atlgc
05-23 06:51 AM
I received a RFE on experience letters (EB3). I have searched everywhere but haven't found the format for a winning experience letter.
Can someone with an approved 140 please paste a format of the experience letter on this thread?
Thanks!
Hello indyanguy,
question,did you got an RFE for your entire work history ,just the latest expeience letter
Can someone with an approved 140 please paste a format of the experience letter on this thread?
Thanks!
Hello indyanguy,
question,did you got an RFE for your entire work history ,just the latest expeience letter
wallpaper 2011 Citroen DS3 WRC Rally Car
CT_Green
04-08 11:05 AM
My PD is Oct 09 2003
satishku_2000
08-10 05:05 PM
may be he is not from india :D
May be he or she has a spouse whose birth country is non retrogressed .. :)
May be he or she has a spouse whose birth country is non retrogressed .. :)
2011 Citroen C4 WRC Raising the
maverick6993
11-07 03:17 PM
I am in Birmingham and would like to join the state cahpter.
more...
stuckinmuck
02-11 12:02 PM
Hi desi9333, let me answer your question in general and note that this is not a speculation on the OP's case. A common reason for L1 denial could be that the USCIS determines that the petitioner isn't really in a 'specialty' occupation. For example, if his job description mentions java programmer, then he is more likely to get denied since we know there is a surplus of java programmers in this country (US citizens, LPRs and our favorite H1Bs). Since I was on an L1 visa, I know the purpose was really 'specialty' occupation which means you need to be an expert on something that's not easily available in the U.S.
To gchodhry, hope you get clarification and solution on your case soon, if you haven't broken any rules. Good luck.
To gchodhry, hope you get clarification and solution on your case soon, if you haven't broken any rules. Good luck.
imneedy
09-04 11:56 AM
.....is marriage. If one is planning to get married soon, it is better to get married and jointly file for spouse after he/she is here.
This is not correct, you only have to worry about spouse at I-485 stage.
This is not correct, you only have to worry about spouse at I-485 stage.
more...
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
2010 Citroen DS3 R3 rally car
smiledentist
06-14 06:33 PM
Any more advices please
more...
sad_angel
05-17 11:51 PM
i filed i-130 for my husband ( he is not in the u.s ) and it has been pending for 20 months . 2 months ago they sent the file to the local office in L.A and 20 days ago they transferred the file to the NBC . is this normal plz :( ????
hair New Citroen Ds3 Rally Car. new
ski_dude12
04-01 11:09 PM
11 years for me... but I have not done anything to cut someone off... just waiting patiently...
hey zcool be cool man..
i did 4 years of bs and 2 years of MS in US and this is my 10th year in US..i am not desperate for GC..but living here for too long and standing in the back of the line..just trying to move ahead in the line..common man don't get pissed off..help out here..
hey zcool be cool man..
i did 4 years of bs and 2 years of MS in US and this is my 10th year in US..i am not desperate for GC..but living here for too long and standing in the back of the line..just trying to move ahead in the line..common man don't get pissed off..help out here..
more...
coolest_me
05-06 11:33 PM
Hi,
We just got the RFE on our application regarding the Medical. We did completed all the vaccination that were required. I am not sure what USCIS is asking us to complete. Does anyone has any experience about this kind of RFE..
We just got the RFE on our application regarding the Medical. We did completed all the vaccination that were required. I am not sure what USCIS is asking us to complete. Does anyone has any experience about this kind of RFE..
hot 2011 citroen ds3 wrc car
thomachan72
03-10 07:10 AM
If they take the trouble of selecting multiple applications from the same employer, I dont doubt that anybody with multiple applications (even from different employers) will get either rejected or get questions.
more...
house new Citroen DS3 Rally Car
CatsintheCraddle
05-04 01:14 PM
My I-485 was denied April 14. USCIS said I only sent them a partial answer to their request for evidence.
I filed for I-485 and I-130 in Nov. 2008 and in December we had to resend all mine, my husband (sponsor) and my cosponsor's tax info. which we did. My case was resumed but I never received my EAD. I contacted the USCIS regarding this and they responded with another RFE; they needed my cosponsor's tax. info again. We resend the exact same things as we did in December and in the meantime I contact my senator and the ombudsman who both look into the case and tell me the USCIS has promised to respond to me a.s.a.p.
