garamchai2go
12-19 10:30 AM
Do we have to carry all the Tax filing papers or just W2 is good enough?
I am planning to go for stamping in Jan. Thanks in advance for the input.
In my case they did not ask me any documents. They asked me about GC when applied, when I am travelling, etc., and that's all. It took less than 1 minute.
I carried W-2 of last few years and last 2 pay-slips. Check consulate or vfs website and you might get pointers or mandatory docs. I recommend, take everything you have..just in case..
I am planning to go for stamping in Jan. Thanks in advance for the input.
In my case they did not ask me any documents. They asked me about GC when applied, when I am travelling, etc., and that's all. It took less than 1 minute.
I carried W-2 of last few years and last 2 pay-slips. Check consulate or vfs website and you might get pointers or mandatory docs. I recommend, take everything you have..just in case..
wallpaper Angelina Jolie Brad Pitt and
luckylavs
06-28 12:23 PM
ofcourse a very good news...but at the same time if VB for next month is disappointing , what will be next plan of action.. to have SkILL bill or any way to have interim bills passed?
abhishek101
05-17 05:50 PM
I have Master's degree from US and have been with the company for 6yrs. This is the response from my Attorney on porting to EB2 category. My I485 was filed during July 2007. What can i do to be able to file a new PERM LC for porting to EB2 category without affecting my I485 application? Please advise.
Thank you for your email inquiring about filing a new PERM labor certification (PERM LC) application to qualify for the EB-2 preference category. A final determination has been made on whether a new PERM LC can be filed.
Regulations that govern the PERM Labor Certification process do not permit an employer to file a new PERM LC application for the sole purpose of shortening the wait time in immigrant visa preference categories. Company will not file a new PERM LC unless it is clearly required by regulation.
We completed our research and legal analysis. The purpose of the research was to determine whether you can still benefit from your current case, or whether substantial job changes require, by law, a new PERM LC application to be filed on your behalf.
Our final assessment is that while some job changes have occurred, the changes are not substantial in the context of labor certification regulations. Please note that while the group, products and/or daily tasks in your employment may be different, these changes are not substantial from an immigration perspective and do not require a new PERM LC. In addition, portability provisions of the law allow considerable flexibility for job changes when an I-485 Adjustment of Status application has been filed.
This is not an internal policy matter, rather company's compliance with U.S. Department of Labor regulations that govern the PERM LC process.
What your lawyer is saying that your duties are not 50% different from the original filing. Seems you work for a big corporation.
I work for a fortune 10 company and one of my colleague got the exact same response when she tried the same thing. I moved from Tech to Finance and they were fine doing it for me. So try to change your job substantially and retry.
Thank you for your email inquiring about filing a new PERM labor certification (PERM LC) application to qualify for the EB-2 preference category. A final determination has been made on whether a new PERM LC can be filed.
Regulations that govern the PERM Labor Certification process do not permit an employer to file a new PERM LC application for the sole purpose of shortening the wait time in immigrant visa preference categories. Company will not file a new PERM LC unless it is clearly required by regulation.
We completed our research and legal analysis. The purpose of the research was to determine whether you can still benefit from your current case, or whether substantial job changes require, by law, a new PERM LC application to be filed on your behalf.
Our final assessment is that while some job changes have occurred, the changes are not substantial in the context of labor certification regulations. Please note that while the group, products and/or daily tasks in your employment may be different, these changes are not substantial from an immigration perspective and do not require a new PERM LC. In addition, portability provisions of the law allow considerable flexibility for job changes when an I-485 Adjustment of Status application has been filed.
This is not an internal policy matter, rather company's compliance with U.S. Department of Labor regulations that govern the PERM LC process.
What your lawyer is saying that your duties are not 50% different from the original filing. Seems you work for a big corporation.
I work for a fortune 10 company and one of my colleague got the exact same response when she tried the same thing. I moved from Tech to Finance and they were fine doing it for me. So try to change your job substantially and retry.
2011 rad pitt 2011 oscars.
.jpg "angelina jolie 2011 march.")
