Macaca
05-25 08:10 PM
Making History, Reluctantly (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/24/AR2007052402069.html) In a Hill Anomaly, Pelosi Shepherds Iraq Bill She Opposes, By Jonathan Weisman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jonathan+weisman/) Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, May 25, 2007
In public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had done nothing to suppress her frustration as she assented to funding the Iraq war without a deadline to end it. But behind closed doors Wednesday night, she was all business.
With its members gathered in her office, she told the House's "Progressive Caucus" that she would vote against the war funding bill, but that she also had no choice but to facilitate its passage. Funds were running out for the troops, and she had promised to protect them. The Memorial Day break loomed, and without the money President Bush would have a week to hammer her party for taking a vacation while the Pentagon scrambled to keep its soldiers fed.
Was she agonized over the situation? Sure, said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), who attended the meeting. But "we all feel that way," he added. "I feel that way, too. Are we going to just walk away now, or are we going to continue this process, to keep the pressure on?"
Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party.
Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature.
Over his objections and the opposition of most Republicans, Hastert did allow passage of campaign finance reform in 2002, but only because a petition drive was about to force the bill to the floor. The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton.
In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law.
"We don't relish bringing a package to the floor that we're not going to vote for," Obey conceded before last night's vote.
Pelosi's agonized decision put her in the company of Foley, who in 1991 brought to the floor the resolution authorizing the Persian Gulf War and then voted against it, and Thomas Brackett Reed, a speaker in the 1890s who voted against the annexation of Hawaii, and then against the Spanish-American War, but allowed both to go forward.
"To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it," Hastert said.
But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions.
Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about. A parliamentary vote to bring the Iraq funding legislation to the floor included language demanding a showdown vote in September over further funding. A second vote allowed Democrats to vote in favor of funds for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, agricultural drought relief and children's health insurance. Finally, the House got around to funding the war.
Republicans cried foul over what they saw as an abuse of the legislative system, but Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats.
"It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker," said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), who is personally close to Pelosi. "You can't just walk away."
In public, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) had done nothing to suppress her frustration as she assented to funding the Iraq war without a deadline to end it. But behind closed doors Wednesday night, she was all business.
With its members gathered in her office, she told the House's "Progressive Caucus" that she would vote against the war funding bill, but that she also had no choice but to facilitate its passage. Funds were running out for the troops, and she had promised to protect them. The Memorial Day break loomed, and without the money President Bush would have a week to hammer her party for taking a vacation while the Pentagon scrambled to keep its soldiers fed.
Was she agonized over the situation? Sure, said Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.), who attended the meeting. But "we all feel that way," he added. "I feel that way, too. Are we going to just walk away now, or are we going to continue this process, to keep the pressure on?"
Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party.
Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature.
Over his objections and the opposition of most Republicans, Hastert did allow passage of campaign finance reform in 2002, but only because a petition drive was about to force the bill to the floor. The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton.
In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law.
"We don't relish bringing a package to the floor that we're not going to vote for," Obey conceded before last night's vote.
Pelosi's agonized decision put her in the company of Foley, who in 1991 brought to the floor the resolution authorizing the Persian Gulf War and then voted against it, and Thomas Brackett Reed, a speaker in the 1890s who voted against the annexation of Hawaii, and then against the Spanish-American War, but allowed both to go forward.
"To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it," Hastert said.
But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions.
Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about. A parliamentary vote to bring the Iraq funding legislation to the floor included language demanding a showdown vote in September over further funding. A second vote allowed Democrats to vote in favor of funds for Gulf Coast hurricane recovery, agricultural drought relief and children's health insurance. Finally, the House got around to funding the war.
Republicans cried foul over what they saw as an abuse of the legislative system, but Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats.
"It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker," said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), who is personally close to Pelosi. "You can't just walk away."
wallpaper Lips And Lipstick Tips
dealsnet
04-29 02:00 PM
You ask this question to lawyers in IV.
Lawyers are giving US immigration answers. Not Indian PIO vs OCI cards.
You can ask GC related questions here.
If you are lazy to search in google, see the link below.
