Openarms
10-14 12:53 PM
What is the new POJO method/sequence to call Texas service center???
wallpaper July « 2009 « Makeup For Life
badluck
07-20 10:37 AM
vv
svr_76
06-10 12:17 PM
Lawyers!
Is there any specific statute/provision that forces/restricts USCIS to count dependents towards Employments Based Visa numbers, when they (dependent) file AOS based on Primary's approved EB case?
Is there any specific statute/provision that forces/restricts USCIS to count dependents towards Employments Based Visa numbers, when they (dependent) file AOS based on Primary's approved EB case?
2011 Gorgeous 80#39;s smokey eye
freddyCR
February 5th, 2005, 09:55 PM
Even the humble beans can be beautiful..
Exp. 1/240 s.
Apert. F3
Focal lenght 15 mm
ISO 200
Fujifilm S 7000
Colors enhanced - cropped in PS cs
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/alcorjr2/beans2Medium.jpg
Exp. 1/240 s.
Apert. F3
Focal lenght 15 mm
ISO 200
Fujifilm S 7000
Colors enhanced - cropped in PS cs
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/alcorjr2/beans2Medium.jpg
more...
nat23
06-14 02:54 PM
I dont know if people would be interested in discussing the implications of all EB categories turning current. Some of the points to discuss would be:
1) Processing times for I-485
2) Effects on future GC applications.
etc
3) Whats if the CIR is passed in its current form ? How does that affect these categories is at all
1) Processing times for I-485
2) Effects on future GC applications.
etc
3) Whats if the CIR is passed in its current form ? How does that affect these categories is at all
digitalchampion
02-22 11:12 PM
im trying to import a file into V1. Swift freezes just after the importation has comenced. I have to ctr-alt-del out of it. The File is a jpg which i have converted to eps using photoshop and freehand. Both have the same problem. The file is only small (150*150 pixels). I have reinstalled swift. I can import the erain sample eps file. but nothing else.
Help!
Help!
more...
CecilG
08-30 11:02 AM
My H1B Visa stamp expires in Jan 08 but H1B Status expires Sept 08. Is it too early to get a new H1B stamp 4 months before expiration of the H1B stamp I currently have.
I am planning to go to Ottawa now for a stamp that expires in Sept 08.
Thanks for your help.
I am planning to go to Ottawa now for a stamp that expires in Sept 08.
Thanks for your help.
2010 and her eye makeup is
nuke
03-18 10:56 PM
I have to file a loan application which requires me to state if I am a Lawful Permanent resident alien and I am not sure if I am, can somebody please clarify if I am a Lawful Permanent resident alien or not if I have a pening I-485 application and I am working on EAD?
more...
desiap
01-14 10:19 PM
Hi,
I've been working full-time on EAD for the last 2+ years. I have a pending 485 application, on which my spouse is the primary applicant. I have never applied for H1B in the past, because I transferred directly from F1 (student visa) to this EAD.
My spouse also has an H1B, which is in it's 7th year (completed 6 yrs of H1B).
My spouse has been put on furlough (unpaid leave) for 3 months.
What are our options ?
1. Can my employer file H1B for me, and an H4 for my spouse ? How will this affect our green card application (on which my spouse is primary applicant) ?
2. How much time does my spouse have to look for another job (with similar job description), without being out of status ? Is there some grace period associated with H1?
Thanks
I've been working full-time on EAD for the last 2+ years. I have a pending 485 application, on which my spouse is the primary applicant. I have never applied for H1B in the past, because I transferred directly from F1 (student visa) to this EAD.
My spouse also has an H1B, which is in it's 7th year (completed 6 yrs of H1B).
My spouse has been put on furlough (unpaid leave) for 3 months.
What are our options ?
1. Can my employer file H1B for me, and an H4 for my spouse ? How will this affect our green card application (on which my spouse is primary applicant) ?
2. How much time does my spouse have to look for another job (with similar job description), without being out of status ? Is there some grace period associated with H1?
