qplearn
09-30 05:38 PM
You should be thankful you are even able to file for 485. There are so many of us here who have waited 4+ YEARS (and still waiting) for just their labor cerification from BECs. Even assuming they get their I-140 approved overnight, they need to wait another 3-4 YEARS before they can even FILE 485. So compared to that 4-5 months processing time to approve I-140 is a rounding error .. dont mean to defend USCIS or trivialize your problem, just giving you some perspective of in the larger context of this huge EB mess.
I am really shocked to hear that. Why is it taking 4+ years to get a labor certification? I thought the PERM system solved this problem; I, of course, don't know much because my labor was approved via SHLC, and that takes 6 months.
Is this included in our demands? I mean the ability to file for 485 even when labor is not approved? Sounds like it should be.
I am really shocked to hear that. Why is it taking 4+ years to get a labor certification? I thought the PERM system solved this problem; I, of course, don't know much because my labor was approved via SHLC, and that takes 6 months.
Is this included in our demands? I mean the ability to file for 485 even when labor is not approved? Sounds like it should be.
wallpaper tattoo Black Ops Background
dealsnet
03-05 07:08 PM
Talk with hospitals in your area. May be $10K for the expense, if you didn't find any insurance to cover the pre-existing condition.
Spend it to get a US citizen child or save that money and make delivery happen in India.
btw her location will be @ Portland, Oregon.
Regards
Spend it to get a US citizen child or save that money and make delivery happen in India.
btw her location will be @ Portland, Oregon.
Regards
slowwin
03-02 10:45 AM
bump
2011 Black+ops+youtube+themes
ItIsNotFunny
09-22 03:06 PM
Please post how many people you called!
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
more...
hopefulgc
08-03 02:25 PM
I like the idea of linking to the High-5 campaign a lot.
$5 sounds like a resonable donation for replies to a harrowing immigration question from experts who have lived it, seen it, done it.
BTW... Could we have a link that bring one to the paypal page directly where you could choose from a drop-down from $5, $10, $20... More like one click donation.
This would save potential donors from having to sift through the Contribution page and locate the place to click to get to the paypal page. It is likely lead to a lot of "conversions".
Just a thought
$5 sounds like a resonable donation for replies to a harrowing immigration question from experts who have lived it, seen it, done it.
BTW... Could we have a link that bring one to the paypal page directly where you could choose from a drop-down from $5, $10, $20... More like one click donation.
This would save potential donors from having to sift through the Contribution page and locate the place to click to get to the paypal page. It is likely lead to a lot of "conversions".
Just a thought
smartboy75
11-01 04:51 PM
Wait for 90 days to pass by...then give a call to USCIS ....and enquire about her status...
Go ahead with your FP appointment....Eventually your daughters Receipt notice and FP will follow...
Hope this helps...
Go ahead with your FP appointment....Eventually your daughters Receipt notice and FP will follow...
Hope this helps...
more...
Pagal
01-18 06:41 AM
Hello,
Consult your lawyer on extensions and right paperwork..
IMHO, with right paperwork, no need to cancel the travel plans andor to worry about PoE... que sera sera...
Consult your lawyer on extensions and right paperwork..
IMHO, with right paperwork, no need to cancel the travel plans andor to worry about PoE... que sera sera...
2010 wallpapers youtube. ops
HereIComeGC
04-11 12:26 PM
dude do not hang-up. It is just another innovative way by USCIS to check your patience. The message changes to 5-10 minutes and then someone does talk to you ... :)
Thank you Dude and Lasantha. ALso Lasantha - Congrationtions on your GC. I will tolerate the annoying message and grind it out.
Thank you Dude and Lasantha. ALso Lasantha - Congrationtions on your GC. I will tolerate the annoying message and grind it out.
more...
pmlboy
05-01 04:57 PM
Thanks for your reply. I am getting the affidavits from my parents, as well as from blood relatives. However, I have been also asked to provide government document stating why mother's name is absent on birth certificate. I am trying to figure out any government law (currently checking births and deaths act of 1969), which can state that name of head-of-household is sufficient for birth certificates. My birth certificate also mentions the Births and Deaths Rules of 1972 of West Bengal, however, I can't locate an online document. If I have to get a statement from court, does anybody have any idea about what would be the template?
Thanks.
Thanks.
hair lack ops youtube backgrounds.
pmpforgc
03-28 08:46 PM
Hi
I am changing my employment and will be going to reside in Memphis, TN
My employment will be in the Arkansas State !! and My Family will be in GA for some time, I have a Part for the income this year 2009 in GA too!!
Just to add this year (2008) I have to file state taxes for South Carolina as well as GA!!
Looks like my tax story will get more interesting in 2009!!
So what will be my Tax status in Case of TN and AR? Do I will need to file taxes in both state for 2009?
thanks for your experienced input that will help me to be little proactive in this matter.
I am changing my employment and will be going to reside in Memphis, TN
My employment will be in the Arkansas State !! and My Family will be in GA for some time, I have a Part for the income this year 2009 in GA too!!
Just to add this year (2008) I have to file state taxes for South Carolina as well as GA!!
Looks like my tax story will get more interesting in 2009!!
So what will be my Tax status in Case of TN and AR? Do I will need to file taxes in both state for 2009?
thanks for your experienced input that will help me to be little proactive in this matter.
more...
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
hot youtube layouts lack ops,
sertasheep
08-03 09:43 PM
Bump ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
house youtube layouts lack ops,
eilsoe
10-02 02:33 PM
there's a wallpaper section??
where..?
where..?
tattoo lack ops wallpaper ps3.
n2b
08-02 09:35 AM
if you can convince the current employer not to revoke the 140 (at least for the next 180 days).
Is this true? If the employer agrees to not invoke I140 for next 180 days, I can start working for another company tomorrow without affecting my 485 application?
Wouldn't you need to show paystubs or something, for 180 days, for the company that filed your I485?
Thank you!!
Is this true? If the employer agrees to not invoke I140 for next 180 days, I can start working for another company tomorrow without affecting my 485 application?
Wouldn't you need to show paystubs or something, for 180 days, for the company that filed your I485?
Thank you!!
more...
pictures youtube backgrounds black
Winner
03-25 10:26 AM
Just curious�
Do these banks, which received TARP funds, have offshoring partners like TCS/Wipro? How is the offshoring part working? What does the H1B bill say about offshoring?
Do these banks, which received TARP funds, have offshoring partners like TCS/Wipro? How is the offshoring part working? What does the H1B bill say about offshoring?
dresses call of duty lack ops
ItIsNotFunny
09-22 03:06 PM
Please post how many people you called!
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
more...
makeup youtube backgrounds black
h1techSlave
05-14 12:31 PM
Urbana is a new community. Home taxes are twice compared to similar houses in VA. It is also around 50 miles from DC.
If you are looking in 300K range with best schools,large indian community then Villages of Urbana in Frederick is one of the better choices.
The property tax is pretty low here because it is in Frederick county. I hope this information helps you. The elementary,middle and high schools here are one of the best in the state.
If you are looking in 300K range with best schools,large indian community then Villages of Urbana in Frederick is one of the better choices.
The property tax is pretty low here because it is in Frederick county. I hope this information helps you. The elementary,middle and high schools here are one of the best in the state.
girlfriend Black+ops+youtube+themes
sk.aggarwal
05-22 11:26 PM
This is because, you dont need to file two I-129s. Don't worry, USCIS hope fully will give you one year+ 4 days extension... provided you have client letter for such.
BTW, last year, I specifically asked my attorney, if we need to file two h1s - one for recapture and another one for 7th year extension. And she told me only one is enough...
BTW, last year, I specifically asked my attorney, if we need to file two h1s - one for recapture and another one for 7th year extension. And she told me only one is enough...
hairstyles lack ops wallpaper ps3. lack
USDream2Dust
10-15 06:53 PM
I have had situations where CIS has issued more than one RFE, but only about twice in 12 years of immigration practice.
I would relax now and be happy about not getting another RFE in short time.
I would relax now and be happy about not getting another RFE in short time.
rosyTown
02-02 06:43 PM
Technical points go to Perlin (even though everyone did an amazing job technically). But I could look at snowflake all day. It's really pretty and well thought out. My vote goes to snowflake.
chanduv23
11-20 08:57 PM
^^^^^^^^^^
No comments:
Post a Comment