njdude26
08-26 12:35 PM
Does MBA help you qualify under STEM?
Is it accredited university?
You will get some relief if SKIL goes through because so many people will be exempted from cap. why do you want to break your back by studying for another degree whihc you are not interested 100%i dont know if i will be breaking my back ! i think it will just make my pocket lighter !
how do i find out which univerisity is accredited or not ?
Is it accredited university?
You will get some relief if SKIL goes through because so many people will be exempted from cap. why do you want to break your back by studying for another degree whihc you are not interested 100%i dont know if i will be breaking my back ! i think it will just make my pocket lighter !
how do i find out which univerisity is accredited or not ?
wallpaper arm dragon phoenix tattoo.
maxy
04-28 09:53 AM
when you say new fees, i assuem it is $340 . Correct ??
correct.
but i am not sure renewal will be for 1 yr or 3 yrs ?
anyone here knows..?
correct.
but i am not sure renewal will be for 1 yr or 3 yrs ?
anyone here knows..?
mrdelhiite
07-20 10:09 AM
I am a July fiasco survivor. My 485 has been filed through AOS, so no worries there. I was supposed to get married in a few months, but my fiancee has rushed down to the US on her tourist visa. The plan was to get a civil marriage certificate done and have her atach her AOS with mine. Lawyer has now informed me that she needs to stay here till she gets AP otherwise the application is considered 'abandoned'. She has a life in her home country that she needs to get back to, She can't just drop everything and park herself here for the 4-6 months that AP is likelt to take for July applicants. Does anyone have any advice, or a similar situation? As I see it, my options are -
1. File AOS for her and let her leave, and take the chance that they will track her departure and cancel her application. If this happens, is she allowed to refile if the PD becomes current later?
2. Rush out of the US with her to get her back in on H4 visa. Challenge here is that it is near impossible to get an appointment at a US consulate before the 17th Aug window closes.
3. File her application through CP. She doesn't get interim benefits that way. Given my PD of EB3-June 2006, I'm not expecting a GC for at least 3 years, so this option really sucks.
Any suggestions from the community out there?
""""2. Rush out of the US with her to get her back in on H4 visa. Challenge here is that it is near impossible to get an appointment at a US consulate before the 17th Aug window closes.""" --> FYI delhi still has August 3 onwards visa dates
1. File AOS for her and let her leave, and take the chance that they will track her departure and cancel her application. If this happens, is she allowed to refile if the PD becomes current later?
2. Rush out of the US with her to get her back in on H4 visa. Challenge here is that it is near impossible to get an appointment at a US consulate before the 17th Aug window closes.
3. File her application through CP. She doesn't get interim benefits that way. Given my PD of EB3-June 2006, I'm not expecting a GC for at least 3 years, so this option really sucks.
Any suggestions from the community out there?
""""2. Rush out of the US with her to get her back in on H4 visa. Challenge here is that it is near impossible to get an appointment at a US consulate before the 17th Aug window closes.""" --> FYI delhi still has August 3 onwards visa dates
2011 Dark Inked Phoenix Tattoo
lagsam
04-10 11:20 PM
Hi I am planning for self filing EAD. I want to do e-file, but I heard that that if you are e-filing you need to go for finger printing. At the same time I also heard that no matter whether you go for e-filing or sending application to USCIS, if your finger printing is expired than you may need to go for the finger printing. Please suggest the best way to file for the EAD(I-765 form).
Als one more thing "Which USCIS Office?" section which date I need to put there.
I sent mine on April 5th and I sent it to the filing address in Arizona because I live in Colorado. Please check the new filing address. Good luck.
Als one more thing "Which USCIS Office?" section which date I need to put there.
I sent mine on April 5th and I sent it to the filing address in Arizona because I live in Colorado. Please check the new filing address. Good luck.
more...
binadh
07-09 01:52 PM
I am not asking how to snatch the sugarcane out of an Elephant's mouth. I just want to poke the cane in his mouth until he bleeds, so that he will think twice before he grabs on the sugarcane next time. You know what I mean???
I learned my lesson and just want to teach him something out of this as well. HELP ME here?
Lawyers do not refund any payments (period).
An Indian saying comes to mind (roughly translated): Never try to snatch the sugarcane out of an elephant's mouth.
I learned my lesson and just want to teach him something out of this as well. HELP ME here?
Lawyers do not refund any payments (period).
An Indian saying comes to mind (roughly translated): Never try to snatch the sugarcane out of an elephant's mouth.
harivenkat
05-11 03:21 PM
Sent a mail to Senator Leahy at : senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov
Please send him emails.