OCI vs PIO Card. Detailed comparison whether you should get OCI card or PIO card for persons of Indian origin (http://www..com/nri/pio-vs-oci.html)
Lawyers are giving US immigration answers. Not Indian PIO vs OCI cards.
You can ask GC related questions here.
If you are lazy to search in google, see the link below.
OCI vs PIO Card. Detailed comparison whether you should get OCI card or PIO card for persons of Indian origin (http://www..com/nri/pio-vs-oci.html)
mn1975
05-12 08:45 PM
thank you GCCovet for your response
2011 lipstick. close-up lips.
No_GC_Yet
07-25 10:01 AM
Hello:
I got two EAD extensions in past and applied for the same third time. Earlier, EAD Renewals took only 2 weeks time ( from VSC). But this time it is not the case. It is still pending for 4 weeks now.
Are there any recent EAD renewals from TSC for anyone? Please let me know if anybody has similar case?
PS: Since my case(I-485) was transferred from VSC to TSC, I applied for EAD renewal at TSC this time.
Thanks
I got two EAD extensions in past and applied for the same third time. Earlier, EAD Renewals took only 2 weeks time ( from VSC). But this time it is not the case. It is still pending for 4 weeks now.
Are there any recent EAD renewals from TSC for anyone? Please let me know if anybody has similar case?
PS: Since my case(I-485) was transferred from VSC to TSC, I applied for EAD renewal at TSC this time.
Thanks
more...
gchopes
04-19 12:28 PM
My lawyer said it was ok and we have applied for h4 extension for spouse. Its under regular processing at VSC so I won't know the outcome for a few months.
Macaca
07-22 05:49 PM
Senate Comity Slips Away (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_9/news/19453-1.html) By Emily Pierce and Erin P. Billings, ROLL CALL STAFF, July 19, 2007
Though tensions between Democrats and Republicans have been festering since the beginning of the 110th Congress, this week�s Senate debate on the Iraq War has pushed the chamber to a new level of partisan acrimony, where even the most seasoned and collegial of Senate elders have abandoned traditional acts of decorum.
�The Senate is spiraling into the ground to a degree that I have never seen before, and I�ve been here a long time,� Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said. �All modicum of courtesy has gone out the window.�
That statement came after a highly charged, all-night debate on a Democratic amendment to refocus the U.S. mission in Iraq and complete a troop drawdown by April 30, 2008. The amendment failed, 52-47, to get the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster, and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) cited the Republicans� �obstructionist� tactics in his decision to scrap the entire debate on the Defense Department authorization bill.
Reid�s insistence not only on having repeated votes this year on pulling out of Iraq but also on having the overnight session contributed to the explosion of partisan tensions, some Senators said.
�I do think 36 hours with no sleep and the orchestration of a repeat debate of what we just got through two months ago weighed heavily on everybody,� Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said. �It was what it was, but there�s a lot of frustration. It�s a good time for a four-week break.�
Senate Republicans said the clearest evidence that the chamber�s traditional comity has evaporated is in Reid�s repeated decisions to prohibit GOP Senators from giving short speeches when they object to his unanimous consent requests. Reid first began using the tactic against a handful of GOP conservatives during last month�s bitterly fought immigration reform debate.
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the most recent victim of that tactic, gave an indignant speech on the floor Wednesday to protest what he said was Reid�s lack of respect for fellow Senators.
Though Specter acknowledged that Senate rules do not afford lawmakers the right to give speeches following unanimous consent requests, the veteran Pennsylvania moderate said, �It has been common practice in this body to allow a Senator who reserves the right to object to make a statement as to why the objection is being lodged.�
Specter went on to ominously state that Reid�s insistence on the rules could come back to haunt him.
�Those practices I think are not only rude, but dictatorial,� he said. �And if those technical rules are applied � and any one of us can do it � this body will cease to function.�
Republican sources said that beyond Specter, both Lott and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) were taken aback this week when they were denied recognition typically afforded the minority. Lott and Specter � Senators who often work with Reid and Democrats on the floor and on legislation � were particularly incensed with what they viewed as Reid�s disregard of Senate decorum and protocol.
Specter said that Lott declined Reid�s offer to publicly apologize.