Thanks
hair Mel goes for the mad #39;80s eye
webm
08-14 05:00 PM
Actually your Initial filed Labor Application/approval notice or attorney can help you identify on this piece of Info.
more...
surabhi
07-23 11:49 AM
Hi,
I dont have attorney and need to respond to RFE. Hence the request
Thanks
I dont have attorney and need to respond to RFE. Hence the request
Thanks
hot 2011 Fiercely #39;80s Eye
gvijayku
01-26 08:31 AM
Recently I have travelled to USA on B1, during port of entry at chicago the immigration officer as marked Advised on the stamp with pen. What does it mean? Does this will have any impact on my next visit to USA on B1.
In port of entry letter I have mentioned stay duration as 4 weeks (1 month). Is this the problem? If so why officer given i-94 till 3 months?
Thanks in advance,
In port of entry letter I have mentioned stay duration as 4 weeks (1 month). Is this the problem? If so why officer given i-94 till 3 months?
Thanks in advance,
more...
house 80#39;s Eye makeup
mrane1
07-25 05:16 PM
My ND is july-12-2007
I am yet to receive by FP,
How will I come to know my FP appointment date, my attorney is not cooperating, please help.. :D
You will get it in the mail. Also keep a track of your application online...
I am yet to receive by FP,
How will I come to know my FP appointment date, my attorney is not cooperating, please help.. :D
You will get it in the mail. Also keep a track of your application online...
tattoo girlfriend symbolic of 80s eye
Openarms
04-30 11:27 AM
any comments on this??
more...
pictures Beauty Trend: 80s Scenester
Macaca
06-22 06:55 AM
Senate Passes Energy Bill (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062101026.html?hpid=topnews) Democrats Prevail; Mileage Standard Would Be Raised By Sholnn Freeman (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/sholnn+freeman/) Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, June 22, 2007
The Senate passed a sweeping energy legislation package last night that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters.
After three days of intense debate and complex maneuvering, Democratic leaders won passage of the bill shortly before midnight by a 65 to 27 vote.
The package, which still must pass the House, would also require that the use of biofuels climb to 36 billion gallons by 2022, would set penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing. It would provide federal grants and loan guarantees to promote research into fuel-efficient vehicles and would support test projects to capture carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants to be stored underground.
Democratic leaders said they hoped the legislation will be a rallying point for voters concerned about national security, climate change and near-record gasoline prices.
"This bill starts America on a path toward reducing our reliance on oil by increasing the nation's use of renewable fuels and for the first time in decades significantly improving the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks," said Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader.
Final passage of the bill capped an otherwise rancorous week in which senators grappled over energy policy. Early yesterday, Democrats accused Republicans of obstruction after a $32 billion package of energy tax cuts was blocked on a procedural vote. But late in the day, a bipartisan group of senators came together to break an impasse on vehicle fuel-efficiency standards that would require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicle to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected additions to the bill that would have pumped billions of federal dollars into efforts to ramp up production of a coal-based fuel for cars and trucks, which proponents had called an important alternative to petroleum. Additionally, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) failed to win approval for a proposal to allow exploration for natural gas off the Virginia coast, and Republicans blocked an effort to require that more of the nation's electricity come for renewable sources.
The passage of fuel-efficiency measure was viewed as a major triumph for the Democrats, particularly the last-minute dealmaking that enabled passage of the comprehensive change to mileage standards.
The politics of fuel economy had gone virtually unchanged since Congress passed the first nationwide standards -- known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE -- in 1975. The last time the full Senate tried to boost fuel-economy standards was in 2002, and the effort was defeated handily.
The auto industry successfully argued that large increases in efficiency standards would force them to build smaller vehicles -- the kind American consumers won't buy. In recent years, however, low mileage standards left U.S. automakers with little market defense against higher-mileage Japanese cars, particularly at times when gas prices soar. As consumers have moved gradually from SUVs and pickup trucks to smaller vehicles, Detroit's Big Three automakers have gone through a painful restructuring period.
The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.
The fuel-efficiency language in the Senate energy package originally had coupled a 35 mile-per-gallon standard with a requirement of 4 percent annual increases for the decade after 2020. A group led by the two Michigan senators -- Democrats Carl M. Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) had sought instead to gain support for an amendment that would impose less-stringent standards while satisfying growing demands for change in the fuel-efficiency laws.
In the compromise-- shepherded principally by Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) -- lawmakers dropped a provision that would have mandated additional 4 percent annual increases in fuel efficiency between 2021 and 2030. They also softened a provision that would have required all automakers to build substantially more vehicles that can run on ethanol and other biofuels.
