sparuthi
10-08 01:00 AM
Hi
I just checked my status on line and saw a LUD on my and my wife's pending 485 applications. My priority date is March 2006.
One reason that I am thinking off is that i had a service request opened on 8/22 when i went for infopass appointment and I recd a letter from USCIS dated Sept 30th with the usual template of saying that "we are processing your application bla bl bla and if you dont hear anything from us in 6 months please call us bla bla bla....."
However the LUD is not 9/30 but 10/7. I am wondering if anyone else has seen LUDs on their applications.
My AP and EAD have been renewed long back (about 1 month back).
Any response in this respect is appreciated
cheers
Sidharth
I just checked my status on line and saw a LUD on my and my wife's pending 485 applications. My priority date is March 2006.
One reason that I am thinking off is that i had a service request opened on 8/22 when i went for infopass appointment and I recd a letter from USCIS dated Sept 30th with the usual template of saying that "we are processing your application bla bl bla and if you dont hear anything from us in 6 months please call us bla bla bla....."
However the LUD is not 9/30 but 10/7. I am wondering if anyone else has seen LUDs on their applications.
My AP and EAD have been renewed long back (about 1 month back).
Any response in this respect is appreciated
cheers
Sidharth
wallpaper for Girls and Instructions
skilledWorker
09-30 02:33 AM
Rescheduling your FP can delay your background check etc., and can complicate your GC approval timeframe. Its better not to reschedule and stick to the appointment unless their is an emergency.
AFAIK, their is no limit on the number of times you can reschedule though, but its advisable not to reschedule for the reasons mentioned earlier..
AFAIK, their is no limit on the number of times you can reschedule though, but its advisable not to reschedule for the reasons mentioned earlier..
Blog Feeds
06-25 01:20 AM
Via The New York TImes
"It was an unusual sign, even for a restaurant here along the Maine coast, where seasonal home-grown businesses are a way of life.
�Closed. Gone to try and get a new visa,� read the hand-scrawled message taped inside the window of Laura�s Kitchen, a cozy eatery that specialized in corned beef hash and omelets and where the tiny tables were still set with brightly colored napkins. �Hope to see you in the spring. Dean & Laura.�
Read Article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/us/30visas.html)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2010/06/24/new-york-times-article-on-the-plight-of-e2-visa-business-owners-in-limbo.aspx?ref=rss)
"It was an unusual sign, even for a restaurant here along the Maine coast, where seasonal home-grown businesses are a way of life.
�Closed. Gone to try and get a new visa,� read the hand-scrawled message taped inside the window of Laura�s Kitchen, a cozy eatery that specialized in corned beef hash and omelets and where the tiny tables were still set with brightly colored napkins. �Hope to see you in the spring. Dean & Laura.�
Read Article (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/30/us/30visas.html)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2010/06/24/new-york-times-article-on-the-plight-of-e2-visa-business-owners-in-limbo.aspx?ref=rss)
2011 And Layers For Girls.
akhilmahajan
03-11 12:43 PM
Can the other New England states join this Action Item?
GO I/WE GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
GO I/WE GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
more...
Blog Feeds
12-15 12:20 PM
The fine folks at NAFSA have issued a report reminding people why the US needs to retain its commitment to international education and needs to fix many aspects of the current system. This sums up the importance of the subject: All prudent steps must be taken to prevent another act of mass terrorism on American soil. But a policy based in fear, that causes us to turn away from the world, is profoundly inimical to American security�because openness is part of security. The United States needs international students, professors, researchers, scientists, and future leaders coming to this country to further...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/nafsa-report-make-sure-cir-doesnt-leave-out-needed-student-visa-reforms.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/12/nafsa-report-make-sure-cir-doesnt-leave-out-needed-student-visa-reforms.html)
hns23
03-06 10:50 PM
Hi:
I am planning to apply for Advanced Parole , my friend informed me we have to compulsary got for FingerPrinting. Is that true??
thanks
hns23
I am planning to apply for Advanced Parole , my friend informed me we have to compulsary got for FingerPrinting. Is that true??
thanks
hns23
more...
Macaca
08-05 08:12 AM
A Bad Deal Gets Worse (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/opinion/05sun2.html) August 5, 2007
President Bush is understandably desperate for some kind of foreign policy success. But that cannot justify sacrificing his principled stand against weapons proliferation to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with India. The agreement could end up benefiting New Delhi�s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power.
The deal was deeply flawed from the start. And it has been made even worse by a newly negotiated companion agreement that lays out the technical details for nuclear commerce. Congress should reject the agreement and demand that the administration, or its successor, negotiate a new one that does not undermine efforts to restrain the spread of nuclear weapons.