One senior Republican aide said Reid � by refusing to allow GOP Senators the opportunity to answer him when addressed � sent a clear signal to the minority of, �To heck with you, your views don�t matter.�
�Not only is violating common courtesy unlike him, it�s not conducive to running the Senate in an effective manner,� the aide said of Reid.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who led the GOP debate on the Defense measure, said what occurred over the course of the past two days � and the past two weeks � demonstrated that the �climate here is very bad� and is �part of the whole environment� of the Senate these days. The Iraq War is just one factor contributing to the heightened partisanship in the chamber, McCain added.
But it isn�t just Republicans who are complaining about the breakdown of the chamber�s otherwise civil atmosphere. Senate Democrats countered that they also have been on the receiving end of what they consider ungracious behavior by their GOP colleagues.
In what appeared to be a slap at Democrats on Wednesday, McConnell turned his back on Reid and the Democratic side of the chamber while speaking about the Democratic amendment to refocus the U.S. mission in Iraq.
McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said the Minority Leader was simply addressing his fellow Republicans as he often does when many are gathered in the chamber. More than 70 Senators � roughly half Republicans, half Democrats � were present for the post-vote debate.
But Senate Democrats have said repeatedly that they are being forced to use heavy-handed tactics because the minority refuses to adhere to the traditional courtesy of allowing the Majority Leader to conduct the bulk of the Senate�s business without first having to file procedural motions to limit debate. Republicans have objected to a little more than half of Reid�s requests to begin debate on both controversial and bipartisan bills, resulting in Reid having to file time-consuming cloture motions to cut off prospective filibusters.
�Who�s been asking for these cloture votes?� asked an exasperated Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). �Republicans.�
McConnell has �lost control of his caucus on this matter,� Durbin said of what he believes is McConnell�s inability to convince conservatives in the Republican Conference to pick their battles.
Reid spokesman Jim Manley declined to comment specifically on why Reid has been prohibiting GOP Senators from making short objection speeches, but he indicated that Democrats need to fight back against the GOP�s blocking strategy.
�It�s become pretty evident in recent weeks that there�s been a decision by the Republican leadership to block the Senate from doing all but the most routine and noncontroversial legislation,� Manley said.
Meanwhile, debate on the Defense bill has stopped for the time being, with Reid saying he would bring it back up once it is possible to �pass a Defense authorization bill, but with a deadline dealing with Iraq.�
For the moment, Democrats have been able to put a lock on the Republicans� procedural objections by bringing up a higher education reconciliation bill that is privileged under the rules and cannot be filibustered. But that measure was taken up only after Republicans blocked Reid from quickly beginning debate on a Homeland Security spending bill.
Reid has tasked Durbin with negotiating a deal with Lott, McCain and Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) on how to resume consideration of the Defense measure.
However, McCain questioned whether the DOD bill would rear its head again in the next two weeks: �Without a certain level of cooperation it�s almost impossible. It will be difficult to make it out in time, make it out by August. And the fiscal year ends the first of October.�
Though tensions between Democrats and Republicans have been festering since the beginning of the 110th Congress, this week�s Senate debate on the Iraq War has pushed the chamber to a new level of partisan acrimony, where even the most seasoned and collegial of Senate elders have abandoned traditional acts of decorum.
�The Senate is spiraling into the ground to a degree that I have never seen before, and I�ve been here a long time,� Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said. �All modicum of courtesy has gone out the window.�
That statement came after a highly charged, all-night debate on a Democratic amendment to refocus the U.S. mission in Iraq and complete a troop drawdown by April 30, 2008. The amendment failed, 52-47, to get the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster, and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) cited the Republicans� �obstructionist� tactics in his decision to scrap the entire debate on the Defense Department authorization bill.
Reid�s insistence not only on having repeated votes this year on pulling out of Iraq but also on having the overnight session contributed to the explosion of partisan tensions, some Senators said.
�I do think 36 hours with no sleep and the orchestration of a repeat debate of what we just got through two months ago weighed heavily on everybody,� Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said. �It was what it was, but there�s a lot of frustration. It�s a good time for a four-week break.�
Senate Republicans said the clearest evidence that the chamber�s traditional comity has evaporated is in Reid�s repeated decisions to prohibit GOP Senators from giving short speeches when they object to his unanimous consent requests. Reid first began using the tactic against a handful of GOP conservatives during last month�s bitterly fought immigration reform debate.
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the most recent victim of that tactic, gave an indignant speech on the floor Wednesday to protest what he said was Reid�s lack of respect for fellow Senators.
Though Specter acknowledged that Senate rules do not afford lawmakers the right to give speeches following unanimous consent requests, the veteran Pennsylvania moderate said, �It has been common practice in this body to allow a Senator who reserves the right to object to make a statement as to why the objection is being lodged.�
Specter went on to ominously state that Reid�s insistence on the rules could come back to haunt him.
�Those practices I think are not only rude, but dictatorial,� he said. �And if those technical rules are applied � and any one of us can do it � this body will cease to function.�
Republican sources said that beyond Specter, both Lott and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) were taken aback this week when they were denied recognition typically afforded the minority. Lott and Specter � Senators who often work with Reid and Democrats on the floor and on legislation � were particularly incensed with what they viewed as Reid�s disregard of Senate decorum and protocol.
Specter said that Lott declined Reid�s offer to publicly apologize.
One senior Republican aide said Reid � by refusing to allow GOP Senators the opportunity to answer him when addressed � sent a clear signal to the minority of, �To heck with you, your views don�t matter.�
�Not only is violating common courtesy unlike him, it�s not conducive to running the Senate in an effective manner,� the aide said of Reid.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who led the GOP debate on the Defense measure, said what occurred over the course of the past two days � and the past two weeks � demonstrated that the �climate here is very bad� and is �part of the whole environment� of the Senate these days. The Iraq War is just one factor contributing to the heightened partisanship in the chamber, McCain added.
But it isn�t just Republicans who are complaining about the breakdown of the chamber�s otherwise civil atmosphere. Senate Democrats countered that they also have been on the receiving end of what they consider ungracious behavior by their GOP colleagues.
In what appeared to be a slap at Democrats on Wednesday, McConnell turned his back on Reid and the Democratic side of the chamber while speaking about the Democratic amendment to refocus the U.S. mission in Iraq.
McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said the Minority Leader was simply addressing his fellow Republicans as he often does when many are gathered in the chamber. More than 70 Senators � roughly half Republicans, half Democrats � were present for the post-vote debate.
But Senate Democrats have said repeatedly that they are being forced to use heavy-handed tactics because the minority refuses to adhere to the traditional courtesy of allowing the Majority Leader to conduct the bulk of the Senate�s business without first having to file procedural motions to limit debate. Republicans have objected to a little more than half of Reid�s requests to begin debate on both controversial and bipartisan bills, resulting in Reid having to file time-consuming cloture motions to cut off prospective filibusters.
�Who�s been asking for these cloture votes?� asked an exasperated Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). �Republicans.�
McConnell has �lost control of his caucus on this matter,� Durbin said of what he believes is McConnell�s inability to convince conservatives in the Republican Conference to pick their battles.
Reid spokesman Jim Manley declined to comment specifically on why Reid has been prohibiting GOP Senators from making short objection speeches, but he indicated that Democrats need to fight back against the GOP�s blocking strategy.
�It�s become pretty evident in recent weeks that there�s been a decision by the Republican leadership to block the Senate from doing all but the most routine and noncontroversial legislation,� Manley said.
Meanwhile, debate on the Defense bill has stopped for the time being, with Reid saying he would bring it back up once it is possible to �pass a Defense authorization bill, but with a deadline dealing with Iraq.�
For the moment, Democrats have been able to put a lock on the Republicans� procedural objections by bringing up a higher education reconciliation bill that is privileged under the rules and cannot be filibustered. But that measure was taken up only after Republicans blocked Reid from quickly beginning debate on a Homeland Security spending bill.
Reid has tasked Durbin with negotiating a deal with Lott, McCain and Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) on how to resume consideration of the Defense measure.
However, McCain questioned whether the DOD bill would rear its head again in the next two weeks: �Without a certain level of cooperation it�s almost impossible. It will be difficult to make it out in time, make it out by August. And the fiscal year ends the first of October.�
more...
Blog Feeds
01-24 07:50 AM
A fat report and one with some helpful recommendations and statistics. Here are some of the more interesting items I found - - Of the top 150 H-1B employers, 24 were deemed H-1B dependent (a high percentage of workers on the H-1B) and 9 had prior H-1B violations. - Real earnings growth for US workers in occupations with proportionately more H-1B workers - particularly IT - was actually much stronger than the general US worker. - Engineers and IT professionals on H-1Bs were more than twice as likely as their US counterparts to have advanced degrees. - The proportion of...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/government-accountability-office-releases-report-on-h-1b-program.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/government-accountability-office-releases-report-on-h-1b-program.html)
2010 lips
fire_hs_1
07-14 04:16 PM
I got my labor and 140 cleared few months back under EB3, Can I apply for 765 to get my EAD ?
I have not applied for 485.
Please let me know.
thanks
I have not applied for 485.
Please let me know.
thanks
more...
texcan
09-10 11:00 AM
All,
IV needs money for rally.
Lets pledge to contrbute right after you get recpits.
We all are skilled immigrations with high billing rates per hour.
Think about how many hours you have spent tracking receipts,
Lets not waste any more time in tracking, instead contribute a few hours to work and contribute some of that money worth to IV.
Lets change one fruitless habbit to fruitful one.
Please contribute.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13158
IV needs money for rally.
Lets pledge to contrbute right after you get recpits.
We all are skilled immigrations with high billing rates per hour.
Think about how many hours you have spent tracking receipts,
Lets not waste any more time in tracking, instead contribute a few hours to work and contribute some of that money worth to IV.
Lets change one fruitless habbit to fruitful one.
Please contribute.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13158
hair lips red lipstick macro
desitechie
09-04 05:22 PM
Please help me with online address change for CA DMV:
My current license expires in May 2010. I moved recently. If I change my address using CA-DMV�s online change of address process, Will I be able to renew my driver license online during renewal time (feb 2010)?
Whats the process for updating the address of the vehicle so that vehicle registration renewal (expected in Jan 2010) comes to the new address?
Thanks
My current license expires in May 2010. I moved recently. If I change my address using CA-DMV�s online change of address process, Will I be able to renew my driver license online during renewal time (feb 2010)?
Whats the process for updating the address of the vehicle so that vehicle registration renewal (expected in Jan 2010) comes to the new address?
Thanks
more...
aphotica
03-01 02:47 AM
i just want some experience working for a person who would like me to make them various medias from websites to graphics.
i have standard knowledge in;
Photoshop
3dsmax
html
i have standard knowledge in;
Photoshop
3dsmax
html
hot Lips: Viva Glam I lipstick
Hassan11
06-06 03:02 PM
sorry, posted this under wrong category I don't know how to delete it.
I received a RFE regarding medical test because the Civil Surgeon didn't complete some of the forms properly. I replied bak to the RFE few days after I received it (within the allowed time).
my question is how many days does it take USCIS on average to look at my reply to the RFE and make a decision on my I-485 application (my PD is current as of June VB and been current for months now)
if USCIS does not make a decision and if PD retrogresses in July VB and I won't be current, does that mean that USCIS won't make a decision then untill my PD is current again???
Please advise. Thank you
I received a RFE regarding medical test because the Civil Surgeon didn't complete some of the forms properly. I replied bak to the RFE few days after I received it (within the allowed time).
my question is how many days does it take USCIS on average to look at my reply to the RFE and make a decision on my I-485 application (my PD is current as of June VB and been current for months now)
if USCIS does not make a decision and if PD retrogresses in July VB and I won't be current, does that mean that USCIS won't make a decision then untill my PD is current again???
Please advise. Thank you
more...
house If your lips are very thick
test005
05-12 11:43 PM
Please suggest.
tattoo How to make up lips
macrosky
06-19 11:47 PM
Can I use salary.com instead of flcdatacenter to determine the prevailing wage? Will immigration officer accept this source? Thanks
more...
pictures lipstick, medium lips on
Blog Feeds
11-08 03:30 PM
Immigration Lawyers Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have...
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have pending applications for adjustment of status, applicants with pending applications for relief under NACARA 203, applicants with pending asylum applications, or applicants with pending applications for legalization.
More... (http://www.immigrationlawyersblog.com/2009/11/apply_early_for_advance_parole.html)
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have...
The USCIS has issued an update reminding applicants to apply early for advance parole and refugee travel documents to ensure adequate processing. Advance parole is required for travel for applicants who have been granted Temporary Protected Status, applicants who have pending applications for adjustment of status, applicants with pending applications for relief under NACARA 203, applicants with pending asylum applications, or applicants with pending applications for legalization.
More... (http://www.immigrationlawyersblog.com/2009/11/apply_early_for_advance_parole.html)
dresses stock photo : sexy female lips
snathan
07-14 06:14 PM
I filed my I-485 and I-140 together in July 2007 using substitute labor (priority date) in Eb3 category.
I have Master degree, so can I change my category from EB3 to EB2 and keep the same priority date?
Thanks in advance and any help would be great.
No, you can not. there are lot more factors than your qualification.
I have Master degree, so can I change my category from EB3 to EB2 and keep the same priority date?
Thanks in advance and any help would be great.
No, you can not. there are lot more factors than your qualification.
more...
makeup mark your lip leaves on a
mrajatish
11-09 10:32 PM
No one joined the call - I will reschedule for next Sunday. Folks, please let me know if you want the call at a different time.
Thanks,
-Raj
Thanks,
-Raj
girlfriend Perfecting a flawless lip is
Student with no hopes
04-23 12:46 PM
If you have a phd, is it automatically EB1? or do the rules of employment should call for phd apply?
hairstyles subjected our poor lips to
swetha87
05-06 11:09 AM
Hello
My friend is in a wierd situation.
His employer applied for H1b under premium processing in USA, the application was sent back as some information was missing under 221g. The employer has submitted the application again. Does anybody know how long will it take for the application to be processes as it was initially filed under premium processing?
Also, since now the H1b approval is not confirmed, He is under OPT and it expires in Aug 2011. Can he apply for STEM extention as his employer is e verified. so incase his h1b is not approved he can still continue to work under OPT. Is it possible to get the STEM extention while his H1b is still under processing? Need you urgent advise. Please help!!
Thank you.
My friend is in a wierd situation.
His employer applied for H1b under premium processing in USA, the application was sent back as some information was missing under 221g. The employer has submitted the application again. Does anybody know how long will it take for the application to be processes as it was initially filed under premium processing?
Also, since now the H1b approval is not confirmed, He is under OPT and it expires in Aug 2011. Can he apply for STEM extention as his employer is e verified. so incase his h1b is not approved he can still continue to work under OPT. Is it possible to get the STEM extention while his H1b is still under processing? Need you urgent advise. Please help!!
Thank you.
gsarkar
02-18 07:27 AM
Dear members,
I am working in India. I have an L1 petition which is valid from sep 2004 through sep 2007 from my company. When I went for visa stamping in 2004 the visa officer gave me a visa valid from sep 2004 through Nov 2005. This meant that I could enter US only in the first year of my petition but continue to stay legally in US on an I-94 through Sep 2007. As of today, I may have to leave for US in March 2007 on this L1 and my question is that if I go for a renewal at the US consulate will they renew my visa for a petition that will expire in Sep 2007. Considering that there are only 7 valid months left on the petition.
Thanks a lot.
I am working in India. I have an L1 petition which is valid from sep 2004 through sep 2007 from my company. When I went for visa stamping in 2004 the visa officer gave me a visa valid from sep 2004 through Nov 2005. This meant that I could enter US only in the first year of my petition but continue to stay legally in US on an I-94 through Sep 2007. As of today, I may have to leave for US in March 2007 on this L1 and my question is that if I go for a renewal at the US consulate will they renew my visa for a petition that will expire in Sep 2007. Considering that there are only 7 valid months left on the petition.
Thanks a lot.
tomytoota786
04-05 07:38 AM
How much a girl has to show initiative in relationships?
No comments:
Post a Comment