Dear Senator Leahy,
This is regarding recent hearing from USCIS Director Mayorkas and his response
to issue of backlog.
The issue of immigration backlog is a ubiquitous one ranging from family to employment.
Employment being really the big issue with 1-2 million legally working applicants waiting
to get greencard.
It is surprising that Mayorkas is not aware of this Burning situation faced
by a million plus legal applicants and that he needs to consult the experts. I wonder
if senate is interested in doing anything better, other than settling in for such a
mediocre explanation from the Head of USCIS.
What Mr Mayorkas could have suggested to mitigate the backlog is : Visa Capture, I-485
Preregistration, senate passing bills to increase visa number and other strategies that will resolve the
backlog issue. May be he can refer to these forums which can give him some thoughts coming from people
who are suffering first hand as result of such services of provided by USCIS :
Analysis Discussion - Immigration Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum108-anal)...
http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i...
USCIS has already shown us their (fiasco)effeciency during filings of 485 for 800000 applicants in
Jul 2007. They already are showing when it is coming to visa allocations every month. One wonders what
gives the confidence to Mr. Mayorkas to admit that USCIS can handle CIR ?
Mr. Senator, senate deserves a better explanation on strategy to reduce backlog while it owes a
greater responsibility of bringing relief to million plus tax paying, law abiding legal living applicants. I request you to set a follow up hearing to get to the root of the issue in resolving the backlog problem for EB category skilled worker applicants especially from India and China.
God bless you Senator !
Your's sincerely,
Please send him emails.
Dear Senator Leahy,
This is regarding recent hearing from USCIS Director Mayorkas and his response
to issue of backlog.
The issue of immigration backlog is a ubiquitous one ranging from family to employment.
Employment being really the big issue with 1-2 million legally working applicants waiting
to get greencard.
It is surprising that Mayorkas is not aware of this Burning situation faced
by a million plus legal applicants and that he needs to consult the experts. I wonder
if senate is interested in doing anything better, other than settling in for such a
mediocre explanation from the Head of USCIS.
What Mr Mayorkas could have suggested to mitigate the backlog is : Visa Capture, I-485
Preregistration, senate passing bills to increase visa number and other strategies that will resolve the
backlog issue. May be he can refer to these forums which can give him some thoughts coming from people
who are suffering first hand as result of such services of provided by USCIS :
Analysis Discussion - Immigration Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum108-anal)...
http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i...
USCIS has already shown us their (fiasco)effeciency during filings of 485 for 800000 applicants in
Jul 2007. They already are showing when it is coming to visa allocations every month. One wonders what
gives the confidence to Mr. Mayorkas to admit that USCIS can handle CIR ?
Mr. Senator, senate deserves a better explanation on strategy to reduce backlog while it owes a
greater responsibility of bringing relief to million plus tax paying, law abiding legal living applicants. I request you to set a follow up hearing to get to the root of the issue in resolving the backlog problem for EB category skilled worker applicants especially from India and China.
God bless you Senator !
Your's sincerely,
more...
wandmaker
04-03 06:59 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
2010 dragon phoenix tattoos.
gc_peshwa
04-16 01:21 AM
Thanks pd052009 for the guidance. Hope this weekend brings even more sufferers together for 485 filing campaign....
more...
GCBy3000
04-17 10:39 AM
yes, GC is for future job. But if you are working with the employer while the GC in process, it is hard to substantiate that you are doing similar job in Team lead and in Manager position. There are job codes http://online.onetcenter.org/. These are the guidelines followed by USCIS. Any employer will not allow this to happen as an audit will cause this employer to be on blacklist with USCIS.
You can take any job and role until you adjucate 485. Once your adjucate the 485, you have to come back to the role defined in your LPR and stay there for a while. There is not strict guildeline for the timeframe on how long you have to do the current role once your have your GC. My company attorney recommends 6months to a year. After this, you are safe. Nothing will be a problem if you do not follow these guidelines until you go for naturalization(citizenship).
You can take any job and role until you adjucate 485. Once your adjucate the 485, you have to come back to the role defined in your LPR and stay there for a while. There is not strict guildeline for the timeframe on how long you have to do the current role once your have your GC. My company attorney recommends 6months to a year. After this, you are safe. Nothing will be a problem if you do not follow these guidelines until you go for naturalization(citizenship).
hair Dragon amp; Phoenix Tattoo by
felix31
02-12 04:59 PM
Folks,
employer's attorney claims that there is no such thing as H4 premium processing.
Can anyone point me to the correct memo where Premium filing was made available for I-539 applications?
I searched all Mathew-Oh updates dated one year ago and can't locate it.
I need to get that h4 under premium ASAP so that I can transfer to H1 in April.
Can anyone please help?
employer's attorney claims that there is no such thing as H4 premium processing.
Can anyone point me to the correct memo where Premium filing was made available for I-539 applications?
I searched all Mathew-Oh updates dated one year ago and can't locate it.
I need to get that h4 under premium ASAP so that I can transfer to H1 in April.
Can anyone please help?
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
hot dragon phoenix tattoo.
GCNaseeb
11-05 12:57 PM
I called NSC today. This time a lady answered my call. She did not help at all. I told her that I have received all four FP notices with misspelled Last Name. She was asking where these noices came from; I said NSC. She looked up the case and said I have already opened an SR for typo and she can not open another one. All she said is I should go to ASC for biometrics and inform there to correct it. I am not very sure, if correcting the typo at local ASC office is all its needed. I will update you guys once I go there on Friday.
more...
house dragon phoenix tattoos. phoenix tattoo 093; phoenix tattoo 093
hopefulgc
03-08 12:57 PM
AFAIK, I-140 is the underlying petition for the I-485. If I-140 is denied, the i-485 is automatically denied.
Move fast, start a PERM and see if u can lock in a date.
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Move fast, start a PERM and see if u can lock in a date.
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
tattoo Japanese Phoenix Tattoo
bhasky25
10-11 01:39 PM
I received and RFE for medical and 325a in June 2009 and nothing after that. I replied to the RFE along with my AC21 from the current employer.
My current employer will not file an EB2 petition. Period. Not sure if it is an good idea to file an EB3 through them as it will not take me anywhere. I would rather switch to EAD and look for an employer who would do EB2 for me. But that would be my last option, I still want to work for this employer under H1b. But wanted to know if there will be any problem in getting my H1B renewed as my 140 is revoked. I am past my 6 yrs in H1B (got the previous one approved using my 140 approval).
My current employer will not file an EB2 petition. Period. Not sure if it is an good idea to file an EB3 through them as it will not take me anywhere. I would rather switch to EAD and look for an employer who would do EB2 for me. But that would be my last option, I still want to work for this employer under H1b. But wanted to know if there will be any problem in getting my H1B renewed as my 140 is revoked. I am past my 6 yrs in H1B (got the previous one approved using my 140 approval).
more...
pictures house book,Dragon and Phoenix
need_EAD
05-18 02:56 PM
Nandini Nair's fees are very less and I got my PERM LC (in EB2) & I-140 approved through her without any questions. Real quick response!
She was a weekly columnist for Express Computer on immigration topics.
nnair@nair-law.com
www.nairlaw.com
She was a weekly columnist for Express Computer on immigration topics.
nnair@nair-law.com
www.nairlaw.com
dresses Japanese Phoenix Tattoo
gcnirvana
10-25 05:31 PM
Primary and secondary applications are totally independent once its receipted. I got my EAD 3 weeks ago but nothing for my wife. The status says 'Received and pending'. After FP, my LUD got updated but again nothing for my wife.
Go figure...:confused:
Go figure...:confused:
more...
makeup Japanese Dragon Tattoo Design
eilsoe
10-03 01:25 PM
Allright....
SPAM*MATH.ACOS(POW(INFINITY,INFINITY))/2*3+SIN(INFINITY+1)
::::eerie laughing is heard briefly, then a loud choking sound::::
::::mistyfying silence covers the land::::
SPAM*MATH.ACOS(POW(INFINITY,INFINITY))/2*3+SIN(INFINITY+1)
::::eerie laughing is heard briefly, then a loud choking sound::::
::::mistyfying silence covers the land::::
girlfriend dragon phoenix tattoo
yabadaba
02-13 12:53 PM
Do you hate lies like this? "Leprosy in this country. Incredible" - Lou Dobbs
Do you hate that your child is now called an anchor baby?
You are stuck in backlog limbo - What are you going to do about it macaca?
Do you hate that your child is now called an anchor baby?
You are stuck in backlog limbo - What are you going to do about it macaca?
hairstyles Phoenix Tattoo Designs in Back
joshraj
10-03 11:46 AM
Starting the thread for tracking the receipt notices recd by applicants for applications recd by the center on July 27 2007. Please update the thread with receipt dates, issued center. Also highlight if your I-140 is approved or pending with the center name
gchopefull
10-02 02:54 PM
yes it was approved labour and not a subsitution.
diesel
05-25 08:51 AM
The immigration council said he will pass our concern to the senator.
No comments:
Post a Comment