TomPlate
01-09 03:34 PM
Extrapolating the Einstein equation E =mc2 I get the following results :
EB3 June 01
EB2 Dec 2000 Your equation is wrong. It is going to be current for all EB category.
EB3 June 01
EB2 Dec 2000 Your equation is wrong. It is going to be current for all EB category.
wallpaper rihanna-tattoo-with-star-
chanduv23
04-27 09:16 AM
Not sure how true this is but I got this email from my friend who is also an IV member.
Dear All,
Be Careful At the Indian Airports , This is a well organized conspiracy by Indian Immigration, Police, Customs and Air India staff with networking at all the Indian
International Airports. Be watchful when ever you give your passport to Immigration/ Customs/Air India staff. The pass port can be easily tampered and can create trouble to you. They have found easy way of making money from NRIs. This is the way it works:
At the time of the passenger's departure, if the passenger is not looking at the officer while he is stamping the exit, the officer very cleverly tears away one of the page from the passport. When the passenger leaves the immigration counter, the case is reported on his computer terminal with full details. Now all over India they have got full details of the passenger with Red Flag flashing on the Passport number entered by the departure immigration officer. They have made their money by doing above. On arrival next time, he is interrogated. Subject to the passenger's period of stay abroad, his income and standing etc., the price to get rid of the problem is settled by the Police and Immigration people. If someone argues, his future is spoiled because there are always some innocent fellows who think the honesty is the basis of getting justice in India ..
Please advise every passenger to be careful at the airport. Whenever they hand over the passport to the counters of Air India , or immigration or the customs, they must be vigilant, should not remove eyes from the passport even if the officer in front tries to divert their attention. Also, please pass this information to all friends, media men and important politicians. Every month 20-30 cases are happening all over India to rob the NRIs the minute he lands. Similar case has happened with Aramco's Arifuddin. He was travelling with his family. They had six passports. They got the visa of America and decided to go via Hyderabad from Jeddah. They reached Hyderabad. Stayed about a month and left for the States. When they reached the States, the page of the American visa on his wife's passport
was missing. At the time of departure from Hyderabad it was there, the whole family had to return to Hyderabad helplessly. On arrival at Bombay back, they were caught by the police and now it is over 2 months, they are running after the Police, Immigration officers and the Courts. On going in to details with him, he found out the following: One cannot imagine, neither can believe, that the Indian Immigration dept can play such a nasty game to harass the innocent passengers.
All the passengers travelling to & fro India via Bombay and Hyderabad must be aware of this conspiracy. Every month 15 to 20 cases are taking place, at each mentioned airport, of holding the passengers in the crime of tearing away the passport pages. On interviewing some of them, none of them was aware of what had happened. They don't know why, when and who tore away the page from the middle of the passport. One can imagine the sufferings of such people at the hands of the immigration, police and the court procedures in India after that. The number of cases is increasing in the last 2-3 years. People who are arriving at the immigration, they are questioned and their passports are being held and they have to go in interrogations. Obviously, the conspiracy started about 2 to 3 years ago, now the results are coming. Some of the Air India counter staff too is involved in this conspiracy.
Dear All,
Be Careful At the Indian Airports , This is a well organized conspiracy by Indian Immigration, Police, Customs and Air India staff with networking at all the Indian
International Airports. Be watchful when ever you give your passport to Immigration/ Customs/Air India staff. The pass port can be easily tampered and can create trouble to you. They have found easy way of making money from NRIs. This is the way it works:
At the time of the passenger's departure, if the passenger is not looking at the officer while he is stamping the exit, the officer very cleverly tears away one of the page from the passport. When the passenger leaves the immigration counter, the case is reported on his computer terminal with full details. Now all over India they have got full details of the passenger with Red Flag flashing on the Passport number entered by the departure immigration officer. They have made their money by doing above. On arrival next time, he is interrogated. Subject to the passenger's period of stay abroad, his income and standing etc., the price to get rid of the problem is settled by the Police and Immigration people. If someone argues, his future is spoiled because there are always some innocent fellows who think the honesty is the basis of getting justice in India ..
Please advise every passenger to be careful at the airport. Whenever they hand over the passport to the counters of Air India , or immigration or the customs, they must be vigilant, should not remove eyes from the passport even if the officer in front tries to divert their attention. Also, please pass this information to all friends, media men and important politicians. Every month 20-30 cases are happening all over India to rob the NRIs the minute he lands. Similar case has happened with Aramco's Arifuddin. He was travelling with his family. They had six passports. They got the visa of America and decided to go via Hyderabad from Jeddah. They reached Hyderabad. Stayed about a month and left for the States. When they reached the States, the page of the American visa on his wife's passport
was missing. At the time of departure from Hyderabad it was there, the whole family had to return to Hyderabad helplessly. On arrival at Bombay back, they were caught by the police and now it is over 2 months, they are running after the Police, Immigration officers and the Courts. On going in to details with him, he found out the following: One cannot imagine, neither can believe, that the Indian Immigration dept can play such a nasty game to harass the innocent passengers.
All the passengers travelling to & fro India via Bombay and Hyderabad must be aware of this conspiracy. Every month 15 to 20 cases are taking place, at each mentioned airport, of holding the passengers in the crime of tearing away the passport pages. On interviewing some of them, none of them was aware of what had happened. They don't know why, when and who tore away the page from the middle of the passport. One can imagine the sufferings of such people at the hands of the immigration, police and the court procedures in India after that. The number of cases is increasing in the last 2-3 years. People who are arriving at the immigration, they are questioned and their passports are being held and they have to go in interrogations. Obviously, the conspiracy started about 2 to 3 years ago, now the results are coming. Some of the Air India counter staff too is involved in this conspiracy.
dealsnet
11-12 01:18 PM
Usually I didn't recomond any one. But for cheaper option this is the man.
If your case is complicated, go with Murthy, Rajiv Khanna, Ron Gotcher etc...
He is the cheapest and good attorney known.
H1B charge is $650 (renew) $750 for new, no charge for filing H4. GC process PERM , I-140, I-485 all for only $2000. Citizenship application $250.
No charge for any RFE. He will respond in detail. I don't know about AC21. May be $250.
HIGHLY RECOMENDED. New York based. Young man in his 30's. Respond emails with an hour.
He is a British guy like one of us came here in the USA as a student F1, H1 and greencard and pass the Bar license to become a lawyer.
So he have first hand knowledge of all the process. So this make him diffrent from any Immigration lawyers.
Andrew Dutton, Esq., P.C., lawyers in Franklin Square, NY, New York (http://www.immigrationcounselorlaw.com/)
Telephone: 516-308-3670
Fax: 516-308-3669
http://www.immigration-counselor.builderspot.com
immigrationcounselorlaw.com
email.
immigration_counselor@yahoo.com
If your case is complicated, go with Murthy, Rajiv Khanna, Ron Gotcher etc...
He is the cheapest and good attorney known.
H1B charge is $650 (renew) $750 for new, no charge for filing H4. GC process PERM , I-140, I-485 all for only $2000. Citizenship application $250.
No charge for any RFE. He will respond in detail. I don't know about AC21. May be $250.
HIGHLY RECOMENDED. New York based. Young man in his 30's. Respond emails with an hour.
He is a British guy like one of us came here in the USA as a student F1, H1 and greencard and pass the Bar license to become a lawyer.
So he have first hand knowledge of all the process. So this make him diffrent from any Immigration lawyers.
Andrew Dutton, Esq., P.C., lawyers in Franklin Square, NY, New York (http://www.immigrationcounselorlaw.com/)
Telephone: 516-308-3670
Fax: 516-308-3669
http://www.immigration-counselor.builderspot.com
immigrationcounselorlaw.com
email.
immigration_counselor@yahoo.com
2011 rihanna tattoos 2011. snathan
vin13
01-16 10:24 AM
Lets say , you move out of H1-b (company A)and start using your EAD (at Company B). Now after a few weeks you find another employer (company C) who is willing to do your H1-B. Then this is subject to the yearly Quota because you lost your H1-B status immediately after you started using your EAD (at Company B).
You can now move to Company C using your EAD and then apply under the new quota for H1-B in April for a start date of October (new fiscal year). Company C may not be reluctant or hesitant in your case because you can keep working for them from Day 1 and you continue on your EAD even if you do not get H1-B.
Company C will be hesitant only if you do not have EAD and you need to wait for the approval before you can work.
You can now move to Company C using your EAD and then apply under the new quota for H1-B in April for a start date of October (new fiscal year). Company C may not be reluctant or hesitant in your case because you can keep working for them from Day 1 and you continue on your EAD even if you do not get H1-B.
Company C will be hesitant only if you do not have EAD and you need to wait for the approval before you can work.
more...
LookingForGC
01-26 10:26 PM
Congrats! Enjoy the freedom.
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
more...
hpandey
04-29 10:54 AM
Thanks kaisersose.
Anyone else have any inputs. I need to make this decision soon and would appreciate as many inputs as possible.
Thanks.
H1-b extension rarely gets denied so you don't need to worry but if you are worried about it ( most people in the GC line have had their H1's renewed multiple times ) then use the EAD for working . EAD would also give you flexibility to change jobs in future to a better paying employer.
H1-b RFE or denial for you will not affect your GC process since you are a derivative application unless you have done something really illegal .
