SDdesi
08-12 01:15 PM
My wife works in a company where a good number of IT folks are staffed by INFY. The poor quality of work made the company think about not extending INFY's contract. But then it came out in the open that there was no documentation on how the applications were built, etc. INFY got wind of this, and now they have positioned themselves in the organization where without them, this company's IT would collapse.
There are many such stories of outsourcing firms that are holding client companies hostage. Though I do not agree with the bill, I think the bill brings back some ethics into play. Especially the L1 loophole.
I squarely blame it on the company for not requiring INFY to document everything. There is such a thing as process or quality control. They have painted themselves into a corner. Having said that, companies will take advantage of this situation. Its just plain business...
There are many such stories of outsourcing firms that are holding client companies hostage. Though I do not agree with the bill, I think the bill brings back some ethics into play. Especially the L1 loophole.
I squarely blame it on the company for not requiring INFY to document everything. There is such a thing as process or quality control. They have painted themselves into a corner. Having said that, companies will take advantage of this situation. Its just plain business...
wallpaper Nanette Lepore Logo.
aerady
05-09 05:40 PM
I have been a victim of this rule implemented by DMV. On Texas the rule is like this. If you have Visa validity embedded on your DL, you will get a letter before 'Valid till Date period' on DL to show proof of approved I-797. In TX your approved petition you need to satisfy two conditions (1) When you go to DMV office, your approved I-797 should have atleast 6 months validity (2) The period on your I-797 should be more than one year. If you disqualify on any of these, they will suspend your license until you show a I-797 that satisfies the above two conditions.
So, My case is like this:-
My TX driving license(Valid till 2017) was suspended by DMV when I went(I tried online but it didn't work) for address change on 5/8/2010 saying that I don�t have a H1B visa which is valid for more than 6 months (Valid till 10/26/2010 � approx 5 months and 20 days) at the time of my visit for Address change.
I quit driving after that and my employer applied for Visa extension and they got the visa approval from 10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011. I got the approved petition from USCIS on 2/15/2011.
I went to the DMV office on 2/16/2011 and again DMV denied me license saying that even though the visa is now valid for 8 months, the total period for which the visa I got is less than 1 year(10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011 =11 months)
I am on 6+ years on US and my employer is processing my green card. USCIS will give only 1 year or less increment H1B extension after the 6th year till I get my I-140 approved.
The USCIS processing time is 4 months to 6 months for visa extensions, which puts me in a loop like sometimes when I get the approved extension, I will not have 6 months validity from the time I receive the approved petition from USCIS OR USCIS may not give one full year extension.
I am literally stuck without driving for the last one year. I was driving in US from 2003 to 2010, I don't have any accident history, I pay taxes regularly and always been a good citizen, but see what I get back!
So, My case is like this:-
My TX driving license(Valid till 2017) was suspended by DMV when I went(I tried online but it didn't work) for address change on 5/8/2010 saying that I don�t have a H1B visa which is valid for more than 6 months (Valid till 10/26/2010 � approx 5 months and 20 days) at the time of my visit for Address change.
I quit driving after that and my employer applied for Visa extension and they got the visa approval from 10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011. I got the approved petition from USCIS on 2/15/2011.
I went to the DMV office on 2/16/2011 and again DMV denied me license saying that even though the visa is now valid for 8 months, the total period for which the visa I got is less than 1 year(10/27/2010 to 9/19/2011 =11 months)
I am on 6+ years on US and my employer is processing my green card. USCIS will give only 1 year or less increment H1B extension after the 6th year till I get my I-140 approved.
The USCIS processing time is 4 months to 6 months for visa extensions, which puts me in a loop like sometimes when I get the approved extension, I will not have 6 months validity from the time I receive the approved petition from USCIS OR USCIS may not give one full year extension.
I am literally stuck without driving for the last one year. I was driving in US from 2003 to 2010, I don't have any accident history, I pay taxes regularly and always been a good citizen, but see what I get back!
ashismaity
03-10 02:28 PM
http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/
March 10 11:00The Immigration Debate
Some activists believe the U.S. needs a fence along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. Diane talks with her guests about this idea and other proposals from Congress in the latest round of the immigration debate.
Guests
Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies
Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum
Colin Hanna, president of Let Freedom Ring. Let Freedom Ring is the parent organization for www.WeNeedAFence.com
March 10 11:00The Immigration Debate
Some activists believe the U.S. needs a fence along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. Diane talks with her guests about this idea and other proposals from Congress in the latest round of the immigration debate.