After the fuel-economy vote, Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), another architect of the compromise, said the nation's desire to be less dependent on foreign oil would be a "hopeless journey" without more efficient cars and trucks.
"Now, in our vehicles, we have better cup-holders, we have keyless entry, we have better music systems, we have heated seats," Dorgan said. "It is time that we expect more automobile efficiency."
Senators who had previously been friendly to the auto industry said they were changing their position after growing weary of the industry's position. "I listened and I listened, year after year," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. "And now, after 20 years, I firmly do believe it is time for a change."
In the end, Senate aides said, Levin's group did not have the votes.
Democratic leaders said the bipartisan backing of the compromise worked out in the Senate would help build support in the House when that chamber House begins debate on its energy package. Already, Rep. John D. Dingell, (D-Mich.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have battled over fuel economy.
In another Senate battle yesterday, Democrats lost a fight against oil companies when Republicans blocked a $32 billion tax package that would have poured money into alternative fuel projects by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.
President Bush, meanwhile, visited the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Athens, Ala., where he touted nuclear power as a clean, dependable and safe source of electricity and promised to streamline the federal regulatory process to ease the way for the construction of new plants.
"Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases," Bush said. "If you're interested in cleaning up the air you ought to be for nuclear power."
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher in Athens, Ala., contributed to this report.
The Senate passed a sweeping energy legislation package last night that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters.
After three days of intense debate and complex maneuvering, Democratic leaders won passage of the bill shortly before midnight by a 65 to 27 vote.
The package, which still must pass the House, would also require that the use of biofuels climb to 36 billion gallons by 2022, would set penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing. It would provide federal grants and loan guarantees to promote research into fuel-efficient vehicles and would support test projects to capture carbon dioxide from coal-burning power plants to be stored underground.
Democratic leaders said they hoped the legislation will be a rallying point for voters concerned about national security, climate change and near-record gasoline prices.
"This bill starts America on a path toward reducing our reliance on oil by increasing the nation's use of renewable fuels and for the first time in decades significantly improving the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks," said Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the majority leader.
Final passage of the bill capped an otherwise rancorous week in which senators grappled over energy policy. Early yesterday, Democrats accused Republicans of obstruction after a $32 billion package of energy tax cuts was blocked on a procedural vote. But late in the day, a bipartisan group of senators came together to break an impasse on vehicle fuel-efficiency standards that would require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicle to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Earlier in the week, the Senate rejected additions to the bill that would have pumped billions of federal dollars into efforts to ramp up production of a coal-based fuel for cars and trucks, which proponents had called an important alternative to petroleum. Additionally, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) failed to win approval for a proposal to allow exploration for natural gas off the Virginia coast, and Republicans blocked an effort to require that more of the nation's electricity come for renewable sources.
The passage of fuel-efficiency measure was viewed as a major triumph for the Democrats, particularly the last-minute dealmaking that enabled passage of the comprehensive change to mileage standards.
The politics of fuel economy had gone virtually unchanged since Congress passed the first nationwide standards -- known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE -- in 1975. The last time the full Senate tried to boost fuel-economy standards was in 2002, and the effort was defeated handily.
The auto industry successfully argued that large increases in efficiency standards would force them to build smaller vehicles -- the kind American consumers won't buy. In recent years, however, low mileage standards left U.S. automakers with little market defense against higher-mileage Japanese cars, particularly at times when gas prices soar. As consumers have moved gradually from SUVs and pickup trucks to smaller vehicles, Detroit's Big Three automakers have gone through a painful restructuring period.
The United States, with current efficiency standards of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 22.2 per gallon for SUVs and small trucks, has lagged behind the rest of the developed world. In the European Union, automakers have agreed to voluntary increases in fuel-economy standards that next year will lift the average to 44.2 miles per gallon, according to the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. In Japan, average vehicle fuel economy tops 45 miles per gallon. China's level is in the mid-30s and projected to rise, propelled by government policy.
The fuel-efficiency language in the Senate energy package originally had coupled a 35 mile-per-gallon standard with a requirement of 4 percent annual increases for the decade after 2020. A group led by the two Michigan senators -- Democrats Carl M. Levin and Debbie Stabenow -- and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.) had sought instead to gain support for an amendment that would impose less-stringent standards while satisfying growing demands for change in the fuel-efficiency laws.
In the compromise-- shepherded principally by Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) -- lawmakers dropped a provision that would have mandated additional 4 percent annual increases in fuel efficiency between 2021 and 2030. They also softened a provision that would have required all automakers to build substantially more vehicles that can run on ethanol and other biofuels.
After the fuel-economy vote, Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), another architect of the compromise, said the nation's desire to be less dependent on foreign oil would be a "hopeless journey" without more efficient cars and trucks.
"Now, in our vehicles, we have better cup-holders, we have keyless entry, we have better music systems, we have heated seats," Dorgan said. "It is time that we expect more automobile efficiency."
Senators who had previously been friendly to the auto industry said they were changing their position after growing weary of the industry's position. "I listened and I listened, year after year," Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. "And now, after 20 years, I firmly do believe it is time for a change."
In the end, Senate aides said, Levin's group did not have the votes.
Democratic leaders said the bipartisan backing of the compromise worked out in the Senate would help build support in the House when that chamber House begins debate on its energy package. Already, Rep. John D. Dingell, (D-Mich.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have battled over fuel economy.
In another Senate battle yesterday, Democrats lost a fight against oil companies when Republicans blocked a $32 billion tax package that would have poured money into alternative fuel projects by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.
President Bush, meanwhile, visited the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant in Athens, Ala., where he touted nuclear power as a clean, dependable and safe source of electricity and promised to streamline the federal regulatory process to ease the way for the construction of new plants.
"Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases," Bush said. "If you're interested in cleaning up the air you ought to be for nuclear power."
Staff writer Michael A. Fletcher in Athens, Ala., contributed to this report.
dresses glittery stars eye makeup.
texcan
02-05 01:38 AM
My wife was on f1 status when we filed for 485.
We went to india this last december and used AP, no issues what so ever.
Make sure you do provide the old 94 to airlines before leaving US.
relax and enjoy you trip.
We went to india this last december and used AP, no issues what so ever.
Make sure you do provide the old 94 to airlines before leaving US.
relax and enjoy you trip.
more...
makeup 2: Clarins Instant Eye Make-up
Blog Feeds
02-28 09:00 AM
On February 18 and 19, the University of California (Irvine) hosted a symposium where many of U.S. immigration's Rock-Star professors came together to try and solve "Persistent Puzzles in Immigration Law." The topics covered a wide expanse. A subject discussed that particularly interested me is Congress's often inexplicable delegation of regulatory authority among a surfeit of federal agencies that administer and enforce the immigration laws, each with its area of real (or presumed) expertise and overlapping responsibilities. One speaker mentioned her concern about the possible mis-use of E-Verify by some employers to screen current or would-be workers for employment eligibility,...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2011/02/time-for-congress-to-streamline-the-h-1b-visa-process.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2011/02/time-for-congress-to-streamline-the-h-1b-visa-process.html)
girlfriend 80s makeup tutorial. Cat Eye
Jitamitra
12-09 09:18 AM
If I were, I would go with the first option. withdraw pending application.
hairstyles Modern 80s makeup with NARS
gcspace
10-04 03:11 PM
My application reached 13 July at NSC nothing got back. Anyone in this boat?
There is a forum group "July3rd to July15th" , please add your name to the list and keep track of it. Yes, there are many people from July3rd to July16th who have not yet received anything.
There is a forum group "July3rd to July15th" , please add your name to the list and keep track of it. Yes, there are many people from July3rd to July16th who have not yet received anything.
Blog Feeds
01-24 07:50 AM
The National Foundation for American Policy has released a policy brief regarding the new GAO report on the H-1B program and notes that the GAO blows a torpedo through the common complaint that the H-1B program is just a way to bring in cheap guest workers. NFAP GAO H-1B report
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/nfap-gao-report-confirms-h-1b-workers-paid-as-much-as-comparable-americans.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/nfap-gao-report-confirms-h-1b-workers-paid-as-much-as-comparable-americans.html)
CRAZYMONK
03-11 09:17 AM
You need to file I-824 to get a duplicate I-797
No comments:
Post a Comment