USCIS's response: My I-485 has been denied, my cosponsor did not send in all his tax info. My cosponsor, who has an identical copy of everything he has sent now three times (everything was in the original application in Nov. too) says it is all there. The USCIS wants us to file for a motion to reopen the case which costs $585. To me this is ridiculous; I originally lost my job (I was working under OPT) becuase they kept delaying my case, and now they want more money? I know it's my word against theirs but we are considering applying for the motion to reopen but was wondering how long do they have to accept or deny this. Also, we are submitting a waiver for the fee due to my husband also being unemployed at the moment and need our savings if we have to leave the country but are wondering if we can also send a check along with the waiver in case they won't waive the fee. They denied the case on April 14, 2009 but did not mail the letter out until the april 23 - we now have less than a week to file for a motion.
Please, if anyone has any experience with filing a motion let us know about it.
I filed for I-485 and I-130 in Nov. 2008 and in December we had to resend all mine, my husband (sponsor) and my cosponsor's tax info. which we did. My case was resumed but I never received my EAD. I contacted the USCIS regarding this and they responded with another RFE; they needed my cosponsor's tax. info again. We resend the exact same things as we did in December and in the meantime I contact my senator and the ombudsman who both look into the case and tell me the USCIS has promised to respond to me a.s.a.p.
USCIS's response: My I-485 has been denied, my cosponsor did not send in all his tax info. My cosponsor, who has an identical copy of everything he has sent now three times (everything was in the original application in Nov. too) says it is all there. The USCIS wants us to file for a motion to reopen the case which costs $585. To me this is ridiculous; I originally lost my job (I was working under OPT) becuase they kept delaying my case, and now they want more money? I know it's my word against theirs but we are considering applying for the motion to reopen but was wondering how long do they have to accept or deny this. Also, we are submitting a waiver for the fee due to my husband also being unemployed at the moment and need our savings if we have to leave the country but are wondering if we can also send a check along with the waiver in case they won't waive the fee. They denied the case on April 14, 2009 but did not mail the letter out until the april 23 - we now have less than a week to file for a motion.
Please, if anyone has any experience with filing a motion let us know about it.
tattoo Citroen DS3 R3 rally model
inskrish
07-17 02:07 AM
Your post resembles one of those ads with deceptive fine print! Do you work for an advertising company by any chance?
People providing all the red dot's........don't be so uptight or high strung. Don't you see the GCK's hidden talent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
GCKabhayega posted seven messges, and got eight 'red dots'. This is certainly a new record in the history of IV.:confused:
People providing all the red dot's........don't be so uptight or high strung. Don't you see the GCK's hidden talent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
GCKabhayega posted seven messges, and got eight 'red dots'. This is certainly a new record in the history of IV.:confused:
more...
pictures New Citroen Ds3 Rally Car. new
TexDBoy
09-10 09:09 PM
If your Opt is till Dec ... why did you get H1B with no I-94 ...
I thought that only happens if you have gap between OPT and H1B ...
I thought that only happens if you have gap between OPT and H1B ...
dresses 2011 Citroen DS3 WRC Rally Car
geve
09-22 11:58 AM
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2008/tc20080915_270731.htm
There's no place like the U.S. when it comes to creating a thriving tech sector. Or is there? The U.S. still has the world's most competitive information technology industry, but its lead is slipping, according to a new study conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) for the Business Software Alliance (BSA).
The study, released Sept. 16, ranks 66 countries in six areas, including the availability of skilled labor, the "innovation friendliness" of a nation's culture, and the strength of its legal protections for intellectual property. The U.S. scored highest overall, but its rating fell from last year, and it was No. 1 in only three of the categories. "America should be proud that it's No. 1, but Americans should also be aware that it can no longer take its leadership for granted," says Robert Holleyman, president and CEO of the BSA, a Washington (D.C.)-based organization that promotes the interests of the software industry.
The EIU's analysis also weighed the quality of a nation's technology infrastructure, measuring the number of PCs per 100 people, market spending on IT hardware per 100 people, the availability of secure Internet servers per 100,000 people, and the percentage of the population with high-speed Internet access. Switzerland, ranked 11th overall, outscored the U.S. on IT infrastructure, which accounted for 20% of a country's score. The study also assessed the openness of a country's economy and the quality of government leadership on technology issues.
No. 5 in R&D Support
In a finding that's likely to vex would-be entrepreneurs, the U.S. scores even further down the list�No. 5�in support for R&D. Taiwan led the category, followed by South Korea, Japan, and Sweden. Here, the EIU scored countries based on the number of new IT-related patents, receipts from royalty payments and licensing fees, and public and private spending on R&D. Holleyman says the BSA plans to share its findings with both major Presidential campaigns and with members of Congress.
The U.S. also lags countries including Canada, Singapore, Britain, and Norway in support for IT development, which accounted for 15% of the overall score. This category covers such things as e-government initiatives, government spending on IT hardware, and access to financing.
The findings of the study will likely renew calls among both IT industry executives and politicians for the country to develop a national innovation strategy as countries such as Finland have done. "America needs a wake-up call," says John Kao, a former professor at Harvard Business School and author of Innovation Nation, a book arguing that the U.S. is losing its edge. "We don't really have a national strategy," he says. "And while I'm not a fan of top-down technocratic approach, I think that at this point in our history, having no strategy is not satisfactory."
Sounding the Alarm
As concerned as he is about U.S. competitiveness, Kao is not a favor of indexes that compare competitiveness among nations, saying they can misrepresent a country's true climate. "They're really abstractions of reality, and they often paint too rosy a picture," he says.
Kao isn't alone in calling the country's competitiveness into question. Judy Estrin, a former Cisco Systems (CSCO) executive, is sounding the alarm as well in a new book, Closing the Innovation Gap, published by BusinessWeek's parent, The McGraw-Hill Cos. (MHP). Estrin says that the lead America enjoys now is the result of work done decades ago, and that the same commitment to innovation and research that existed before has evaporated. "Innovation builds on innovation. We're reaping the benefits now of seeds planted 10, 20, and 30 years ago, and the problem is that we're not planting any more seeds," she says.
The study shows the U.S. still leads the world in the "human capital" category, which measures the number of students attending universities, a country's capacity to train scientists and engineers, and employment in the tech sector as a percentage of the overall workforce. Here too, though, the U.S. lead is threatened. While students from other countries still flock to U.S. universities to get their MBAs and PhDs, tight immigration policies are causing more of those students to go home after graduation. "Our own education system is not producing the innovators we need," Estrin says. "And we're not opening our doors to the best people, and our immigration policy is such that we have been making it harder for them to stay, and so they are going home and innovating elsewhere."
By highlighting vulnerabilities, the study doesn't just trumpet U.S. weaknesses; it points to areas where improvements can be made. "A strong tech industry is crucial to America's ability to address almost every economic and social challenge," Holleyman says in a statement. "Despite our current economic difficulties, the tech sector remains one of the primary engines of the U.S. economy. This index provides a guide to how we can keep that engine moving forward to ensure competitiveness in the future."
There's no place like the U.S. when it comes to creating a thriving tech sector. Or is there? The U.S. still has the world's most competitive information technology industry, but its lead is slipping, according to a new study conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) for the Business Software Alliance (BSA).
The study, released Sept. 16, ranks 66 countries in six areas, including the availability of skilled labor, the "innovation friendliness" of a nation's culture, and the strength of its legal protections for intellectual property. The U.S. scored highest overall, but its rating fell from last year, and it was No. 1 in only three of the categories. "America should be proud that it's No. 1, but Americans should also be aware that it can no longer take its leadership for granted," says Robert Holleyman, president and CEO of the BSA, a Washington (D.C.)-based organization that promotes the interests of the software industry.
The EIU's analysis also weighed the quality of a nation's technology infrastructure, measuring the number of PCs per 100 people, market spending on IT hardware per 100 people, the availability of secure Internet servers per 100,000 people, and the percentage of the population with high-speed Internet access. Switzerland, ranked 11th overall, outscored the U.S. on IT infrastructure, which accounted for 20% of a country's score. The study also assessed the openness of a country's economy and the quality of government leadership on technology issues.
No. 5 in R&D Support
In a finding that's likely to vex would-be entrepreneurs, the U.S. scores even further down the list�No. 5�in support for R&D. Taiwan led the category, followed by South Korea, Japan, and Sweden. Here, the EIU scored countries based on the number of new IT-related patents, receipts from royalty payments and licensing fees, and public and private spending on R&D. Holleyman says the BSA plans to share its findings with both major Presidential campaigns and with members of Congress.
The U.S. also lags countries including Canada, Singapore, Britain, and Norway in support for IT development, which accounted for 15% of the overall score. This category covers such things as e-government initiatives, government spending on IT hardware, and access to financing.
The findings of the study will likely renew calls among both IT industry executives and politicians for the country to develop a national innovation strategy as countries such as Finland have done. "America needs a wake-up call," says John Kao, a former professor at Harvard Business School and author of Innovation Nation, a book arguing that the U.S. is losing its edge. "We don't really have a national strategy," he says. "And while I'm not a fan of top-down technocratic approach, I think that at this point in our history, having no strategy is not satisfactory."
Sounding the Alarm
As concerned as he is about U.S. competitiveness, Kao is not a favor of indexes that compare competitiveness among nations, saying they can misrepresent a country's true climate. "They're really abstractions of reality, and they often paint too rosy a picture," he says.
Kao isn't alone in calling the country's competitiveness into question. Judy Estrin, a former Cisco Systems (CSCO) executive, is sounding the alarm as well in a new book, Closing the Innovation Gap, published by BusinessWeek's parent, The McGraw-Hill Cos. (MHP). Estrin says that the lead America enjoys now is the result of work done decades ago, and that the same commitment to innovation and research that existed before has evaporated. "Innovation builds on innovation. We're reaping the benefits now of seeds planted 10, 20, and 30 years ago, and the problem is that we're not planting any more seeds," she says.
The study shows the U.S. still leads the world in the "human capital" category, which measures the number of students attending universities, a country's capacity to train scientists and engineers, and employment in the tech sector as a percentage of the overall workforce. Here too, though, the U.S. lead is threatened. While students from other countries still flock to U.S. universities to get their MBAs and PhDs, tight immigration policies are causing more of those students to go home after graduation. "Our own education system is not producing the innovators we need," Estrin says. "And we're not opening our doors to the best people, and our immigration policy is such that we have been making it harder for them to stay, and so they are going home and innovating elsewhere."
By highlighting vulnerabilities, the study doesn't just trumpet U.S. weaknesses; it points to areas where improvements can be made. "A strong tech industry is crucial to America's ability to address almost every economic and social challenge," Holleyman says in a statement. "Despite our current economic difficulties, the tech sector remains one of the primary engines of the U.S. economy. This index provides a guide to how we can keep that engine moving forward to ensure competitiveness in the future."
more...
makeup Left Side of 2011 Citroen DS3
andy garcia
02-23 11:05 AM
Here is e.g. for 2002 again this excludes schedule A here is the breakdown for india
EB1 - 3K
EB2 - 21K
EB3 - 17.5K
EB4 - 0.3K
EB5 - 0
EB Total - 41K
Am I missing something?
You are missing this:
The large number of LPRs in the EB in 2005 was primarily due to the AC21 Act of 2000, which recaptured 130,107 unused EB visa numbers from 1999 and 2000 to be made available to 1st, 2nd, and 3rd preference EB immigrants once the annual limit had been reached. Approximately 94,000 of those recaptured visa numbers were used in 2005. None of these visas were used in 2006. In addition, the REAL ID Act of 2005 recaptured 50,000 unused EB visas, 5,125 of which were used in 2005. In 2006, 33,341 of these visas were used, exceeding the 2006 employment preference limit of 143,949. The majority of the visa numbers recaptured by the REAL ID Act were issued to individuals whose country of origin was the Philippines (57 percent) or India (22 percent).
EB1 - 3K
EB2 - 21K
EB3 - 17.5K
EB4 - 0.3K
EB5 - 0
EB Total - 41K
Am I missing something?
You are missing this:
The large number of LPRs in the EB in 2005 was primarily due to the AC21 Act of 2000, which recaptured 130,107 unused EB visa numbers from 1999 and 2000 to be made available to 1st, 2nd, and 3rd preference EB immigrants once the annual limit had been reached. Approximately 94,000 of those recaptured visa numbers were used in 2005. None of these visas were used in 2006. In addition, the REAL ID Act of 2005 recaptured 50,000 unused EB visas, 5,125 of which were used in 2005. In 2006, 33,341 of these visas were used, exceeding the 2006 employment preference limit of 143,949. The majority of the visa numbers recaptured by the REAL ID Act were issued to individuals whose country of origin was the Philippines (57 percent) or India (22 percent).
girlfriend Citroen DS3 Rally
DDLMODES
07-18 09:26 PM
If you did PERM (only then can you file concurrently)
Who said that concurent filing is available for PERM only ???
That is not true right ????
Somebody please clarify !
Who said that concurent filing is available for PERM only ???
That is not true right ????
Somebody please clarify !
hairstyles Citroen DS3 R3 rally car
The7zen
01-27 09:36 AM
If this bill was introduced, we need to meet with lawmaker offices and put pressure on them. Our responsibility is to do our part and leave the outcome to prayers, But not even trying should not be an option. What are we going to loose?
Pardon my ignorance, what is in this bill to support EB community ?
Pardon my ignorance, what is in this bill to support EB community ?
prince40
04-16 01:07 PM
one of my colleague has received mail notification to the lawyer that application was picked in selection. H1b applied in masters premium.
did he get it this morning??
did he get it this morning??
chanduv23
12-09 10:18 PM
^^^^
0 comments:
Post a Comment