Any agreement needs to honor the principle Mr. Bush set forth in 2004: that countries do not need to make their own nuclear fuel, or reprocess their spent fuel, to operate effective nuclear energy programs. The technology can be all too easily diverted to make fuel for a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Bush�s accord with India jettisoned that essential principle. Washington capitulated to India�s nuclear establishment and endorsed continued reprocessing. And while United States law calls for nuclear cooperation to end if India detonates another weapon, the agreement makes no explicit mention of that requirement � while it promises that Washington will acquiesce, if not assist, in India�s efforts to find other fuel suppliers.
Bringing India � which never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty � in from the cold is not a bad idea. It is the world�s most populous democracy, with a dynamic economy. And its record on nonproliferation � aside from its own diversion of civilian technology to its once-secret weapons program � is pretty good. The problem is that the United States got very little back. No promise to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing.
The message of all this is unmistakable: When it comes to nuclear proliferation, Washington�s only real policy is to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Suspicion of America�s motives around the world are high enough. America cannot afford another such blow to its credibility, especially when it is trying to rally international pressure against nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
The administration will argue that altering this agreement now would be a slap at India. But there is no good in compounding a bad deal. And there are better ways to deepen political and economic ties.
Congress accepted the administration�s arguments far too uncritically when it approved the first India-related nuclear legislation last December. It must now take a stand against the even more damaging companion agreement. At a time when far too many governments are re-examining their decision to forswear nuclear weapons, the United States should be shoring up the nuclear rules, not shredding them.
President Bush is understandably desperate for some kind of foreign policy success. But that cannot justify sacrificing his principled stand against weapons proliferation to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with India. The agreement could end up benefiting New Delhi�s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power.
The deal was deeply flawed from the start. And it has been made even worse by a newly negotiated companion agreement that lays out the technical details for nuclear commerce. Congress should reject the agreement and demand that the administration, or its successor, negotiate a new one that does not undermine efforts to restrain the spread of nuclear weapons.
Any agreement needs to honor the principle Mr. Bush set forth in 2004: that countries do not need to make their own nuclear fuel, or reprocess their spent fuel, to operate effective nuclear energy programs. The technology can be all too easily diverted to make fuel for a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Bush�s accord with India jettisoned that essential principle. Washington capitulated to India�s nuclear establishment and endorsed continued reprocessing. And while United States law calls for nuclear cooperation to end if India detonates another weapon, the agreement makes no explicit mention of that requirement � while it promises that Washington will acquiesce, if not assist, in India�s efforts to find other fuel suppliers.
Bringing India � which never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty � in from the cold is not a bad idea. It is the world�s most populous democracy, with a dynamic economy. And its record on nonproliferation � aside from its own diversion of civilian technology to its once-secret weapons program � is pretty good. The problem is that the United States got very little back. No promise to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing.
The message of all this is unmistakable: When it comes to nuclear proliferation, Washington�s only real policy is to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Suspicion of America�s motives around the world are high enough. America cannot afford another such blow to its credibility, especially when it is trying to rally international pressure against nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
The administration will argue that altering this agreement now would be a slap at India. But there is no good in compounding a bad deal. And there are better ways to deepen political and economic ties.
Congress accepted the administration�s arguments far too uncritically when it approved the first India-related nuclear legislation last December. It must now take a stand against the even more damaging companion agreement. At a time when far too many governments are re-examining their decision to forswear nuclear weapons, the United States should be shoring up the nuclear rules, not shredding them.
2010 The little girl/girls are
Blog Feeds
10-25 11:40 PM
How Senator David Vitter (R-LA) is still in Congress after his prostitute scandal escapes me. If his latest legislative effort is some kind of attempt to redeem himself with voters, he's living in a very warped world. Vitter is proposing to cut off funding for the 2010 Census unless the survey checks the citizenship of all people responding. Even if you didn't think it was bad public policy designed to exploit anti-immigrant passions, there are three very, very big practical problems with the idea. First, it would cost a fortune to make the change at this late stage - upwards...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/impractical-and-unconstitutional.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/impractical-and-unconstitutional.html)
more...
Karthikthiru
09-05 03:21 PM
Nice article
Karthik
Karthik
hair And Layers For Girls.
kvranand
07-09 08:15 PM
You can apply for another 3Y extension as far as I know. :)
more...
rsanghvi
08-25 12:04 AM
Hi,
My PD is 2005 and my I-485 was denied on the ground of my birth certificate and I got more proof from where I was born and submitted to USCIS and it was accepted in August 2009 and since then it has been more than a year and there is no update in the online status update for my I-485 application.
Lot of my friends from Late 2005 and early 2006 got the GC's last couple of months. I have requested my Lawyer to make a AILA inquiry? What else can I do at this point?
My PD is 2005 and my I-485 was denied on the ground of my birth certificate and I got more proof from where I was born and submitted to USCIS and it was accepted in August 2009 and since then it has been more than a year and there is no update in the online status update for my I-485 application.
Lot of my friends from Late 2005 and early 2006 got the GC's last couple of months. I have requested my Lawyer to make a AILA inquiry? What else can I do at this point?
hot Anyway it´s only for girls and
Openarms
05-08 05:20 PM
Wake Up EB3 and EB2 CHINA - mainland born,INDIA,MEXICO,PHILIPPINES folks to gather and fight for freedom... The above mentioned folks are the one who are suffering from this retrogression since 2005 no body helped us so far....
more...
house girls hair with layers
tom
06-18 03:14 PM
.
tattoo are all heavier set girls.
bidhanc
03-11 03:36 PM
Hi,
I just got back word from my lawyer saying that you shld be able to work with an expired EAD as USCIS would "backdate extensions of work authorisation" (provided of course that you have applied for the extension).
(I have been trying to upload the pdf, but can't seem to get it.
It's saved as a pdf on my local drive and am using the attachment icon provided, any help would be appreciated).
I know there are have been many nays on this subject and have asked my lawyer to provide more substantial proof (any memos or publications by USCIS).
Any comments on this?
I just got back word from my lawyer saying that you shld be able to work with an expired EAD as USCIS would "backdate extensions of work authorisation" (provided of course that you have applied for the extension).
(I have been trying to upload the pdf, but can't seem to get it.
It's saved as a pdf on my local drive and am using the attachment icon provided, any help would be appreciated).
I know there are have been many nays on this subject and have asked my lawyer to provide more substantial proof (any memos or publications by USCIS).
Any comments on this?
more...
pictures Girls can go for shoulder
cooldude
07-19 11:56 PM
...
dresses Wholesale White organza, claret sash, 5 layers, custom made flower girls#39;
medococo
02-17 02:22 PM
hi all
iam 2007dv winner
got my interview 3 months ago
my case pending administrative process .............
i dont know what to do
any advice or any thing i can do about this ?????????????:(
iam 2007dv winner
got my interview 3 months ago
my case pending administrative process .............
i dont know what to do
any advice or any thing i can do about this ?????????????:(
more...
makeup The Afflicted Girls ~ by Suzy
kirupa
07-29 12:29 PM
Hi John - this may help you out: http://www.kirupa.com/blend_wpf/custom_wpf_windows.htm
The rounded corners in that tutorial came from Windows itself :)
Cheers,
Kirupa
The rounded corners in that tutorial came from Windows itself :)
Cheers,
Kirupa
girlfriend hair long hair layers
coopheal
04-06 09:32 AM
bump
hairstyles long layers in combination
roseball
07-28 03:12 PM
Hi..Can I transfer my H1B to someother company after receiving 3 year H1B extension based on approved I-140? Replies will be much appreciated.
Yes, you can. You will get a fresh 3 yrs H1 based on your approved I-140.
Yes, you can. You will get a fresh 3 yrs H1 based on your approved I-140.
inbobabo
12-09 03:21 PM
Hi everyone,
I have just received my H1-B, and I'm planning on a two week vacation back to my country.
I'm not on a good relationship with my company at the moment, and even if they granted my vacation, I'm afraid they might cancel my H1-B visa while I'm on a vacation overseas.
If they do, would I be not able to come back into US, or would they at least give me a few days to pack up my stuff?
Any advice and comments would be appreciated.
Thank you for your time.
I have just received my H1-B, and I'm planning on a two week vacation back to my country.
I'm not on a good relationship with my company at the moment, and even if they granted my vacation, I'm afraid they might cancel my H1-B visa while I'm on a vacation overseas.
If they do, would I be not able to come back into US, or would they at least give me a few days to pack up my stuff?
Any advice and comments would be appreciated.
Thank you for your time.
n8900498
07-27 08:03 PM
I signed an employment agreement stating that if I had to leave my employer before getting my Green Card that I will be liable for all the fees pertaining to the Green Card application which my employer has been paying for while I am been employed by him.
I have heard that an employer cannot hold Green Card fees over an employee. I also believe if anything, the fees owing should drop according to the length of time that the employee has worked for that employer.
I have been with my current employer for 4 years now and I wish to leave him but I do not want to pay him for the Green Card fees as I believe that should be a business expense to him.
I would just like to know what are my rights in the above case
Best Regards
I have heard that an employer cannot hold Green Card fees over an employee. I also believe if anything, the fees owing should drop according to the length of time that the employee has worked for that employer.
I have been with my current employer for 4 years now and I wish to leave him but I do not want to pay him for the Green Card fees as I believe that should be a business expense to him.
I would just like to know what are my rights in the above case
Best Regards
No comments:
Post a Comment