Guests
Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies
Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum
Colin Hanna, president of Let Freedom Ring. Let Freedom Ring is the parent organization for www.WeNeedAFence.com
2011 Charlie and Nanette Lepore
MindGlow
07-09 10:38 PM
Received this e-mail from Tom Davis (Virginia congressman for where I live) today (Monday, July 9, 2007). Plan to reply by tomorrow mentioning it is not about "individual redress" rather a wrong imposed by USCIS/DOS on the legal-patiently waiting-community of immigrants. Any suggestions welcome.
Dear Mr. <Name>:
My staff is aware of the situation regarding employment-based visa applicants seeking adjustment of status and the most recent announcement by the State Department of the unavailability of visa numbers. At this time, my staff members are reviewing the situation. Individual redress is not possible at this time.
Thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Tom Davis
Member of Congress
Dear Mr. <Name>:
My staff is aware of the situation regarding employment-based visa applicants seeking adjustment of status and the most recent announcement by the State Department of the unavailability of visa numbers. At this time, my staff members are reviewing the situation. Individual redress is not possible at this time.
Thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Tom Davis
Member of Congress
more...
nyte_crawler
04-26 12:38 PM
You have been calling H1 PD will be fair for some time now. I dont think it is. It is infact unfair for those who have the intention to immigrate. (Sorry to say this time and time again)
Let's say,
Person A comes in Jan 1999, works for several companies and infact jumped around for higher pay and better prospects and just before the 6th year is finished he/she applies for the GC process.
Person B comes in Dec 1999, works for a year and decides to settle and applies for the GC process and get stuck with the employer.
According to your argument, who gets a better deal, Person A. But is it fair. Absolutely Not. Lets say you walk into a grocery store, but want to stand infront of the queue in the check-out line just because you entered in the grocery store first does not makes sense. :)
Learning01, thanks for hijacking the topic to SS and Medicare. :)
I dont expect the wait to be any less longer .. But I would surely welcome priority date being based on H1 start date as it would be more fair method
Let's say,
Person A comes in Jan 1999, works for several companies and infact jumped around for higher pay and better prospects and just before the 6th year is finished he/she applies for the GC process.
Person B comes in Dec 1999, works for a year and decides to settle and applies for the GC process and get stuck with the employer.
According to your argument, who gets a better deal, Person A. But is it fair. Absolutely Not. Lets say you walk into a grocery store, but want to stand infront of the queue in the check-out line just because you entered in the grocery store first does not makes sense. :)
Learning01, thanks for hijacking the topic to SS and Medicare. :)
I dont expect the wait to be any less longer .. But I would surely welcome priority date being based on H1 start date as it would be more fair method
WaitingForMyGC
02-23 04:50 PM
I am expecting about a year forward movement for EB2 India in April 2009 bulletin.
I'll hold you responsible if it doesn't and blame you for all the s**t I am going through due to retrogession. :-)
I'll hold you responsible if it doesn't and blame you for all the s**t I am going through due to retrogession. :-)
more...
greensignal
12-28 12:30 PM
Hi Guys, Even my receipt date for AP is October 12th but status is still pending.
However, I got 2 soft LUD's on my I140 & I485 on 12/26/07 & 12/27/07. Can I expect my I140 approval????
Hoping for the best......
However, I got 2 soft LUD's on my I140 & I485 on 12/26/07 & 12/27/07. Can I expect my I140 approval????
Hoping for the best......
2010 Robb/NJ.comNanette Lepore
kinvin
03-09 10:07 AM
Thank You indio0617 for the upto the minute responses.
more...
9years
12-02 09:02 AM
How much time does one really need to prepare to file for labor these days ,please let me know. The time before filing the labor, if everything goes very fast.
Robert Kumar,
Even though one wants to push too fast, I think there are certain duration one has to wait in each step before goes to the next step (this is just based on my knowledge and I may be wrong). It takes around 6 months minimum I think. Good luck for your process.
Robert Kumar,
Even though one wants to push too fast, I think there are certain duration one has to wait in each step before goes to the next step (this is just based on my knowledge and I may be wrong). It takes around 6 months minimum I think. Good luck for your process.
hair Nanette Lepore Love Crime
Kodi
05-08 04:15 PM
Do they always ask for recruitment info or only when they audit the case?
more...
baburob2
03-15 06:25 PM
Overall no big progress w.r.t our title's though Brownback's comment on immigration numbers is good.
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
hot Nanette Lepore dress
sanjay02
12-18 02:34 PM
Guys
I have a suggestion we need to meet the senators office in person and also try to get more visibility in terms of getting exposed to media may be channels like
a) AZN TV
b) India waves
c) CBS
d) NBC
Since we have hired Quinn & Gillispie we need to understand whats their strategic plan and what they have in plate for us. We need to have vision in front of us. All I am trying to say is identify the senators who would favor the CIR/SKILL Bill etc and have the immigrationvoice.org volunteers meet them in person. Some of the things I have mentioned may be redundant but, I wanted to make my point clear, calling the senators office just a week before with phone calls webfaxes etc is not just bearing any fruits as we have learnt from our past experiences.
I would request the senior members of IV to have a one-one meeting with Quinn& Gillispie and later update all the members here.
I have a suggestion we need to meet the senators office in person and also try to get more visibility in terms of getting exposed to media may be channels like
a) AZN TV
b) India waves
c) CBS
d) NBC
Since we have hired Quinn & Gillispie we need to understand whats their strategic plan and what they have in plate for us. We need to have vision in front of us. All I am trying to say is identify the senators who would favor the CIR/SKILL Bill etc and have the immigrationvoice.org volunteers meet them in person. Some of the things I have mentioned may be redundant but, I wanted to make my point clear, calling the senators office just a week before with phone calls webfaxes etc is not just bearing any fruits as we have learnt from our past experiences.
I would request the senior members of IV to have a one-one meeting with Quinn& Gillispie and later update all the members here.
more...
house Nanette Lepore Simona Dress
mzafar125
05-02 09:30 AM
Hello,
Just wanted to let you know that I received my refund yesterday. My wife and I filed a joint return. We both have SSN's. Just relax folks if you filed your taxes you will receive the refund. I had hoped the money could have been put to better use but oh well the politicians know better.
PD Oct 2002 ROW
485 files in June 2007
Still waiting for that darn GC
Just wanted to let you know that I received my refund yesterday. My wife and I filed a joint return. We both have SSN's. Just relax folks if you filed your taxes you will receive the refund. I had hoped the money could have been put to better use but oh well the politicians know better.
PD Oct 2002 ROW
485 files in June 2007
Still waiting for that darn GC
tattoo Katy Perry in Nanette Lepore
pappu
08-24 07:59 AM
If there is abuse of the system, then people should go ahead and complain to USCIS WITH PROOF. Writing hearsay stories on the forum without proof will not help solve anything.
more...
pictures white Nanette Lepore dress
abhisec
07-15 03:59 PM
sent $10 thru bill pay. Let's keep going!
dresses Jersey Dress NANETTE LEPORE
paskal
09-11 12:34 AM
there is still time even for the rally
if not going- plenty of time :-)
guys they are shipping very quick
all i did was to use "standard" instead of regular shipping
cost me less than $2 more for 3 items
here's my deal:
ordered friday night
shipped monday morning (first working day)
in transit now and scheduled for delivery wednesday
so you can still order and get it for the rally!!!!
if not going- plenty of time :-)
guys they are shipping very quick
all i did was to use "standard" instead of regular shipping
cost me less than $2 more for 3 items
here's my deal:
ordered friday night
shipped monday morning (first working day)
in transit now and scheduled for delivery wednesday
so you can still order and get it for the rally!!!!
more...
makeup lover Nanette Lepore dress
kushaljn
07-15 11:56 AM
Just sent $10 for me and my wife.
Citibank - Reference Number: 10136
Citibank - Reference Number: 10136
girlfriend Wales Vest Dress by Nanette
amsgc
04-02 08:57 PM
Dude, I asked where do you go and rate the post. No wonder ssnd calls you dumb.
On the top right corner of this post, there is a "scale". Click on it! :)
On the top right corner of this post, there is a "scale". Click on it! :)
hairstyles Nanette Lepore Plaisance Dress
JunRN
09-29 01:29 AM
If USCIS waste another 11,000 visas this year...it is equivalent to one year visas for one country (9,800 EB visas per country per year)....can you imagine that?
The problem is compounded because applicants who supposedly got the visa this year would get the visa allocation from FY2008. That visa number could have been yours....or mine....
The problem is compounded because applicants who supposedly got the visa this year would get the visa allocation from FY2008. That visa number could have been yours....or mine....
flipflop
10-03 05:10 PM
Every year congress mandates that 140k immigrant visas may be issued. Lets say, in a particular year 200k applications were sent in, but only half of them could reach a stage where they could be approved (rest half are stuck in name check et al). Now you can approve only 100k which means that 40k visas which could have been used will go wasted for that year.
ragz4u
03-08 10:33 AM
Again, the link is http://www.capitolhearings.org/ then click on Dirksen 226 in the right frame
Senator Specter seems to emphasize that he would like to get done with amendments etc. and to make sure that he meets Bill Frist's deadline of March 27th so that it can be debated
Senator Brownback is bringing an amendment to extend J1 visa which apparently expires this year
Will keep on updating as and when I hear things
Senator Specter seems to emphasize that he would like to get done with amendments etc. and to make sure that he meets Bill Frist's deadline of March 27th so that it can be debated
Senator Brownback is bringing an amendment to extend J1 visa which apparently expires this year
Will keep on updating as and when I hear things
No comments:
Post a Comment