seeker
01-10 07:27 PM
Lets us call Cornyn and Reids office and ask them to reintroduce Skil (as an appropriation bills amendment). Lets do it guys.... CIR will never happen.
What does IV core think about this action plan?
What does IV core think about this action plan?
wallpaper Black And White Wedding Cakes
lifestrikes
02-26 02:49 PM
Copies of the documents will do. Original is not required for H-4 stamping.
pani_6
07-23 07:49 PM
I am applying to renew my EAD and looking at the paper Application on page 7 I see that if you are C9 which all of us are mostly..we need not file an application fee..
Is it true..
Plz help
Is it true..
Plz help
2011 Blue damask wedding cake2
hsm2007
10-12 09:09 PM
Guys,
I had received FP notice 2 days ago and my FP date is after 3 weeks. I was getting ready to try to do it early but I just received Card Production Ordered email for both my spouse and myself. What do I do now? Do I need to still go for the FP after 3 weeks.
I am not sure why they would send me the FP notice if they wanted to approve my GC.
I had received FP notice 2 days ago and my FP date is after 3 weeks. I was getting ready to try to do it early but I just received Card Production Ordered email for both my spouse and myself. What do I do now? Do I need to still go for the FP after 3 weeks.
I am not sure why they would send me the FP notice if they wanted to approve my GC.
more...
martinvisalaw
07-02 06:51 PM
Whatever you call it, you are really always applying for a new EAD. There is no such thing as renewing an existing EAD. The I-765 form that you complete will ask about any prior EADs that you had. If you do not have details, please put as close to the facts as possible. If you still have a CIS receipt number, definitely include that so CIS can look up the details.
adham_a
04-16 10:54 AM
Grendizer and dukefleed :)
more...
asdfred
06-09 09:02 AM
EAD is for job
AP is for reentering US
Pending 485 is status in US
So, if she is not planning to work - then no need to apply for EAD
AP is for reentering US
Pending 485 is status in US
So, if she is not planning to work - then no need to apply for EAD
2010 Black White Damask Wedding
Jaime
09-20 03:38 AM
谢谢! A big xie-xie! To all Chinese IV members who attended the rally! Your participation and graciousness was invaluable and it was nice to meet you all! We look forward to us all working together for our next events, and for our ultimate common goal of receiving fairness from the law! Along with the beginning of our march towards auspicious victory we have also started a life-long friendship! Let's continue working together!!
more...
glus
07-25 10:45 AM
Is any one got receipt of 485filing on july 2nd? Please post the status like checks are cashed, receipt,retuns etc.
Not yet. They are still entering Jun cases.
Not yet. They are still entering Jun cases.
hair Black and White cake
fatjoe
09-06 01:45 PM
In the same boat. Looks like July 17th & around are not cleared yet. Mine filed on July 18th
more...
santa123
09-02 07:07 PM
Is there an active IV FL chapter? If so pls provide details.
hot Black and White Damask with
joo
03-23 12:08 PM
Has anyone travel to london Can anyone suggest which is the best airport transfers
I heared of some
http://www.airportransfers.net
http://www.ncc24hr.com
http://www.minicabsbytext.com/
Any Suggestion Remarks about the price reliability?
I heared of some
http://www.airportransfers.net
http://www.ncc24hr.com
http://www.minicabsbytext.com/
Any Suggestion Remarks about the price reliability?
more...
house Black White Damask with a;
Iammontoya
04-11 03:28 PM
it is possible (answering a question you directed towards Kirupa)
shift click on the objects you would like to group. Click on arrange and group. To undo it.. click on Arrange (ungroup).
That should do it.
Good luck!
shift click on the objects you would like to group. Click on arrange and group. To undo it.. click on Arrange (ungroup).
That should do it.
Good luck!
tattoo Damask Wedding Cake
logiclife
01-18 06:04 PM
They will in Feb.
They have to. Otherwise the universities who provide these advanced degrees only to ask students with advanced degrees go go back saying "Sorry folks, no H1s" will have to kiss goodbye to 13 billion in revenue.
They have to. Otherwise the universities who provide these advanced degrees only to ask students with advanced degrees go go back saying "Sorry folks, no H1s" will have to kiss goodbye to 13 billion in revenue.
more...
pictures Color Palette: Black and White
webr
07-02 07:14 PM
Edison residents, officials outraged by Time magazine column about Indian immigrants | NJ.com (http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2010/07/edison_residents_officials_out.html)
dresses Black and White Damask Wedding
ritwik_ind
10-26 10:00 AM
Hi there,
This is my post for the contest. :eye:
http://http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7766/lostil.jpghttp://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7766/lostil.jpg
http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7766/lostil.jpg
hope you like it, [Wish me luck!! ]
Cheers,
Twik
Mans mind, once stretched by an idea, never attains its original dimensions.
This is my post for the contest. :eye:
http://http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7766/lostil.jpghttp://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7766/lostil.jpg
http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7766/lostil.jpg
hope you like it, [Wish me luck!! ]
Cheers,
Twik
Mans mind, once stretched by an idea, never attains its original dimensions.
more...
makeup Photo: Black and white damask
vin13
07-22 10:10 PM
Hey, U are not alone. looks like we are two guys out here in South Dakota.:)
I am on EB-2. Priority date Apr 2005. Sent 485 application last week.
I am on EB-2. Priority date Apr 2005. Sent 485 application last week.
girlfriend lack and white damask wedding cake. Pink Wedding Cake damask cake
madooripraveen
03-20 03:50 PM
On mar 12th I got a query on I-485.
It says.
The Documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of service records indicate that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying form i-140 immigration petitioner and /or job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
There fore submit a currently dated letter from your original form I-140 employer which which address this discrepancy.
I filed my labor and I-140 I was in california, i moved to different state since I filed my 485, till now I am with the same employer.
Any gurus who can suggest me on the query would be greatly appreciated.
thanks
It says.
The Documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of service records indicate that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying form i-140 immigration petitioner and /or job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
There fore submit a currently dated letter from your original form I-140 employer which which address this discrepancy.
I filed my labor and I-140 I was in california, i moved to different state since I filed my 485, till now I am with the same employer.
Any gurus who can suggest me on the query would be greatly appreciated.
thanks
hairstyles Black Wedding Cake Beautiful
Macaca
08-16 05:40 PM
Is the Senate Germane? Majority Leader Reid's Lament (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_19/procedural_politics/19719-1.html) By Don Wolfensberger | Roll Call, August 13, 2007
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
Don Wolfensberger is director of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and former staff director of the House Rules Committee.
The story is told that shortly after Thomas Jefferson returned from Paris in 1789, he asked President George Washington why the new Constitution created a Senate. Washington reportedly replied that it was for the same reason Jefferson poured his coffee into a saucer: to cool the hot legislation from the House.
Little could they have known then just how cool the Senate could be. Today, the "world's greatest deliberative body" resembles an iceberg. Bitter partisanship has chilled relationships and slowed legislation to a glacial pace.
The Defense authorization bill is pulled in pique because the Majority Leader cannot prevail on an Iraq amendment; only one of the 12 appropriations bills has cleared the Senate (Homeland Security); an immigration bill cannot even secure a majority vote for consideration; and common courtesies in floor debate are tossed aside in favor of angry barb-swapping. This is not your grandfather's world-class debating society.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) frustration level is code red. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) input level is code dead. The chief source of all this animosity and gridlock is the Democrats' intentional strategy to pursue partisan votes on Iraq to pressure the administration and embarrass vulnerable Republican Senators. The predictable side effects have been to poison the well for other legislation and exacerbate already frayed inter-party relationships.
The frustration experienced by Senate Majority Leaders is nothing new and has been amply expressed by former Leaders of both parties. The job has been likened to "herding cats" and "trying to put bullfrogs in a wheelbarrow." But there does seem to be a degree of difference in this Congress for a variety of reasons.
While Iraq certainly is the major factor, the newness of Reid on the job is another. It takes time to get a feel for the wheel. Meanwhile, there will be jerky veers into the ditch. Moreover, McConnell also is new to his job as Minority Leader. So both Leaders are groping for a rock shelf on which to build a workable relationship. Add to this the resistance from the White House at every turn and you have the perfect ice storm.
Reid's big complaint has been the multitude of amendments that slow down work on most bills - especially non-germane amendments - and the way the Senate skips back and forth on amendments with no logical sequence. These patterns and complaints also are not new, but they are a growing obstacle to the orderly management of Senate business.
Reid has asked Rules and Administration Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to look into expanding the germaneness rule. The existing rule applies only to general appropriations bills, post-cloture amendments and certain budget matters. The committee previously looked at broadening the germaneness rule back in 1988 and recommended an "extraordinary" majority vote (West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd suggested three-fifths) for applying a germaneness test on specified bills. But the Senate never considered the change.
The House, by contrast, adopted a germaneness rule in the first Congress on April 7, 1789, drawn directly from a rule invented on the fly and out of desperation by the Continental Congress: "No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment." According to a footnote in the House manual, the rule "introduced a principle not then known to the general parliamentary law, but of high value in the procedure of the House." The Senate chose to remain willfully and blissfully ignorant of the innovation - at least until necessity forced it to apply a germaneness test to appropriations amendments beginning in 1877.
Reid's suggestion to extend the rule to other matters sounds reasonable enough but is bound to meet bipartisan resistance. Any attempt to alter traditional ways in "the upper house" is viewed by many Senators as destructive of the institution. The worst slur is, "You're trying to make the Senate more like the House." Already, Reid's futile attempts to impose restrictive unanimous consent agreements that shut out most, if not all, amendments on important bills are mocked as tantamount to being a one-man House Rules Committee.
What are the chances of the Senate applying a germaneness rule to all floor amendments? History and common sense tell us they are somewhere between nil and none. Senators have little incentive to give up their freedom to offer whatever amendments they want, whenever they want. Others cite high public disapproval ratings of Congress as an imperative for reform. However, there is no evidence the public gives a hoot about non-germane amendments. Only if such amendments are tied directly to blocking urgently needed legislation might public ire be aroused sufficiently to bring pressure for change; and that case has yet to be made.
Nevertheless, the Majority Leader's lament should not be dismissed out of hand. It may well be time for the Senate to undergo another self-examination through public hearings in Feinstein's committee. When Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) chaired that committee in the previous two Congresses, he showed a willingness to publicly air, and even sponsor, suggested changes in Senate rules. One such idea, to make secret "holds" public, has just been adopted as part of the lobby reform bill.
The ultimate barrier to any change in Senate rules is the super-majority needed to end a filibuster. Although, in 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture on most matters from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the membership (60), they left the two-thirds threshold in place for ending debates on rules changes. That means an extraordinary bipartisan consensus is necessary for any significant reform. In the present climate that's as likely as melting the polar ice caps. Then again ...
ekaurgcf
06-01 08:42 PM
Hi Attorneys,
If someone could give me your inputs/replies please.
Thanks.
If someone could give me your inputs/replies please.
Thanks.
netfood
07-13 07:36 PM
I had L1A from 10/2005 to 10/2008. My lawyer filed I-485 in 2008, but he did not file extension of L1A. My L1A is expired in 2008. In Jan. 2010, my I-485 was denied. We filed appeal in Feb.. Then, we filed L1A extension, which is denied in June 2010. I do not know what to do? I have been in here for five years. now my wife and child's L2 also expired. Can I file another L1A without leaving USA (I was told no, because I did not meet 1/3 requirement, one year abroad within three years of admission into the USA. I have to go back Jamaca for one year and refile there, but I would give up my I-485). Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment