maddipati1
12-03 03:24 PM
there are lot of threads abt this topic. search it.
read form I-131 instructions, where it clearly says, AP appl. is considered abandoned if you leave US before its approval. this is for sure.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
read form I-131 instructions, where it clearly says, AP appl. is considered abandoned if you leave US before its approval. this is for sure.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
wallpaper The wallpaper samples are from
txh1b
08-18 11:31 AM
What was the RFE about? You should not begin work for new employer as you do not qualify for H1b portability. Any employment prior to that has the risk of being considered unauthorized.
glus
01-02 12:39 PM
Appreciate the responses...my concern was whether a potential H1B denial would cause problems at port of entry when using Advance Parole...
Normally not, unless the IO marks the passport as "inadmissible" for any reason.
Normally not, unless the IO marks the passport as "inadmissible" for any reason.
2011 File name: Magic Tree House 07
lost_in_migration
11-08 02:05 PM
Why are number of I-485 less than number of I-130
I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker
Both require a I-485 to adjust status
I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker
Both require a I-485 to adjust status
more...
samrat_bhargava_vihari
06-25 03:50 PM
Why he sent before date?
Guru's Is it right that after filling 485, USCIS will process application according to PD(2003,2004,2005 like that) ?
or USCIS will process application with the date 485 application received?
or i am missing something over here.
Thanks
They will process applications based on receipt date. But approval will happen only if your PD is current. That means if
CASE A with PD 2003
CASE B with PD 2005
CASE C with PD 2007
Say all file in July and if dates gets retrogess some time in OCT or before to 2006.
Say for CASE A and CASE C all process is done( name check,... every thing but not approval) and CASE B is stuck in name check.
then CASE A will be approved because A process is complete and PD is current
CASE B will be pending waiting to clear name check though the PD is current
Once name check done and PD is current this will approve.
CASE C will not be approved though processing is complete PD is not current
once PD become current CASE C will approve.
This is just example to explain how it works.
Guru's Is it right that after filling 485, USCIS will process application according to PD(2003,2004,2005 like that) ?
or USCIS will process application with the date 485 application received?
or i am missing something over here.
Thanks
They will process applications based on receipt date. But approval will happen only if your PD is current. That means if
CASE A with PD 2003
CASE B with PD 2005
CASE C with PD 2007
Say all file in July and if dates gets retrogess some time in OCT or before to 2006.
Say for CASE A and CASE C all process is done( name check,... every thing but not approval) and CASE B is stuck in name check.
then CASE A will be approved because A process is complete and PD is current
CASE B will be pending waiting to clear name check though the PD is current
Once name check done and PD is current this will approve.
CASE C will not be approved though processing is complete PD is not current
once PD become current CASE C will approve.
This is just example to explain how it works.
santb1975
02-15 05:41 PM
I will keep you posted on how this goes.
May you have plenty of supporters coming your way.
I am happy to report that one brave Dallas member called up and we both will be collecting letters at the DFW Temple on Sunday.
May you have plenty of supporters coming your way.
I am happy to report that one brave Dallas member called up and we both will be collecting letters at the DFW Temple on Sunday.
more...
geesee
07-20 05:21 PM
^^^^
2010 WotD – Tree Village
dealsboy
07-19 10:27 PM
Trance,
Either you or your wife have to curb the career growth.
As of today EB2 is progressing well. There is a gossip out there that EB2 will be current in a year. If you stay with your current company you will get your Green Card.
If you stay in EB2 you may have to cut the career progression for 2 more years (Assumption - EB2 will be current in a year). If you move to Eb3 then it will be 10 yrs or more.
How sure are you that they will process her Green Card in EB2 or atleast they will file for a GC? If your wife only wants to join a company that processes GC in EB2 then there may be a chance that they will pay your wife less.
Decide on your own.
My personal suggestion.
Do not get into EB3 hell.
Answers
1. Do not take the offer. IMO.
2. Yes
3. No
Note : I am in EB3 and my wife is in health care. She will get her job next year.
Either you or your wife have to curb the career growth.
As of today EB2 is progressing well. There is a gossip out there that EB2 will be current in a year. If you stay with your current company you will get your Green Card.
If you stay in EB2 you may have to cut the career progression for 2 more years (Assumption - EB2 will be current in a year). If you move to Eb3 then it will be 10 yrs or more.
How sure are you that they will process her Green Card in EB2 or atleast they will file for a GC? If your wife only wants to join a company that processes GC in EB2 then there may be a chance that they will pay your wife less.
Decide on your own.
My personal suggestion.
Do not get into EB3 hell.
Answers
1. Do not take the offer. IMO.
2. Yes
3. No
Note : I am in EB3 and my wife is in health care. She will get her job next year.
more...
saro28
11-07 05:52 AM
agc2005: I am sending in the card and new photos along with the application today to TSC. According to USCIS Service rep, I don't need to attach the fees. Now I need to find the address where to send.
hair Tree House
piyu7444
04-01 02:32 PM
What was your exact PD (Day?) Nov 21 2006
2. Which service center did you file with? Texas
3. What day did you file in July? Are you in any special category with EB2 like NIW? No special category and I filed on Jul 1 and my application reached USCIS on Jul 2
4. What is your country of chargeability? Are you cross chargeable to any other country? India and no crosscharge.........
Hope this helps..
2. Which service center did you file with? Texas
3. What day did you file in July? Are you in any special category with EB2 like NIW? No special category and I filed on Jul 1 and my application reached USCIS on Jul 2
4. What is your country of chargeability? Are you cross chargeable to any other country? India and no crosscharge.........
Hope this helps..
more...
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
hot house wallpapers of nature for
hopefulgc
07-20 02:04 PM
One has 2 pages the other has 4 pages
Shouldn't really matter.. unless the IO is anal about it..
I would send in a G325A along with a cover letter stating my full name, SS, alien #, if any, just to be safe.
Shouldn't really matter.. unless the IO is anal about it..
I would send in a G325A along with a cover letter stating my full name, SS, alien #, if any, just to be safe.
more...
house Beautiful Tree wallpaper
glus
08-21 09:32 AM
I am happy for you. Good luck!!
G
G
tattoo 3d haunted house wallpaper
Refugee_New
03-19 03:05 PM
Well...my PD is current and my RD at Nebraska is also current as per thier processing times. But still no LUDs or any other updates so far :( (its been 19 days since my PD became current)
I already spoke to USCIS IO one week back, and was told its a bit too early, and wait for 45 days and call back if nothing happens until then. They weren't willing to give me the status whether my Namecheck crossed 180 days.
Just going to wait until April 1, and then call them again. Or get an INFOPASS . What do the gurus suggest?
[EB3 - I , PD May 2001, RD July 30 07, Nebraska ]
Its unfortunate that you have a very recent RD. I talked to an IO at NSC yesterday and i was told that they will process the case based on the order they recieved. So they go by RD. If this is true then i guess you will have to wait some more time. Because thousands of people applied I-485 between June first to July 30.
I already spoke to USCIS IO one week back, and was told its a bit too early, and wait for 45 days and call back if nothing happens until then. They weren't willing to give me the status whether my Namecheck crossed 180 days.
Just going to wait until April 1, and then call them again. Or get an INFOPASS . What do the gurus suggest?
[EB3 - I , PD May 2001, RD July 30 07, Nebraska ]
Its unfortunate that you have a very recent RD. I talked to an IO at NSC yesterday and i was told that they will process the case based on the order they recieved. So they go by RD. If this is true then i guess you will have to wait some more time. Because thousands of people applied I-485 between June first to July 30.
more...
pictures All-Natural Wooden Tree House
mpadapa
10-10 06:40 AM
H1 extensions are never subjected to cap. But if U start using EAD (by filing I-9) then U loose H1 status and hence U break the continuity of H1, so in future if U decide to go back to H1B (for reason like 485 rejected), then U have to apply a NEW H1 which is subjected to cap (not applicable for cap-exempt employment).
H4 is not lost when U use EAD, it is just that U R in AOS status on H4. It is similar to F1, F1 status doesn't allow ppl to work outside campus, but after U graduate, U can work anywhere on EAD (for 1yr) and still be on F1 status and travel using F1. The same Q is answered by susan henner on the IV free conf on Sep 30, the recording of that can be found at http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
augustus U'r lawyer is absolutely correct. Come on folks don't scare people..
Afaik, you can file for an H1 extension without being subject to caps as long as an AOS pending. For instance, you can take a break and go to school, and then file for another H1 extension - it won't be subject to the caps. Confirm it with your lawyer.
jazz
H4 is not lost when U use EAD, it is just that U R in AOS status on H4. It is similar to F1, F1 status doesn't allow ppl to work outside campus, but after U graduate, U can work anywhere on EAD (for 1yr) and still be on F1 status and travel using F1. The same Q is answered by susan henner on the IV free conf on Sep 30, the recording of that can be found at http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
augustus U'r lawyer is absolutely correct. Come on folks don't scare people..
Afaik, you can file for an H1 extension without being subject to caps as long as an AOS pending. For instance, you can take a break and go to school, and then file for another H1 extension - it won't be subject to the caps. Confirm it with your lawyer.
jazz
dresses Tree House My House :
new_phd
05-14 12:51 AM
*** Modified post to reflect that this is a repeat post.***
__________All Other________ China _________ India __________ Mexico _______ Phillipines
EB-1_________ C ____________ C ____________ C ____________ C ____________ C
EB-2_________ C ________ 01 APR 04 _____ 01 APR 04 _________ C ____________ C
EB-3_____ 01 MAR 06 _____ 22 Mar 03 _____ 01 NOV 01 _____ 01 JUL 02 _____ 01 MAR 06
Other_____01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03
Everything else is current.
Link to travel.state.gov bulletin: http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4231.html
__________All Other________ China _________ India __________ Mexico _______ Phillipines
EB-1_________ C ____________ C ____________ C ____________ C ____________ C
EB-2_________ C ________ 01 APR 04 _____ 01 APR 04 _________ C ____________ C
EB-3_____ 01 MAR 06 _____ 22 Mar 03 _____ 01 NOV 01 _____ 01 JUL 02 _____ 01 MAR 06
Other_____01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03 _____ 01 JAN 03
Everything else is current.
Link to travel.state.gov bulletin: http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4231.html
more...
makeup stories about tree house
yabadaba
06-22 09:40 AM
My colleague told me that he took only chest X-ray and not done skin test he got his GC.
hemasar....dont give wrong information. Just becuse your colleague said that he got it does not make it a law. Please be prudent in providing correct legal information!
hemasar....dont give wrong information. Just becuse your colleague said that he got it does not make it a law. Please be prudent in providing correct legal information!
girlfriend +cheerleaders+wallpaper
swarnapuri
06-26 12:48 PM
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
hairstyles A tree house for my Birthday!
vallabhu
01-02 11:45 AM
I am not giving up so easily after waiting for 4 years, esp when I have qualification mentioned in ETA-750 and mine was not a substitution labor either.
Any other thoughts guys.
Any other thoughts guys.
ivvm
04-01 02:08 AM
Your application will be processed for completion once your PD gets current!
raydhan
06-13 01:49 PM
Hello everyone,
I am on the EB3 category and have a PD of March 19, 2002. Also, I am from a non-retrogressed country (Brazil). Would any of the wise members of this forum be willing to estimate how much longer I'd have to wait until I am concurrent? Thanks in advance.
camberiu,
Let's forget about the visa numbers. My P.D. is Jan'02 (EB3-India :( )and I am not expecting any movement significant movement for the next 4-6 months.
Atleast you can expect some good news in the World Cup on July 9th. Hope to see Cafu lift Brazil's 6th Cup.
You better log off and watch Brazil-Croatia in 10 minutes.
I am on the EB3 category and have a PD of March 19, 2002. Also, I am from a non-retrogressed country (Brazil). Would any of the wise members of this forum be willing to estimate how much longer I'd have to wait until I am concurrent? Thanks in advance.
camberiu,
Let's forget about the visa numbers. My P.D. is Jan'02 (EB3-India :( )and I am not expecting any movement significant movement for the next 4-6 months.
Atleast you can expect some good news in the World Cup on July 9th. Hope to see Cafu lift Brazil's 6th Cup.
You better log off and watch Brazil-Croatia in 10 minutes.
No comments:
Post a Comment