Bpositive
01-10 10:38 PM
My wife is planning to travel on AP while H1B is pending administrative processing after a Chennai Consulate interview. We have submitted the required information but she needs to rejoin work and can't wait beyond our existing travel plans.
Has anyone gone through a similar situation. Should we be having any port of entry concerns?
Has anyone gone through a similar situation. Should we be having any port of entry concerns?
more...
chenche19
04-01 11:57 AM
Gurus,
my and my wife received a denial letter from USCIS regarding our I-485 applications. My I-140 was approved on November 08'.
the weird thing is that I did not get an RFE of any kind... so, we decided to submit an MTR because:
1. the grounds for denial are wrong: no RFE on Medical and my case falls under visa gate - USCIS publication of July 23, 2007 states that USCIS will submitt an RFE on this matter.
2. denial over birth certificate??? anyway, it was submitted originally and USCIS just lost it in the process anyway no RFE on that either.
3. taken literally from the letter of denial "EVIDENCE OF EVIDENCE OF ELIGIBILITY MAINTANCE " I believe that is my I-94 -which we had submitted and the visa bulletin on june 2007 giving me the green light for I-140 and I-485.
so, we submitted an MTR based on this documents and I got the receipt date as March 17.
any thoughts and comments will be apreciated.
thanks,
my and my wife received a denial letter from USCIS regarding our I-485 applications. My I-140 was approved on November 08'.
the weird thing is that I did not get an RFE of any kind... so, we decided to submit an MTR because:
1. the grounds for denial are wrong: no RFE on Medical and my case falls under visa gate - USCIS publication of July 23, 2007 states that USCIS will submitt an RFE on this matter.
2. denial over birth certificate??? anyway, it was submitted originally and USCIS just lost it in the process anyway no RFE on that either.
3. taken literally from the letter of denial "EVIDENCE OF EVIDENCE OF ELIGIBILITY MAINTANCE " I believe that is my I-94 -which we had submitted and the visa bulletin on june 2007 giving me the green light for I-140 and I-485.
so, we submitted an MTR based on this documents and I got the receipt date as March 17.
any thoughts and comments will be apreciated.
thanks,
laborpains
12-09 03:35 PM
At last my turn comes in January.....now the real fight begins.....any information abt how to get name check status....etc. my FP was done in Sep 2007....did not receive any new FP request...any insight on that gurus.
Happy holidays
~dask:confused:
EB-3-I
PD:Jan 31st 2002
Hey Dask, I am a 31 JAN 2002 PD too! Did not not receive any FP notice recently.
Happy holidays
~dask:confused:
EB-3-I
PD:Jan 31st 2002
Hey Dask, I am a 31 JAN 2002 PD too! Did not not receive any FP notice recently.
more...
sri1234
02-11 04:14 PM
As far as i know medicals are valid for 2 1/2 years.
Answer to your next question is, there could be many possibilities.
1. USCIS might have lost your original 693
2. There could be something which is not clear in the original 693 etc
Don't worry much. Just give them what they asked.
Its good that they opened your file.
I second krishna_brc
Answer to your next question is, there could be many possibilities.
1. USCIS might have lost your original 693
2. There could be something which is not clear in the original 693 etc
Don't worry much. Just give them what they asked.
Its good that they opened your file.
I second krishna_brc
2010 Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie
bsbawa10
08-14 11:11 PM
dude, there's gibberish in the sheet.............is this the right link?
Some people are not acting responsibly on the data. I made changes now. I brought the data back and also you will have to login into your gmail account now tobe able to make changes.
My humble request to all please act responsibly.
Do not edit somebody elses data.
Do not add/delete/modify any column.
Do not sort the data. If you really feel the urge, import it to your local computer and then sort it.
I will sort the data according to PD periodically.
You can add your own row at the end . Also please please do not sort the data.
Some people are not acting responsibly on the data. I made changes now. I brought the data back and also you will have to login into your gmail account now tobe able to make changes.
My humble request to all please act responsibly.
Do not edit somebody elses data.
Do not add/delete/modify any column.
Do not sort the data. If you really feel the urge, import it to your local computer and then sort it.
I will sort the data according to PD periodically.
You can add your own row at the end . Also please please do not sort the data.
more...
gc_mania_03
06-24 10:00 AM
Even I am going back to school full-time with my wife on EAD with AOS pending. As far as I know there are no issues. If there are any specifics in your case, just consult your attorney.
I remember in one of the calls with attorney[organized by IV], I was told I don't have to worry about producing pay-stubs.
-gc_mania_03
I remember in one of the calls with attorney[organized by IV], I was told I don't have to worry about producing pay-stubs.
-gc_mania_03
hair angelina jolie 2011 march.
vegasbaby
10-04 12:14 AM
Would greatly appreciate some advice regarding my fiancee.
She is currently in the US on a B1-B2 Tourist/Business visa. This is her fifth visa and has visited the US a total of 10 times over the past 5 years, spending 1-5 months each time. She has NEVER had a problem on arrival at the airport, never been called into the room for questioning, etc.
We are planning on getting married, but we need to make a trip to her home country for my work in the next few weeks for about a month. We were planning on waiting till 30 days after our return to marry and then to apply for her I-130/I-485 after that.
We just had a consultation with an immigration lawyer who recommended that she does NOT leave the country, and that we should get married ASAP and apply for the I-130/I-485 now, wait 2-3 months and make our trip then. The lawyer thought that there was a possibility that she might not be admitted the next time she comes in if the border agent has even the tiniest suspicion that she is entering to get married.
Although her previous B1-B2 visas were renewed each year without an interview, this year she was called in and they asked her some questions. She mentioned that she was doing some work for me in China, and that she would be staying with me in the US. She also put me down as her financial guarantee in the US.
I understand the basics of dual intent, and would not want to compromise her ability to enter the country.
Of course no one can know for sure, but would be grateful for some experienced advice about this. What are her chances of being refused entry when she returns? (Her visa is valid for one year, so it would be on the same visa she arrived here on this summer.) Would it be better if she arrived on a different flight than me? Or even better if she arrived on a flight to another city rather than the one where we live?
Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
I have to agree with the attorney here...B1/B2s visa are not much of a gain to USCIS. The beneficiary is not paying any taxes while in US. So there is every possibility of rejection/denial at POE. Best would be getting married while in US..The attorney's would have much more control if COS was done from US. Most attorney's would not be of much help when consular processing is involved.
She is currently in the US on a B1-B2 Tourist/Business visa. This is her fifth visa and has visited the US a total of 10 times over the past 5 years, spending 1-5 months each time. She has NEVER had a problem on arrival at the airport, never been called into the room for questioning, etc.
We are planning on getting married, but we need to make a trip to her home country for my work in the next few weeks for about a month. We were planning on waiting till 30 days after our return to marry and then to apply for her I-130/I-485 after that.
We just had a consultation with an immigration lawyer who recommended that she does NOT leave the country, and that we should get married ASAP and apply for the I-130/I-485 now, wait 2-3 months and make our trip then. The lawyer thought that there was a possibility that she might not be admitted the next time she comes in if the border agent has even the tiniest suspicion that she is entering to get married.
Although her previous B1-B2 visas were renewed each year without an interview, this year she was called in and they asked her some questions. She mentioned that she was doing some work for me in China, and that she would be staying with me in the US. She also put me down as her financial guarantee in the US.
I understand the basics of dual intent, and would not want to compromise her ability to enter the country.
Of course no one can know for sure, but would be grateful for some experienced advice about this. What are her chances of being refused entry when she returns? (Her visa is valid for one year, so it would be on the same visa she arrived here on this summer.) Would it be better if she arrived on a different flight than me? Or even better if she arrived on a flight to another city rather than the one where we live?
Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
I have to agree with the attorney here...B1/B2s visa are not much of a gain to USCIS. The beneficiary is not paying any taxes while in US. So there is every possibility of rejection/denial at POE. Best would be getting married while in US..The attorney's would have much more control if COS was done from US. Most attorney's would not be of much help when consular processing is involved.
more...
lkapildev
01-10 04:28 PM
:) May be you are caught on Name Check process.. Call USCIS and get your namecheck status.
