-slams-287g-program.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/dhs-report-slams-287g-program.html)
more...
Blog Feeds
11-08 03:30 PM
Immigration Lawyers Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The Department of Homeland Security has published a report estimating the lawful permanent resident (i.e. green card) population as of January 2008. In it, the DHS approximates that 12.6 million green card holders lived in the U.S. as of that...
The Department of Homeland Security has published a report estimating the lawful permanent resident (i.e. green card) population as of January 2008. In it, the DHS approximates that 12.6 million green card holders lived in the U.S. as of that date with half obtaining green card status in 2000 or later and the other half obtaining it between 2005-2007.
More... (http://www.immigrationlawyersblog.com/2009/11/us_green_card_population_as_of.html)
The Department of Homeland Security has published a report estimating the lawful permanent resident (i.e. green card) population as of January 2008. In it, the DHS approximates that 12.6 million green card holders lived in the U.S. as of that...
The Department of Homeland Security has published a report estimating the lawful permanent resident (i.e. green card) population as of January 2008. In it, the DHS approximates that 12.6 million green card holders lived in the U.S. as of that date with half obtaining green card status in 2000 or later and the other half obtaining it between 2005-2007.
More... (http://www.immigrationlawyersblog.com/2009/11/us_green_card_population_as_of.html)
hair Platinum londe is no longer
mrajatish
01-29 06:59 PM
Guys,
I am trying to arrange "Meet the Senators/Congressmen Drive" in Washington State. We already have a few volunteers, mostly from the eastside of Seattle. I am looking for a couple more people to help us in our efforts. Please feel free to contact me at 425-996-1021 to discuss this.
Thanks,
Raj
I am trying to arrange "Meet the Senators/Congressmen Drive" in Washington State. We already have a few volunteers, mostly from the eastside of Seattle. I am looking for a couple more people to help us in our efforts. Please feel free to contact me at 425-996-1021 to discuss this.
Thanks,
Raj
more...
kirupa
10-12 10:16 PM
Welcome to the forums :)
I have added your entry to the list!
I have added your entry to the list!
hot a new londe hairstyle.
Blog Feeds
05-05 12:50 PM
I am fortunate enough to have a pretty good arts and sports immigration practice. I've met a lot of really talented people from both fields over the years. I can't say I remember a family that has had members who have achieved as much as the Kleiza family, originally from Lithuania. Mother Kristina and afther Egidijus are two very successful painters. Kristina was a very successful artist in Lithuania and Egidijus was an art professor and furniture designer. The two moved to the United States with their children 14 years ago and run an art studio in New York. You...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/immigrants-of-the-day-the-kleiza-family-artists-and-an-athlete.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/immigrants-of-the-day-the-kleiza-family-artists-and-an-athlete.html)
more...
house Blonde Hairstyles 2011 Do you
immi_help3
06-05 02:48 PM
Hi All,
How important is the location of the US embassy for getting the H1B visa stamping ? When applying for my H1B petition in April 2008, my lawyer had mentioned that I would be going to the US embassy in Germany for the H1B visa interview. I'm also aware that I could go to my home country for doing the same. However, does anyone know if I can go to Canada/Mexico, given that I have the visas to go to these countries ? I have a US H4 visa.
Thanks!
How important is the location of the US embassy for getting the H1B visa stamping ? When applying for my H1B petition in April 2008, my lawyer had mentioned that I would be going to the US embassy in Germany for the H1B visa interview. I'm also aware that I could go to my home country for doing the same. However, does anyone know if I can go to Canada/Mexico, given that I have the visas to go to these countries ? I have a US H4 visa.
Thanks!
tattoo Blonde Hairstyles for Summer
Macaca
05-15 10:07 AM
Congress's Start (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/12/AR2007051201099.html) -- It's time to begin recording concrete achievements, Sunday, May 13, 2007
FOUR MONTHS into the 110th Congress is too early to assign grades to the new Democratic majority -- but not too soon to remind lawmakers that most of their self-assigned tasks remain undone; that progress in the next few months on immigration, trade and lobbying reform is critical; and that this Congress will be judged on what it accomplished -- and on where it punted.
The biggest punt thus far concerns entitlement spending, an issue on which the administration, chiefly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., has been seeking to jump-start discussions. This is an auspicious moment that Democrats seem determined to squander. First, the Democratic Congress has a lame-duck Republican president who could take, or at least share, the blame for cuts that will have to be part of any solution. Second, as members of Congress well know, the longer they wait to take on Medicare and, particularly, Social Security, the harder the problem they will face.
Democrats have seized on Vice President Cheney's comments to Fox News in January about raising payroll taxes -- "This president has been very, very clear on his position on taxes, and nothing's changed" -- as a rationale for why they can't risk bargaining with the administration. But this is an excuse, not a legitimate basis for inaction. After all, Mr. Cheney also said there would be "no preconditions."
Meanwhile, lawmakers for the most part have used their oversight powers usefully, though we wish more energy were spent examining torture policies, for instance, and less on subpoenaing the secretary of state. Although the budget process has yet to play itself out, the adoption of tough pay-as-you-go rules to constrain new mandatory spending has had a surprisingly beneficial effect in restraining demands for new programs. The Senate's passage of a measure to strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers is an important step.
Still unanswered is whether Democrats will deliver on their campaign promises and whether both sides will find ways to forge consensus on issues of common concern. House Democrats' "Six for '06" campaign pledge has so far amounted to "None in '07." Much of this (federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, for instance) is out of Democrats' control, given the Senate's supermajority rules and President Bush's veto pen; in some cases (having Medicare negotiate drug prices, for example), that's just as well. But even such relatively noncontroversial matters as increasing the minimum wage remain undone. Voters are starting to notice, and the coming weeks will be crucial for Democrats to put some actual accomplishments on the board.
On a matter that is within their control, it's still uncertain whether House Democrats will produce a lobbying and ethics reform package worthy of their campaign pledges to end the "culture of corruption." The key tests will be whether lawmakers require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign cash they deliver (as the Senate version of the measure has done) and whether the House will create a more credible ethics process, including some kind of independent arm to assess and investigate ethics allegations.
On immigration, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is right to bring to the floor last year's measure, which won the support of 23 Republicans. The clock is ticking on this incendiary topic, and the administration has not improved matters by pushing an unbalanced and punitive plan. If Mr. Bush is looking for a legacy issue beyond Iraq, this could be it, but he is, so far, blowing the chance.
On trade, an agreement that seems to clear the way for approval of trade pacts with Peru and Panama is a start, but only that. Much more important is the passage of deals with Colombia and South Korea, and extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which is needed to complete a new global trade treaty. Congressional leaders should work with Mr. Bush to extend the authority -- not because they like or trust him but because doing so will be better for the economy in which they, too, have an important stake.
FOUR MONTHS into the 110th Congress is too early to assign grades to the new Democratic majority -- but not too soon to remind lawmakers that most of their self-assigned tasks remain undone; that progress in the next few months on immigration, trade and lobbying reform is critical; and that this Congress will be judged on what it accomplished -- and on where it punted.
The biggest punt thus far concerns entitlement spending, an issue on which the administration, chiefly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., has been seeking to jump-start discussions. This is an auspicious moment that Democrats seem determined to squander. First, the Democratic Congress has a lame-duck Republican president who could take, or at least share, the blame for cuts that will have to be part of any solution. Second, as members of Congress well know, the longer they wait to take on Medicare and, particularly, Social Security, the harder the problem they will face.
Democrats have seized on Vice President Cheney's comments to Fox News in January about raising payroll taxes -- "This president has been very, very clear on his position on taxes, and nothing's changed" -- as a rationale for why they can't risk bargaining with the administration. But this is an excuse, not a legitimate basis for inaction. After all, Mr. Cheney also said there would be "no preconditions."
Meanwhile, lawmakers for the most part have used their oversight powers usefully, though we wish more energy were spent examining torture policies, for instance, and less on subpoenaing the secretary of state. Although the budget process has yet to play itself out, the adoption of tough pay-as-you-go rules to constrain new mandatory spending has had a surprisingly beneficial effect in restraining demands for new programs. The Senate's passage of a measure to strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers is an important step.
Still unanswered is whether Democrats will deliver on their campaign promises and whether both sides will find ways to forge consensus on issues of common concern. House Democrats' "Six for '06" campaign pledge has so far amounted to "None in '07." Much of this (federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, for instance) is out of Democrats' control, given the Senate's supermajority rules and President Bush's veto pen; in some cases (having Medicare negotiate drug prices, for example), that's just as well. But even such relatively noncontroversial matters as increasing the minimum wage remain undone. Voters are starting to notice, and the coming weeks will be crucial for Democrats to put some actual accomplishments on the board.
On a matter that is within their control, it's still uncertain whether House Democrats will produce a lobbying and ethics reform package worthy of their campaign pledges to end the "culture of corruption." The key tests will be whether lawmakers require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign cash they deliver (as the Senate version of the measure has done) and whether the House will create a more credible ethics process, including some kind of independent arm to assess and investigate ethics allegations.
On immigration, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is right to bring to the floor last year's measure, which won the support of 23 Republicans. The clock is ticking on this incendiary topic, and the administration has not improved matters by pushing an unbalanced and punitive plan. If Mr. Bush is looking for a legacy issue beyond Iraq, this could be it, but he is, so far, blowing the chance.
