GCKaIntezar
06-11 01:30 PM
at some month before OCT 2007 the dates would become unavailable.
what would happen at that time?
say your case was received by USCIS and they have not issued FP notices.
what if they issued FP notices but not issued EAD and/or AP.
would they still issue an EAD and AP even if your dates are not current(obviously the case was received by them and they issued you a case number)
any ideas?
How do you know that the visa numbers will indeed become "U", come October? Any numbers/sources to back up the claim?
I know some senior members previously indicated in these forums that there is a difference between a "U"-Unavailable and a retrogressed date of 2003 for example.
what would happen at that time?
say your case was received by USCIS and they have not issued FP notices.
what if they issued FP notices but not issued EAD and/or AP.
would they still issue an EAD and AP even if your dates are not current(obviously the case was received by them and they issued you a case number)
any ideas?
How do you know that the visa numbers will indeed become "U", come October? Any numbers/sources to back up the claim?
I know some senior members previously indicated in these forums that there is a difference between a "U"-Unavailable and a retrogressed date of 2003 for example.
wallpaper Eliza Dushku | The latest news
lelica32
06-06 02:17 AM
The question is: Is he milking you or your your company? LOL and UDD.
UDD for use due diligence.
I talk about I-140
UDD for use due diligence.
I talk about I-140
desiguy22042
09-23 09:42 PM
Hi rc0878,
I just checked the notice and there is no priority date on mine. It is left blank.
I wonder if it is printed for ANYONE.
Quick question for thosewho have already recieved their receipt notice????
What does the priority date column say on your receipt notices? I mean does it show the actual priority date or is blank????
I just checked the notice and there is no priority date on mine. It is left blank.
I wonder if it is printed for ANYONE.
Quick question for thosewho have already recieved their receipt notice????
What does the priority date column say on your receipt notices? I mean does it show the actual priority date or is blank????
2011 Eliza Dushku is Dollhouse
sunny1000
07-09 12:14 PM
Here is something to note:
Accepting I485 along with a pending I-140 is part of the rule making by USCIS and so they may choose to change the rule back to "not accept I485 until an I140 petition is approved" just like that good ol' days before 2002, if they want.
But, I don't think they would do that as they need all the money that is being generated by EAD/AP.:rolleyes:
Accepting I485 along with a pending I-140 is part of the rule making by USCIS and so they may choose to change the rule back to "not accept I485 until an I140 petition is approved" just like that good ol' days before 2002, if they want.
But, I don't think they would do that as they need all the money that is being generated by EAD/AP.:rolleyes:
more...
siaa96
10-08 01:01 PM
having been in the US since 2001, losing out my LC/PD to the dot-com bust and finally ending up with a PD of 2006, I second that. PD should be based on number of years of experience or years of stay in the US or amount of taxes paid till now or something like that.
In any case what we WANT is very different from what we usually get from this immigration system and there are bigger more important battles for IV to fight. Look, if there is no retrogression PD almost does not matter!! THATS the right fix. END RETROGRESSION!
Being a 2001 PD myself I fully sympathize with you for your trauma and support your notion that the Immigration System should give weightage to the number of years in the US, I do not support the notion of ending retrogression. Given that there are only a finite number of visa quotas, ending retrogression will make the GC a game of Inky-Pinky-Ponky. Either they give it to everyone (all the 800000 that applied) or they do FIFO based on date of entry in the US. If not, the present system of retrogression at least ensures that a person who came into the US in 2007 does not win the Inky-Pinki-Ponky game before a person like me in the queue since 2001. I agree that some extremely unfortunate people like you lose out, but it is still fairer than having no retrogression with the quota limitations in place, as that would be totally unfair.
In any case what we WANT is very different from what we usually get from this immigration system and there are bigger more important battles for IV to fight. Look, if there is no retrogression PD almost does not matter!! THATS the right fix. END RETROGRESSION!
Being a 2001 PD myself I fully sympathize with you for your trauma and support your notion that the Immigration System should give weightage to the number of years in the US, I do not support the notion of ending retrogression. Given that there are only a finite number of visa quotas, ending retrogression will make the GC a game of Inky-Pinky-Ponky. Either they give it to everyone (all the 800000 that applied) or they do FIFO based on date of entry in the US. If not, the present system of retrogression at least ensures that a person who came into the US in 2007 does not win the Inky-Pinki-Ponky game before a person like me in the queue since 2001. I agree that some extremely unfortunate people like you lose out, but it is still fairer than having no retrogression with the quota limitations in place, as that would be totally unfair.
diptam
07-02 02:01 AM
CURRENT employment letter they will give in 10 mins....
But for FUTURE employment letter i signed a bond for 10 grands saying that i wont leave them till 1 Year after GC....
I bargained for 1 yr after EAD ( I already worked 2.5 yrs with them and i'm in this country for 7.5 yrs ) but the bargain was a failure... I could just change
certain Clauses but nothing in the core of the Bond/agreement.
After EAD i would show the bond to a lawyer for $250 and ask them if i can win the case within 4-5 grands ... If yes , i would hire that lawyer or else
i'll pay 10 grands and do something else :))
If i succeed by the lawyer route i would spend my win sum of $5000 for a vacation to Alaska or Europe .....
Take it easy guys - Lets just hope USCIS accepts out 485 app tomorrow.
My app has just reached Omaha, NE at 8 PM .... Hope it reaches Lincoln,NE by morning tomorrow ( its just 1 hr drive)
with a copy of I-140, you can complete all your paperwork between now and dawn tomorrow.
In the meanwhile, act everything is normal. Ask a employment letter with job title and current salary (say, you want it for trip to Canada or renewing your DL or some 'genunine' reason like that.
Apply.
But for FUTURE employment letter i signed a bond for 10 grands saying that i wont leave them till 1 Year after GC....
I bargained for 1 yr after EAD ( I already worked 2.5 yrs with them and i'm in this country for 7.5 yrs ) but the bargain was a failure... I could just change
certain Clauses but nothing in the core of the Bond/agreement.
After EAD i would show the bond to a lawyer for $250 and ask them if i can win the case within 4-5 grands ... If yes , i would hire that lawyer or else
i'll pay 10 grands and do something else :))
If i succeed by the lawyer route i would spend my win sum of $5000 for a vacation to Alaska or Europe .....
Take it easy guys - Lets just hope USCIS accepts out 485 app tomorrow.
My app has just reached Omaha, NE at 8 PM .... Hope it reaches Lincoln,NE by morning tomorrow ( its just 1 hr drive)
with a copy of I-140, you can complete all your paperwork between now and dawn tomorrow.
In the meanwhile, act everything is normal. Ask a employment letter with job title and current salary (say, you want it for trip to Canada or renewing your DL or some 'genunine' reason like that.
Apply.
more...
gcgcgcgc
09-21 12:52 PM
I got my receipt notices (485,765,131) yesterday. I had my 140 approved from Texas. Lawyer filed 485 package on July 17th to Texas. I got my receipt notices on 09/18/07 from Nebraska.
2010 Actress : Eliza Dushku
gbof
09-09 09:13 PM
Oct09 VB is awafully disgusting for my EB3 friends. Call of the day -- try out all possible options to improve your chances (EB2, if after so many years you qualify) and INTENSE lobby efforts for recapture by roping in all friendly employers and congressmen. Running away will not improve the lot.......
more...
BharatPremi
11-01 05:44 PM
:D:Di work for big company...and i have paystubs...
in essense...what you are saying is that if one has paystubs that one can change after the 180 day period even if 140 is not approved...
i am beginning to see light at the end of the tunnel...:D
in essense...what you are saying is that if one has paystubs that one can change after the 180 day period even if 140 is not approved...
i am beginning to see light at the end of the tunnel...:D
hair Eliza Dushku Photo
kvranand
09-25 10:40 PM
I have received all of my family reciepts (I-485,AP,EAD) today from my attorney. Case filed at NSC and got the receipts with LIN numbers. Package reached NSC on Aug 10, '07.
RD Aug 13, '07.
ND Sept 19, '07.
RD Aug 13, '07.
ND Sept 19, '07.
more...
akhilmahajan
02-09 12:12 PM
Thanks a lot. Please ask your friends and family to also contribute.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
hot Eliza Patricia Dushku has been
jindhal
09-24 10:11 AM
You can think what you want. Most of IV core is/was Eb3. But never ever have anyone here sided with any one category. Maybe that's why a few good men rose above this small thinking, and they had the courage to join the core team for representing entire EB.
You can bicker as much as you want but you do not represent Eb2. As few days back there were a few claiming to be in Eb3 and they were blaming IV for working only for Eb2. These guys can also bicker as much as they want and they don't represent Eb3 either.
IV functions and represents the collective issues of the entire EB community without any regard to any amount of bickering from anyone in either Eb2 or Eb3 or India or China or ROW or any other group. You can say what you want but it won't stick. Our goal is clearly accessible from the homepage. If you don't agree with our goals, feel free to take this bickering somewhere else.
Just to be clear, you can say what you want but we don't think its your lunch.
Point Proved
You can bicker as much as you want but you do not represent Eb2. As few days back there were a few claiming to be in Eb3 and they were blaming IV for working only for Eb2. These guys can also bicker as much as they want and they don't represent Eb3 either.
IV functions and represents the collective issues of the entire EB community without any regard to any amount of bickering from anyone in either Eb2 or Eb3 or India or China or ROW or any other group. You can say what you want but it won't stick. Our goal is clearly accessible from the homepage. If you don't agree with our goals, feel free to take this bickering somewhere else.
Just to be clear, you can say what you want but we don't think its your lunch.
Point Proved
more...
house legend: Eliza Dushku and
DallasBlue
08-25 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
tattoo Eliza Dushku
desi3933
07-09 11:01 AM
The above documents should have Condi's (and USCISs) LAW. Googler's last link appears to be the main source for all other links.
Please note very carefully that we are looking for a LAW that specifies when AOSs will (not) be accepted from GC applicants. We are NOT looking for a law for allocating GC #s to approved AOSs (which is explained in the above links).
This LAW should explain the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when 140K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
============================
My points -
a. 140k GCs are NOT available on Oct 1st. Only 27% (37,800) are available and are subject to 7% country cap. DoS estimated the PD based on the number of I-485 applications pending and other related factors.
b. A person can file I-485 as long as his PD is before PD mentioned in the visa bulletin. This is how "immediately available" is defined.
c. Since revised visa bulletin update states that no visa number is available for FY USCIS, by law, can not accept new I-485 applications.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
Please note very carefully that we are looking for a LAW that specifies when AOSs will (not) be accepted from GC applicants. We are NOT looking for a law for allocating GC #s to approved AOSs (which is explained in the above links).
This LAW should explain the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when 140K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification as a VAWA self-petitioner may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
============================
My points -
a. 140k GCs are NOT available on Oct 1st. Only 27% (37,800) are available and are subject to 7% country cap. DoS estimated the PD based on the number of I-485 applications pending and other related factors.
b. A person can file I-485 as long as his PD is before PD mentioned in the visa bulletin. This is how "immediately available" is defined.
c. Since revised visa bulletin update states that no visa number is available for FY USCIS, by law, can not accept new I-485 applications.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
pictures Eliza Dushku
SDdesi
02-14 09:54 PM
Contributed $100 (6J641736D3197961L)
dresses Eliza Dushku Torchwood White
FinalGC
09-01 10:58 AM
How am I being a racist? I'm just pointing out the fact that North and South Indians belong to different races and USCIS should stop clubbing them together.
Pooja.......The way you are going, very soon, you will start saying Northeast guys vs MidWest vs Mountain Time people vs...Pacific Time people.......If you continue with this attitude, all you do is DIVIDE, rather than UNITE.....Maybe you need to understand that such comments are considered racists
Pooja.......The way you are going, very soon, you will start saying Northeast guys vs MidWest vs Mountain Time people vs...Pacific Time people.......If you continue with this attitude, all you do is DIVIDE, rather than UNITE.....Maybe you need to understand that such comments are considered racists
more...
makeup Eliza Dushku Photo
jsb
11-08 12:52 PM
When some one decides to apply AC21 by having an offer from another employer, it is not clear if one is required to inform USCIS about it. Some say one should, others say, not required. Has anyone seen any USCIS position on it? If not, perhaps we should make this as a question for next Ombudsman's conference call.
girlfriend Eliza Dushku - A Short
kdprasad
08-13 08:01 PM
DId your checks get cashed and receipts issued.
I heard from a friend,he got a receipt but checks not cashed yet.
Same with me!!!
I heard from a friend,he got a receipt but checks not cashed yet.
Same with me!!!
hairstyles eliza dushku, rising
amitjoey
07-10 02:46 PM
no wonder they are talking about impeachment of GWB and Sr Mcain's press conf. no news of this protest.. I like the way Michael moore trashed them yesterday in his live interview with Wolf on why and how CNN neglected his story all along..
CNN sucks big time and others are not too far behind
WRITE TO politicalticker@cnn.com
CNN sucks big time and others are not too far behind
WRITE TO politicalticker@cnn.com
mrdelhiite
09-13 08:31 AM
mailed on 2nd july received 3rd july notice date 10th sep sen to Nebraska receipt number from Nebraska. delivered at 11:14 am on July 03, 2007 and was signed for by F HEINAUER
Thanks
Gopi
Where was ur I140 approved ?
-M
Thanks
Gopi
Where was ur I140 approved ?
-M
rkd
09-08 12:43 PM
Type EB3-I
EAD Paper Filed at TSC on 07/01/08
ND 07/08/08
Received CPO email on 09/05.
EAD Paper Filed at TSC on 07/01/08
ND 07/08/08
Received CPO email on 09/05.
No comments:
Post a Comment