I would advise you not to get worried. You just need to decide whether you want to maintain your H1 status or work on EAD. Everything will be fine either way.
Anyone else have any inputs. I need to make this decision soon and would appreciate as many inputs as possible.
Thanks.
H1-b extension rarely gets denied so you don't need to worry but if you are worried about it ( most people in the GC line have had their H1's renewed multiple times ) then use the EAD for working . EAD would also give you flexibility to change jobs in future to a better paying employer.
H1-b RFE or denial for you will not affect your GC process since you are a derivative application unless you have done something really illegal .
I would advise you not to get worried. You just need to decide whether you want to maintain your H1 status or work on EAD. Everything will be fine either way.
2010 Tags: Rihanna, Star Tattoos
sonu
10-06 10:02 AM
Hi,
I am a July 2nd filer and I got my receipt notices, EADs and completed the FP too. I didnt get the AP yet but my wife's AP shows as approved. When I talked to an IO couple of days ago, she said my AP is approved but they didnt update the website. I called USCIS Customer Service today 3 to 4 (it seems they keep track of it) times and each gave me a different information. Sometimes they said they have Aug 17th as the receipt date but my receipt date is July 2nd(on the RN) and Aug 20th is the ND. So, I dont know what this Aug 17th date is and they say that is what they have in their systems as received date and I am still in the processing time. I am confused. According to my attorney, my wife's AP shudnt have been approved without my AP getting approved since I am the primary applicant.
Do I need to worry or just wait some more days? I am mainly worried that they have the wrong date as receipt date in their system and it might affect on future processing.
Thank you for any kind of input.
I am in the same situation as your, USCIS website shows that my wife's AP approved and mine is still pending at TSC. I called USCIS yesterday , they told me to wait for 90 days from notice date.
I am a July 2nd filer and I got my receipt notices, EADs and completed the FP too. I didnt get the AP yet but my wife's AP shows as approved. When I talked to an IO couple of days ago, she said my AP is approved but they didnt update the website. I called USCIS Customer Service today 3 to 4 (it seems they keep track of it) times and each gave me a different information. Sometimes they said they have Aug 17th as the receipt date but my receipt date is July 2nd(on the RN) and Aug 20th is the ND. So, I dont know what this Aug 17th date is and they say that is what they have in their systems as received date and I am still in the processing time. I am confused. According to my attorney, my wife's AP shudnt have been approved without my AP getting approved since I am the primary applicant.
Do I need to worry or just wait some more days? I am mainly worried that they have the wrong date as receipt date in their system and it might affect on future processing.
Thank you for any kind of input.
I am in the same situation as your, USCIS website shows that my wife's AP approved and mine is still pending at TSC. I called USCIS yesterday , they told me to wait for 90 days from notice date.
more...
b072707
10-29 10:20 AM
Got the receipts by calling USCIS. good luck to all.
hair rihanna tattoo. rihanna
mihird
05-17 07:10 PM
My company paid for it, but I did get to see the break up of the charges...I think, PERM is pretty complicated to file...
more...
Dhundhun
07-16 07:29 PM
seee SFO website...they issue PCC is upto 45 days, I think...
cgisf.org - even better call them
Won't SFO charge $20. Isn't it more than Rs 800. Tinku01 knows from where to buy for Rs100 to Rs200.
cgisf.org - even better call them
Won't SFO charge $20. Isn't it more than Rs 800. Tinku01 knows from where to buy for Rs100 to Rs200.
hot rihanna tattoos
eager_immi
07-11 12:32 PM
True but these were not applications that were filed 2 weeks back. Many people had 485 pending for over 2 years due to retrogression. Also a lot of cases that got a visa # still had pending security checks so technically they did not approve 60K 485, they only used up the visa#s.Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
more...
house rihanna tattoos 2011. track of
ssss
01-10 06:43 PM
My husband's case was transferred from CSC to TSC. We haven't received the FP notice yet. USCIS status "The I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS was transferred and is now pending standard processing at a USCIS office". when we called customer service cust service rep informed that we need to wait 180 days after the transfer for FP
tattoo Rihanna Tattoo 2011
skagitswimmer
April 6th, 2005, 12:14 PM
This is a very useful thread!
Has anyone tried using the multiple mask technique to expand dept of field rather than (or in addition to) dynamic range? Might have to soften the edge of the mask but in principle it should work, using one photo set to near focus and the other to infinity. Obvioiusly a tripod would be essential. For non-manual focus lenses one could toggle the infinity focus on/off.
Has anyone tried using the multiple mask technique to expand dept of field rather than (or in addition to) dynamic range? Might have to soften the edge of the mask but in principle it should work, using one photo set to near focus and the other to infinity. Obvioiusly a tripod would be essential. For non-manual focus lenses one could toggle the infinity focus on/off.