On trade, an agreement that seems to clear the way for approval of trade pacts with Peru and Panama is a start, but only that. Much more important is the passage of deals with Colombia and South Korea, and extension of presidential trade negotiating authority, which is needed to complete a new global trade treaty. Congressional leaders should work with Mr. Bush to extend the authority -- not because they like or trust him but because doing so will be better for the economy in which they, too, have an important stake.
more...
pictures One popular londe hairstyle
lucas92
05-01 02:51 PM
I am bored. Yeah!
dresses Color: Pale Blonde, Golden
howzatt
07-18 10:18 AM
My company and lawyer refuse to talk to me or email me back.
I sent my completed package to the lawyer 2 weeks back, and I have not heard back from him.
The initial draft needs to be sent back by the lawyer for signatures and then the file can go out.
How do I hadle the situation?
sounds like your lawyer is getting 'instructions' from your company. I would just try to talk to your employer and work out a solution.
I sent my completed package to the lawyer 2 weeks back, and I have not heard back from him.
The initial draft needs to be sent back by the lawyer for signatures and then the file can go out.
How do I hadle the situation?
sounds like your lawyer is getting 'instructions' from your company. I would just try to talk to your employer and work out a solution.
more...
makeup hair, hair color, hairstyle,
palemguy
12-21 02:46 PM
My EAD got approved today. It is in card production stage.
I am wondering if mutli year EAD if effective immediately. If so, I will be getting EAD that is valid for 3 yrs or mutli years right?
Friends, I appreciates your inputs.
I am wondering if mutli year EAD if effective immediately. If so, I will be getting EAD that is valid for 3 yrs or mutli years right?
Friends, I appreciates your inputs.
girlfriend Color: Blonde, Pale Golden
Irs
02-17 11:58 AM
Switzerland has similar law that works well not sure of cons on this.
hairstyles BLONDE HAIRSTYLE COLOR FOR
gcformeornot
01-29 10:04 PM
I meant on IV page......
JeffDG
03-30 11:41 AM
I initially voted in favour of this, but on further reflection, I think this is bad policy and urge others to not support this.
Giving I-485 benefits to people without current PDs is a bad idea. It creates a class of immigrants who are neither non-immigrant visa holders (h1b) nor are they lawful permanent residents (i-551) with a set of rights that falls into neither category. The AoS pending status is intended as a short-duration temporary "gap" coverage for people who are a matter of months from having actual I-551 rights.
Essentially, this proposal aims to make every month into the July 2007 fiasco. In addition, and this is the truly horrible part of it, relieves US employers of the pressure and costs they feel now, extending H1Bs every 3 years. That means that the only allies that legal EB immigrants have (US Employers who require their services) are detached from the immigrants themselves...they no longer have a dog in the hunt, and will stop whatever pressure they are bringing to bear now upon Congresscritters and Senators to increase the number of EB visas available.
Disconnecting the interests of foreign-national employees from their US employers will weaken the political position of the foreign-national employees. We cannot vote or contribute to campaigns, our employers however, can do both. If employees are shifted to EADs and APs, with no further involvement of employers in their immigration status needed, then those employers become disconnected from the process, and the one and only ally the legal immigrant has is no longer interested. That's a horrible thing for the immigrant to advocate.
I strongly urge IV to back away from this proposal, as it is not in the long-term interests of the EB Immigrant community. I urge IV to instead focus their resources on items that will help immigrants long term, like increasing the number of EB visas available through initiatives like eliminating the DV program and allocating the visas to EB applicants.
Giving I-485 benefits to people without current PDs is a bad idea. It creates a class of immigrants who are neither non-immigrant visa holders (h1b) nor are they lawful permanent residents (i-551) with a set of rights that falls into neither category. The AoS pending status is intended as a short-duration temporary "gap" coverage for people who are a matter of months from having actual I-551 rights.
Essentially, this proposal aims to make every month into the July 2007 fiasco. In addition, and this is the truly horrible part of it, relieves US employers of the pressure and costs they feel now, extending H1Bs every 3 years. That means that the only allies that legal EB immigrants have (US Employers who require their services) are detached from the immigrants themselves...they no longer have a dog in the hunt, and will stop whatever pressure they are bringing to bear now upon Congresscritters and Senators to increase the number of EB visas available.
Disconnecting the interests of foreign-national employees from their US employers will weaken the political position of the foreign-national employees. We cannot vote or contribute to campaigns, our employers however, can do both. If employees are shifted to EADs and APs, with no further involvement of employers in their immigration status needed, then those employers become disconnected from the process, and the one and only ally the legal immigrant has is no longer interested. That's a horrible thing for the immigrant to advocate.
I strongly urge IV to back away from this proposal, as it is not in the long-term interests of the EB Immigrant community. I urge IV to instead focus their resources on items that will help immigrants long term, like increasing the number of EB visas available through initiatives like eliminating the DV program and allocating the visas to EB applicants.
HalfDog
07-11 01:19 PM
thats...freaking weird. GJ :D
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario