wizkid732
08-25 09:57 AM
Anyone?
Hi,
I have been in this too long and want to decide if it makes any sense fighting anymore and anticipating the cards. Any advice is greatly appreciated
I contacted the Senators office and the rep there made a query to USICS> this is the response she got.
�This case is currently in an extended security review area."
She then tried to contact this area and the Officer advised that it cannot be released at this time. The Service is aware that there is a visa available, however, since it is still being reviewed for security issues it cannot be released at this time
Any Advise?
-Thanks
Hi,
I have been in this too long and want to decide if it makes any sense fighting anymore and anticipating the cards. Any advice is greatly appreciated
I contacted the Senators office and the rep there made a query to USICS> this is the response she got.
�This case is currently in an extended security review area."
She then tried to contact this area and the Officer advised that it cannot be released at this time. The Service is aware that there is a visa available, however, since it is still being reviewed for security issues it cannot be released at this time
Any Advise?
-Thanks
wallpaper denise milani wallpaper. denise milani wallpaper. denise milani wallpaper.
gcdreamer05
11-19 12:55 PM
The vermont service center says 2 months for h1b extensions, mine has been pending for 75 days, so i called the uscis today and guess what they told me, the processing times have been updated on teh web site but it is very difficult for us to follow them, i would suggest you wait for 90 days and see if there is any change in your online status if not call me back.
Then why do these people keep updating monthly processing dates if they cannot stick to their words.
I believe the processing times are just a gimmick to show progress to press....:mad:
Then why do these people keep updating monthly processing dates if they cannot stick to their words.
I believe the processing times are just a gimmick to show progress to press....:mad:
indio0617
01-05 10:19 PM
For any new comprehensive immigration reform, we must push for the Ability to be able to file for EAD after labor rather than having to wait for I-140 approval.
Do anybody know if any of the proposed bills have this provision? We must get together to push for this in the final bill as this doesn't harm anybody.
Thanks,
WaldenPond
I do not think any of the proposed bills push for I-485 filing after the Labor Cert itself. This has not been proposed because I-140 approval is not an issue right now. It is being approved as fast as one month these days. But I see no harm in asking for it. Let us reach for the moon and see what we get :)
Do anybody know if any of the proposed bills have this provision? We must get together to push for this in the final bill as this doesn't harm anybody.
Thanks,
WaldenPond
I do not think any of the proposed bills push for I-485 filing after the Labor Cert itself. This has not been proposed because I-140 approval is not an issue right now. It is being approved as fast as one month these days. But I see no harm in asking for it. Let us reach for the moon and see what we get :)
2011 denise-milani-wallpaper-2
chumki
12-17 07:06 PM
My situation is I got LAID off.
I had to change employment.
So,
Should I file Ac-21 ?
I had to change employment.
So,
Should I file Ac-21 ?
more...
rotucan
12-12 06:16 PM
I have also OPT card with a A# and another alien number with 485.. I went to INFOPASS, the IO said that there is no problem.. the one in the OPT is a temporal number.... the new alien from 485 is the permanent:o
Jerrome
01-30 10:22 AM
Yes, you can Travel as long as the H1 Visa Stamping in Un-Expired,
My scneario was i worked for employer A,
Had H1 visa stamping Upto Oct 2006.
Changed employer and H1B transfer with Extension.
Traveled to India returned, While returning Showed the New 797 to the Officer and Got the I-94 for the new date. No problem.
Please carry just in case your new employer employement verification letter and latest paystub. Most of the time it is not necessary but just in case.
My scneario was i worked for employer A,
Had H1 visa stamping Upto Oct 2006.
Changed employer and H1B transfer with Extension.
Traveled to India returned, While returning Showed the New 797 to the Officer and Got the I-94 for the new date. No problem.
Please carry just in case your new employer employement verification letter and latest paystub. Most of the time it is not necessary but just in case.
more...
gc_on_demand
08-06 03:05 PM
Are there public benefits that aliens can legally receive without worrying that they will be considered a public charge?
A: Yes. Not all publicly funded benefits will be considered in deciding whether someone is or is likely to become a public charge. The focus of the public charge definition is on cash benefits for income maintenance and institutionalization for long-term care at government expense. Examples of benefits that will not be considered for public charge purposes include:
Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases; use of health clinics, prenatal care, etc.), other support for institutionalization for long-term care, Children�s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Nutrition programs including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and Breakfast programs, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs:
Housing assistance
Child care services
Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
Emergency disaster relief
Foster care and adoption assistance
Educational assistance, including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
Job training programs
In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter).
Are health care benefits and enrollment in health insurance programs like Medicaid and CHIP considered for public charge purposes?
A: No, not unless an alien is primarily dependent on the government for subsistence as demonstrated by institutionalization for long-term care at government expense. In particular, USCIS and the State Department will not consider participation in Medicaid, CHIP, or similar state-funded programs, for public charge purposes. This approach will help to safeguard public health while still allowing USCIS and the State Department to identify people who are primarily dependent on the government for subsistence by looking to the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance. In addition, short-term institutionalization for rehabilitation will not be considered for public charge purposes.
Point is should he put YES or NO in I 485. If he does put YES I am sure in given environment he will get RFE for his wife.
I just want to see if some has same or simillar situation..
A: Yes. Not all publicly funded benefits will be considered in deciding whether someone is or is likely to become a public charge. The focus of the public charge definition is on cash benefits for income maintenance and institutionalization for long-term care at government expense. Examples of benefits that will not be considered for public charge purposes include:
Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases; use of health clinics, prenatal care, etc.), other support for institutionalization for long-term care, Children�s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Nutrition programs including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and Breakfast programs, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs:
Housing assistance
Child care services
Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
Emergency disaster relief
Foster care and adoption assistance
Educational assistance, including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
Job training programs
In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter).
Are health care benefits and enrollment in health insurance programs like Medicaid and CHIP considered for public charge purposes?
A: No, not unless an alien is primarily dependent on the government for subsistence as demonstrated by institutionalization for long-term care at government expense. In particular, USCIS and the State Department will not consider participation in Medicaid, CHIP, or similar state-funded programs, for public charge purposes. This approach will help to safeguard public health while still allowing USCIS and the State Department to identify people who are primarily dependent on the government for subsistence by looking to the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance. In addition, short-term institutionalization for rehabilitation will not be considered for public charge purposes.
Point is should he put YES or NO in I 485. If he does put YES I am sure in given environment he will get RFE for his wife.
I just want to see if some has same or simillar situation..
2010 Denise Milani - She is da Best
senthil1
12-05 05:44 PM
No difference this year. This year most H1bs will go to Indian consulting companies as they will process and keep them in India. Also many US Master degree graduates will pay money to consulting companies and get H1b though there will be no new jobs. Only US companies like Intel,Google will reduce/stop hiring H1b and non H1b.
I think H1b will last more month this time than past 3 years. And lawmakers will think its not right time to increase.
I spoke to 1-2 relatives who are having consulting business and they told me they are reducing work force.. ( Not lay off but not interested to hire more and more h1b in this slow economy ) ....
I think H1b will last more month this time than past 3 years. And lawmakers will think its not right time to increase.
I spoke to 1-2 relatives who are having consulting business and they told me they are reducing work force.. ( Not lay off but not interested to hire more and more h1b in this slow economy ) ....
more...
h1techSlave
07-19 01:22 PM
one of my friend got his Initail EAD after 90 days by walking into local office but that was long back in 2002 . Not sure if laws changed ..
In the immigration world, 5 years is like 5 centuries.:)
In the immigration world, 5 years is like 5 centuries.:)
hair Denise Milani Wallpapers
abhishek101
03-25 01:54 PM
Finally, someone who thinks long-term. That is why I had mentioned that we need to go beyond our immediate benefits and think longterm.
Also, people with Masters in Computer Science are also eligible, so for the many nay sayers, grunt IT work is not interesting to US govt., but there is still a lot of innovation going on in core Computer Science.
I agree fully. If we get only one thing to say it should be getting the soft limit back. It is something that already exists in current immigration system and can be defended easily. Once we have got that as an amendment we should start pushing for other things.
I always believe in One step at a time and in picking your fights. We all would love to get everything right now but a wise thing would be choose the most important fight.
SO my Vote : Reinstate Soft Quota.
Also, people with Masters in Computer Science are also eligible, so for the many nay sayers, grunt IT work is not interesting to US govt., but there is still a lot of innovation going on in core Computer Science.
I agree fully. If we get only one thing to say it should be getting the soft limit back. It is something that already exists in current immigration system and can be defended easily. Once we have got that as an amendment we should start pushing for other things.
I always believe in One step at a time and in picking your fights. We all would love to get everything right now but a wise thing would be choose the most important fight.
SO my Vote : Reinstate Soft Quota.
more...
joydiptac
05-18 06:44 PM
Guys,
This is a very positive development. Chinese are suing based on EB3 China visas used in 2008 & 2009 which were 2058 and 1077 respectively. Which are far less than 2500 that the law actually allows without spillover. This is awesome. Go Chinese friends!
Pappu sir,
Do we (EB3I) know the number of applicants who were approved green card from EB3 I in the last three years? I suspect that the same would have happened here too. We need to also follow (Law) suit.
This is a very positive development. Chinese are suing based on EB3 China visas used in 2008 & 2009 which were 2058 and 1077 respectively. Which are far less than 2500 that the law actually allows without spillover. This is awesome. Go Chinese friends!
Pappu sir,
Do we (EB3I) know the number of applicants who were approved green card from EB3 I in the last three years? I suspect that the same would have happened here too. We need to also follow (Law) suit.
hot Denise Milani
dba9ioracle
09-22 12:37 PM
If employer is asking pay cut becuase he is in trouble, you should change the job. I don't think he will do anything (or pay you douple), if you are in trouble even if he is making good money. Move on..
more...
house Free Denise Milani 0027
morchu
05-06 11:51 AM
You are NOT eligible for AC21 benefits (for the part of continuing the GC even after jobchange) on your I140 yet . So technically if the job is different you need another LC and I140. But thinking from a broader view, LC states, job title, description, wage and employer. So from an LC point of view, as long as the stated conditions there remain the same, the job is the same. As long as the job is SAME no issues.
Absolutely no issues, as long as you have a letter from same employer does not matter.
Absolutely no issues, as long as you have a letter from same employer does not matter.
tattoo Denise-Milani-Wallpaper (1)
gcfriend65
06-06 08:57 AM
OK, Here is my situation. I came to the U.S. in August 1998 on F-1 visa stamped until Dec. 2000. I continued on my F-1 I-94 till November 2002, at which point I switched to H-1 B. I have changed three jobs prior to this one, but never have been out of status. I have all my pay stubs, income tax returns and original I-797's for the companies I worked for and am currently working. I have two Master's degrees from US university. Is it advisable to go for H-1 B visa stamping in Canada, Mexico or Mumbai, India. I have my passport valid till April 2015.
more...
pictures Re: Denise Milani - Hot amp; Sexy
Abhinaym
08-13 10:12 AM
<Doing the rain dance>
dresses Denise Milani Beautiful Model
priderock
06-07 06:27 PM
This is a very complex bill with some provisions that could be detrimental to us. But there are some amendments that could help us (and some that could hurt us).
But I some times feel like you do. We as a groups seem to be confused. All along we want to have control over our GC process and not succumb to employers. But when this bill would have given what we wanted all along, we don't want it.
It would have been better to get some of provisions in that would help us rather than an out right opposition. As I said this is a VERY VERY VERY complex bill and there are VERY FEW that understood this completely.
But I some times feel like you do. We as a groups seem to be confused. All along we want to have control over our GC process and not succumb to employers. But when this bill would have given what we wanted all along, we don't want it.
It would have been better to get some of provisions in that would help us rather than an out right opposition. As I said this is a VERY VERY VERY complex bill and there are VERY FEW that understood this completely.
more...
makeup Denise Milani - Tennis Play
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
girlfriend Denise Milani 12-04-08
rockstart
06-15 12:42 PM
Most of the info you are asking is already available on IV Wiki. Please refer the relevant sections
Dear Friends,
Please advise me for the following relating to my birth certificate that I have to use for Immigration purposes.
One or two alphabets of my name on birth certificate are different from my passport and secondary school. In addition, my family name is not included in the certificate. Rest of the information is all fine and matching with my passport and secondary school certificates( like DOB, Parents, Place etc)
I have some questions
1. Does the birth certificate issued by Indian consulate in foreign country is deemed acceptable?
2. Do I need to furnish any kind of affidavit along with original birth certificate, if yes, please share the format for those, who is writing these affidavit and any specific stamp paper/value etc?
3. Any guidelines in order to correct the information in my original certificate.
4. Any other vital information in this regard
Thanks you all.
Zimmyneuro
Dear Friends,
Please advise me for the following relating to my birth certificate that I have to use for Immigration purposes.
One or two alphabets of my name on birth certificate are different from my passport and secondary school. In addition, my family name is not included in the certificate. Rest of the information is all fine and matching with my passport and secondary school certificates( like DOB, Parents, Place etc)
I have some questions
1. Does the birth certificate issued by Indian consulate in foreign country is deemed acceptable?
2. Do I need to furnish any kind of affidavit along with original birth certificate, if yes, please share the format for those, who is writing these affidavit and any specific stamp paper/value etc?
3. Any guidelines in order to correct the information in my original certificate.
4. Any other vital information in this regard
Thanks you all.
Zimmyneuro
hairstyles random picture thread *work
windycloud
07-10 10:33 AM
The H1 document in and by itself is not. The I-94 card that comes printed at the bottom is. And the I-94 card is a valid document as per the I-9 form.
Exactly. And that's what I gave them. The I-797 with the I-94. And this agency I'm talking about is TSA, part of Homeland Security. And obviously they don't know how to read a legal document issued by USCIS, also part of Homeland Security.
Exactly. And that's what I gave them. The I-797 with the I-94. And this agency I'm talking about is TSA, part of Homeland Security. And obviously they don't know how to read a legal document issued by USCIS, also part of Homeland Security.
msyedy
01-10 02:06 PM
Hey BacktoSchool
If you have EB3 2002 labor approved( I have not seen that in your post) now.
If the above statement is true, then File another labor in EB2 through perm which will be approved in 6 months.
Get I-140 of both EB3 and EB2 labor approved via premium.
USE EB3 priority with the EB2 labor, that means you can file for I-485 and get EAD because the proprity date EB2 category is accepting is Jan-2003 and your priority is June 2002.
Think on this, ask your employer and lawyer, couple of my friends are doing this.
In max six months time you will be eligible for I-485
If you have EB3 2002 labor approved( I have not seen that in your post) now.
If the above statement is true, then File another labor in EB2 through perm which will be approved in 6 months.
Get I-140 of both EB3 and EB2 labor approved via premium.
USE EB3 priority with the EB2 labor, that means you can file for I-485 and get EAD because the proprity date EB2 category is accepting is Jan-2003 and your priority is June 2002.
Think on this, ask your employer and lawyer, couple of my friends are doing this.
In max six months time you will be eligible for I-485
JoeWings
March 24th, 2005, 10:21 AM
The AA battery holder is for LAST RESORT use only. It was never designed for continous use. If you did it would get very expensive very quickly.
You didn't say what kind of batteries. If they were Ni-Cads or NiMH, they only supply 1.2 volts. The D100 requires 1.5 volts.
Also, you might try mounting a newer AF lens to it just to see if its the older lens. Hopefully the lens you used isn't pre-1977. If so, you may have damaged the body.
You didn't say what kind of batteries. If they were Ni-Cads or NiMH, they only supply 1.2 volts. The D100 requires 1.5 volts.
Also, you might try mounting a newer AF lens to it just to see if its the older lens. Hopefully the lens you used isn't pre-1977. If so, you may have damaged the body.
No comments:
Post a Comment