Also USCIS process is a complete mess, if someone entered you under CHN quota then 2020. I hope that may not be the case as they have accepted your application even your PD 2007. You should be fine, have patience Use AC21 if you are not happy with your employeer. 6 months from approval of I-140 count that and move on.
Also USCIS process is a complete mess, if someone entered you under CHN quota then 2020. I hope that may not be the case as they have accepted your application even your PD 2007. You should be fine, have patience Use AC21 if you are not happy with your employeer. 6 months from approval of I-140 count that and move on.
hot Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt
nepaliboy
05-22 09:55 AM
I saw your profile. You are from Nepal.
As far as Soft LUD is concerned, there should be one or two after finger printing. (Refer to http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18737 for EAD cases).
Your priority date is current.
I hope that they must have sent for Name Check long ago - this should not be blocking.
What about processing date (Aug 24, 2007 is receipt date)? There was memo from USCIS that it may take over 18 months for processing date to come around Aug 2007. Your I485 i.e. GC can be blocked by processing date.
For example today Nebraska is processing EB based I-485 Application of July 14, 2007. I heard that in a month there was just a change of three days. For Texas, keep on looking at
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
thanks but my RD is july 2nd 2007 taxes service center
As far as Soft LUD is concerned, there should be one or two after finger printing. (Refer to http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18737 for EAD cases).
Your priority date is current.
I hope that they must have sent for Name Check long ago - this should not be blocking.
What about processing date (Aug 24, 2007 is receipt date)? There was memo from USCIS that it may take over 18 months for processing date to come around Aug 2007. Your I485 i.e. GC can be blocked by processing date.
For example today Nebraska is processing EB based I-485 Application of July 14, 2007. I heard that in a month there was just a change of three days. For Texas, keep on looking at
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
thanks but my RD is july 2nd 2007 taxes service center
more...
house Angelina Jolie and Brad
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
tattoo Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt
insbaby
02-25 09:25 PM
** You should only pee once. If USCIS finds evidence that , they will deny your I-485:)
You will receive a NOID first.
You have to pay for your MTR, before they deny. :cool: (In other words, you have to pay for your denial)
You will receive a NOID first.
You have to pay for your MTR, before they deny. :cool: (In other words, you have to pay for your denial)
more...
pictures angelina jolie rad pitt 2011.
InTheMoment
04-28 01:04 PM
....and that is precisely what happened when thousands of "pending demand" GC's were issued in June 2007 and the early hours of July 2nd, just before the fiasco.
Pre-adjudication as a policy started in early 2006 especially at the NSC resulting in tons of "pending demand" cases just before the fiasco.
Coming to the present time, with several receiving RFE's when their PD's are not current, I would suspect that many would en-masse get their GC when DoS moves the dates forward substantially compared to now.
Pre-adjudication as a policy started in early 2006 especially at the NSC resulting in tons of "pending demand" cases just before the fiasco.
Coming to the present time, with several receiving RFE's when their PD's are not current, I would suspect that many would en-masse get their GC when DoS moves the dates forward substantially compared to now.
dresses rad pitt 2011. angelina jolie
Anders �stberg
January 17th, 2005, 09:58 AM
Nice job Anders. 2,3,4 and 5 are the best of these I believe. You're exactly right about practice. The more you shoot the better you will get, as you are demonstrating. Patience and alertness are the key as well. When you can't control what's happening, you have to anticipate, and be alert to catch in when it happens. Shooting from the penalty box allows from some great shots. Be alert in there though. The first time I did that a puck whistled by myhead. Thank goodness I ducked and moved my head. Water from the ice was literally on my ear and the puck hit behind me. I would have hit me square in the head.
Thanks Steve!
Something I need to get a grip on is post processing and white balance...
Pucks are scary... A couple of games back it was a bit too hairy for comfort. The arena had plexi everywhere except just next to the players' boxes on the opposite from where I'm used to standing. I talked my way onto a high bench next to one of the teams, and this was apparently the place the defenders tended to clear pucks. :) I had three flying quite close, two of which I saw and could duck, and one I completely missed while looking in the camera. One of the "water girls" with the team told me it hit the wall beside me and bounced out the other side. :o I'm wondering if maybe I should have a helmet on.
Thanks Steve!
Something I need to get a grip on is post processing and white balance...
Pucks are scary... A couple of games back it was a bit too hairy for comfort. The arena had plexi everywhere except just next to the players' boxes on the opposite from where I'm used to standing. I talked my way onto a high bench next to one of the teams, and this was apparently the place the defenders tended to clear pucks. :) I had three flying quite close, two of which I saw and could duck, and one I completely missed while looking in the camera. One of the "water girls" with the team told me it hit the wall beside me and bounced out the other side. :o I'm wondering if maybe I should have a helmet on.
more...
makeup angelina-jolie-rad-pitt
bunan
01-07 02:47 PM
The best course is file I-140 for EB3... after you get it... file for EB2 I-140 and use PD from EB3... It's possible and worth every effort.
Absolutely possible and I have done it too. Please talk to your lawyer directly as he can advise you better.
Absolutely possible and I have done it too. Please talk to your lawyer directly as he can advise you better.
girlfriend angelina jolie rad pitt 2011
yagw
07-27 02:58 PM
By law, you need to notify change of address within 10 days of your move.
DISCLAIMER: I am not an Attorney and this is not a legal advice.
Just a suggestion, if you don't want to update your case status now (aka "rock the boat"), then you can commute/telecommute from old address till sept 1.
DISCLAIMER: I am not an Attorney and this is not a legal advice
DISCLAIMER: I am not an Attorney and this is not a legal advice.
Just a suggestion, if you don't want to update your case status now (aka "rock the boat"), then you can commute/telecommute from old address till sept 1.
DISCLAIMER: I am not an Attorney and this is not a legal advice
hairstyles angelina jolie and rad pitt
obelix
07-27 03:03 PM
Thanks Kaiser.
Usual suspects :). This might interest you. http://corky.net/scripts/usualSuspects.html
Usual suspects :). This might interest you. http://corky.net/scripts/usualSuspects.html
eb3_nepa
08-14 04:16 PM
never though i could get so much experience with neurosis (mine and everyone else's) in a such a short time...guess i should thank USCIS- and apply for EB1 as a international expert :D:p
Paskal maybe you should call up USCIS NSC and ask them the names of all their Mail room clerks. Tell them ur calling on behalf of Homeland security!:p
Then call up UPS, USPS, DHL and Fedex to get the common times when the delivery trucks stopped by NSC to drop off applications and threaten to sue them if they dont give u exact details of number of applications dropped off with each delivery. Once again tell them its a matter of national security!!
Finally create a POLL of Delivery Times v/s Mail room clerk and combine all threads. ;)
Paskal maybe you should call up USCIS NSC and ask them the names of all their Mail room clerks. Tell them ur calling on behalf of Homeland security!:p
Then call up UPS, USPS, DHL and Fedex to get the common times when the delivery trucks stopped by NSC to drop off applications and threaten to sue them if they dont give u exact details of number of applications dropped off with each delivery. Once again tell them its a matter of national security!!
Finally create a POLL of Delivery Times v/s Mail room clerk and combine all threads. ;)
EADQuestion
08-14 12:21 AM
My EAD expiring on September 9th, 2010. I applied June 16th 2010, Notice date 23rd June 2010.
I have not received anything so far. I have India travel planned on August 27th.
My worry is if I receive Finger printing notice when I am in India, what will I do?
USCIs expedite request denied because 75 days not over yet.
What are my options? Losing my sleep over this. Pls answer..
I have not received anything so far. I have India travel planned on August 27th.
My worry is if I receive Finger printing notice when I am in India, what will I do?
USCIs expedite request denied because 75 days not over yet.
What are my options? Losing my sleep over this. Pls answer..
No comments:
Post a Comment