ck_b2001
09-11 09:03 PM
i am not sure if my lawyer has the receipts. my case was sent on 6.29.2007 and received on july 2nd.
i got my FP notice (for my wife also) yesterday in mail for 9/25 appt.
from the receipt number on FP notice i checked it on USCIS website. it says that they received the 485 app on 30 aug. and the LUD on 485 is 9/3.
sent Jun 29th, recieved Jul 2nd at TSC. Got FP notice for 10/03. Lawyer recieved Reciepts yesterday with Notice Date of 09/05. LUD was 9/3. Website says they recieved app 30 aug (did not make sense to me). Lawyer further told me i will get EAD Card directly before they will recieve approval notice. AP will be recieved by lawyers directly.
i got my FP notice (for my wife also) yesterday in mail for 9/25 appt.
from the receipt number on FP notice i checked it on USCIS website. it says that they received the 485 app on 30 aug. and the LUD on 485 is 9/3.
sent Jun 29th, recieved Jul 2nd at TSC. Got FP notice for 10/03. Lawyer recieved Reciepts yesterday with Notice Date of 09/05. LUD was 9/3. Website says they recieved app 30 aug (did not make sense to me). Lawyer further told me i will get EAD Card directly before they will recieve approval notice. AP will be recieved by lawyers directly.
anandrajesh
08-15 01:46 PM
Absolutely right, how otherwise do you explain that they issued card production for people with PD's in 2004, (Dates not current in June) on July 2nd and in an hour and then said the visas are unavailable.
NO FIFO whatsoever.
They just saved themselves by retracting the VB of JULY, or else they would have faced lawsuits, and investigation which would have shown all irregularities and fraud.
One of my buddies got his GC approved yesterday and his Priority Date is June 2005, EB2 India. I am here waiting since 2004 March to file for my I485. There are no methods to USCIS Madness.
NO FIFO whatsoever.
They just saved themselves by retracting the VB of JULY, or else they would have faced lawsuits, and investigation which would have shown all irregularities and fraud.
One of my buddies got his GC approved yesterday and his Priority Date is June 2005, EB2 India. I am here waiting since 2004 March to file for my I485. There are no methods to USCIS Madness.
rajeshalex
11-27 04:56 PM
U can get the tracking nummber /case number from the lawyer . But you can not get any details from USCIS since 140 is owned by company.
However if the company has received a140 receipt then the receipt will have
the beneficiary name
If u are the beneficiary then u can take an infopass with uscis and get the information from the case number
Rajesh
However if the company has received a140 receipt then the receipt will have
the beneficiary name
If u are the beneficiary then u can take an infopass with uscis and get the information from the case number
Rajesh
BrickWall
03-12 09:49 PM
You cannot become a Canadian Citizen, just because you are on H1 in the US. The only advantage is you can apply for Permanent Residency from the US, which is much faster than applying from India. Once, you get your Green Card, you still should maintain residency in Canda, before you apply for Citizenship.
Ria, You can apply for Canadian Permanent Residency by urself. You dont need to hire people to do it. I did it by myself, and it is very easy.
Hi..
I am working in US from last 4yrs and applying for canadian immig. What if I have applied it through NYC Buffalo but by the time they are finished processing (lets say 2 hrs from now), I had to move to India (coz i din't get my GC from here or any other reason). Can I go to consulate in India or do I have to come here for interview? how would that work?
Thank you in advance..
Ria, You can apply for Canadian Permanent Residency by urself. You dont need to hire people to do it. I did it by myself, and it is very easy.
Hi..
I am working in US from last 4yrs and applying for canadian immig. What if I have applied it through NYC Buffalo but by the time they are finished processing (lets say 2 hrs from now), I had to move to India (coz i din't get my GC from here or any other reason). Can I go to consulate in India or do I have to come here for interview? how would that work?
Thank you in advance..
more...
DesiTech
06-01 06:25 PM
hi viewers,
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
arouncoumar
11-08 12:46 PM
Yup, returning H1Bs qualify for emergency appt. I'd done it years ago.
more...
backtoschool
12-28 12:32 PM
I spoke to some one and he has told me the following:
(1) Yes, you can take off of education outside US . Make sure that employer does not revoke I-140. And uey, ofcourse you will be returning for a similar job.. ( Yeh right I will do the same job after investing in MBA. LOL. I wont.. its on paper)
(2) EAD and AP can be applied on one;s behalf in his or her abscence from the US. The catch is that one must return tothe US before the AP that you used to exit before it expires. So the plan would be apply for new AP in your abscence as soon as it is approved return to US for a day or two pick the new one and exit again.
(3) 485/GC is for future jobs.
(4) Looks like it is possible.. this is :"similar to a situation where in yoru co decides to send you to a mission outside US for extended period.
Other questions for folks who asked me:
My stats
EB3 - india
PD Jul 2002
No, i am not stuck in the name check stuff. Just the BS wait!!!
SO, guys who else is moving outside US for education?
(1) Yes, you can take off of education outside US . Make sure that employer does not revoke I-140. And uey, ofcourse you will be returning for a similar job.. ( Yeh right I will do the same job after investing in MBA. LOL. I wont.. its on paper)
(2) EAD and AP can be applied on one;s behalf in his or her abscence from the US. The catch is that one must return tothe US before the AP that you used to exit before it expires. So the plan would be apply for new AP in your abscence as soon as it is approved return to US for a day or two pick the new one and exit again.
(3) 485/GC is for future jobs.
(4) Looks like it is possible.. this is :"similar to a situation where in yoru co decides to send you to a mission outside US for extended period.
Other questions for folks who asked me:
My stats
EB3 - india
PD Jul 2002
No, i am not stuck in the name check stuff. Just the BS wait!!!
SO, guys who else is moving outside US for education?
smisachu
05-13 03:51 PM
[QUOTE=michael_trs;1852366]Smisachu, I agree, I need to add alternative education� thank you for your advice.
What about �requirements normal for the occupation� is this Yes or No for Master's + 5 years ?
What is your experience?[/QUOTE
Yes. That's a little dicy for Software Developer. Maybe you work in a sepcific skill and can elaborate on that.
For me I work in a field with very specific skills and my Job title was also more specific than this. We put MS+3 and that 3 years have to be spent working in one particular area and must have acquired a set of specific skills. So the requirements for my occupation were normal and we said yes.
What about �requirements normal for the occupation� is this Yes or No for Master's + 5 years ?
What is your experience?[/QUOTE
Yes. That's a little dicy for Software Developer. Maybe you work in a sepcific skill and can elaborate on that.
For me I work in a field with very specific skills and my Job title was also more specific than this. We put MS+3 and that 3 years have to be spent working in one particular area and must have acquired a set of specific skills. So the requirements for my occupation were normal and we said yes.
more...
.jpg "Natalie Portman#39;s fiancee has")
akred
03-26 12:45 AM
My information is 12 years old, but something you might want to check into. Back then Emirates would put you up in a downtown hotel if you wanted to break your journey. And you didn't have to get a Dubai visa if you were staying less than 24 hours.
chanduv23
08-09 01:07 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
tnite
08-06 04:06 PM
bump
DesiTech
06-01 06:46 PM
You will, however, need to keep the 140 and labor alive at your old job if you are beyond the 6th year of H1 in order to obtain an H1 transfer or extension with new employer. So if you are already done with your initial 6 year term, then you will need co-operation of your current employer to prevent him from withdrawing your current labor and 140 - atleast until 365 days have passed with new PERM labor or atleast until your PERM and 140 is approved with new GC process.
If I transfer to new company, how can I keep 140 and labor alive ? Its in old company hands if they wish they can cancel correct ??
MY 6th is completing Aug,2007. So U mean the new company has to start from ground zero then will I get H1 ext. or by that period my PD will be correct. Like my current PD is 06/2003 with EB3. But if I start from scratch I would be qualify for EB2. So can I get PD of my old which was filed under EB3 to new which would be filing under EB2 if I take new offer.
Thx for ur help
If I transfer to new company, how can I keep 140 and labor alive ? Its in old company hands if they wish they can cancel correct ??
MY 6th is completing Aug,2007. So U mean the new company has to start from ground zero then will I get H1 ext. or by that period my PD will be correct. Like my current PD is 06/2003 with EB3. But if I start from scratch I would be qualify for EB2. So can I get PD of my old which was filed under EB3 to new which would be filing under EB2 if I take new offer.
Thx for ur help
more...
balan2008
07-07 04:53 PM
friends,
We are in a process of divorce . Last year I filed employment based 485 with my wife as depended. Now we both have EAD and she is working under EAD. If we divorce while 485 is pending who go out of status? Me or my wife? Is both 485 will be canceled? Or both are safe. If I marry again is it possible to bring my new wife under my filed 485 petition?
Thanks for your help.
balan
I485 Filed on July 2, 2007.
We are in a process of divorce . Last year I filed employment based 485 with my wife as depended. Now we both have EAD and she is working under EAD. If we divorce while 485 is pending who go out of status? Me or my wife? Is both 485 will be canceled? Or both are safe. If I marry again is it possible to bring my new wife under my filed 485 petition?
Thanks for your help.
balan
I485 Filed on July 2, 2007.
sriramkalyan
09-15 05:39 PM
Hoo .. i am not attacking illegals .. i just ENVY them ... Powerful senators & congress men are after them ..
What happened in 2007 is now history. That is not likely to repeat in the upcoming CIR. At this time CIR is the only way to get things moving. Unless CIR is defeated or unless administration says that they do not want a CIR bill, piece meal approach is not likely to happen. Given the situation, asking for a separate bills is setting ourselves for failure, and it alienates us and our issues from the pro-immigration community. At this time, if you call/meet with lawmakers asking for EB only bill, the pro-immigration lawmakers get turned off and anti-immigrant lawmakers use the count of your call to oppose the immigration reform. At this time its a bad idea by calling lawmakers asking for "EB only bill". It will only turn out to hurt our issues and the cause. Additionally, it doesn't help to call specific lawmakers who already understand, agree, support and champion our issues.
IV do not have a any position on on the issue of illegals/undocumented. And whatever is your personal belief, please understand the reality of the situation and refrain from attacking illegals on IV forums as it doesn't help our cause in anyways.
What happened in 2007 is now history. That is not likely to repeat in the upcoming CIR. At this time CIR is the only way to get things moving. Unless CIR is defeated or unless administration says that they do not want a CIR bill, piece meal approach is not likely to happen. Given the situation, asking for a separate bills is setting ourselves for failure, and it alienates us and our issues from the pro-immigration community. At this time, if you call/meet with lawmakers asking for EB only bill, the pro-immigration lawmakers get turned off and anti-immigrant lawmakers use the count of your call to oppose the immigration reform. At this time its a bad idea by calling lawmakers asking for "EB only bill". It will only turn out to hurt our issues and the cause. Additionally, it doesn't help to call specific lawmakers who already understand, agree, support and champion our issues.
IV do not have a any position on on the issue of illegals/undocumented. And whatever is your personal belief, please understand the reality of the situation and refrain from attacking illegals on IV forums as it doesn't help our cause in anyways.
more...
number30
04-29 06:08 PM
Thanks snathan and aravindhome for your responses.
I'm going to consult an attorney on this for sure...
After i consulted my friends and after going through some other posts i figured that F1 is the best option i have now.
My fiancee is interested in pursuing her higher education, but just wanted to find out if it would be OK that i sponsor her education and state that her fiance is in US with green card at the time of visa application?.. would this cause any problems for getting her F1 visa?
OR should she not mention anything about me in any stage be it in University Admisssion process or the F1 visa application process?
I know all of the other options (H1, L1, B1 and GC sponsor for spouse) would require much time.
aravindhome-- i'm not sure how fast can she get a canadian PR and then come to this Country?...On what basis is she going to enter this country?
Thanks a lot
Ravi
Once she is on F1 here you can get married.
I'm going to consult an attorney on this for sure...
After i consulted my friends and after going through some other posts i figured that F1 is the best option i have now.
My fiancee is interested in pursuing her higher education, but just wanted to find out if it would be OK that i sponsor her education and state that her fiance is in US with green card at the time of visa application?.. would this cause any problems for getting her F1 visa?
OR should she not mention anything about me in any stage be it in University Admisssion process or the F1 visa application process?
I know all of the other options (H1, L1, B1 and GC sponsor for spouse) would require much time.
aravindhome-- i'm not sure how fast can she get a canadian PR and then come to this Country?...On what basis is she going to enter this country?
Thanks a lot
Ravi
Once she is on F1 here you can get married.
tikka
05-29 09:52 PM
Oh I did not know that one person can send webfax for each state.
When I click that link it said "You have already sent it"
I'll check again now
please do
thank you
When I click that link it said "You have already sent it"
I'll check again now
please do
thank you
more...
mirage
03-06 03:03 PM
How's Asking for temperory Lifting Country Cap or Exemption of Long pending case from Country limits going against her own bills ? Nothing 'Immigration' is flying right now, we already saw the fate of those bills...I have heard this several times from various lawmakers offices they don't want to lift the country caps... So what do we do then ?
So your strategy is to go against her own bill to recapture greencards that she introduced for us last year.
I think this is wrong.
Recapture is a good option if you want to do it right. Otherwise all ROW will oppose you. How are you different than the guys who open threads against Telgus or EB3 vs EB2 or against Muslims.
What you are doing is only dividng the community. My collegues who are also IV members are mad reading that someone in IV is pursuing a one point agenda against ROW. We need to stop such threads. A lot of ROW are quiet members on IV forum and they will be upset.
Country caps can only be supported if there is recapture or increase in visa numbers.
So your strategy is to go against her own bill to recapture greencards that she introduced for us last year.
I think this is wrong.
Recapture is a good option if you want to do it right. Otherwise all ROW will oppose you. How are you different than the guys who open threads against Telgus or EB3 vs EB2 or against Muslims.
What you are doing is only dividng the community. My collegues who are also IV members are mad reading that someone in IV is pursuing a one point agenda against ROW. We need to stop such threads. A lot of ROW are quiet members on IV forum and they will be upset.
Country caps can only be supported if there is recapture or increase in visa numbers.
GCard_Dream
07-09 06:49 PM
Yes. We both did get the TB test done (test and X-ray) back in 2007. Even though the TB skin test came out negative, doctor didn't wait the test result and ordered the X-ray anyway.
I did take my wife for another medical today. Didn't need any vaccination but just the TB skin test, and blood test for HIV and RPE. The doctor said that the TB test does expire after a year but I am not sure if that's true. By the way, what do you mean by both TB test (skin test and X-ray)? Is X-ray mandatory?
Thanks to all for sharing their experience and knowledge.
1) Did you both get TB tested? The rules have changed. This is the most common cause for an RFE on medical exam.
2) Is she on any medication? Sometimes this requires a certificate from the prescribing physician. No big deal
Overall, there is probably no cause to worry about this. In fact, this could mean you are close to being approved. Same thing happened to me (see my history in my sig line).
I did take my wife for another medical today. Didn't need any vaccination but just the TB skin test, and blood test for HIV and RPE. The doctor said that the TB test does expire after a year but I am not sure if that's true. By the way, what do you mean by both TB test (skin test and X-ray)? Is X-ray mandatory?
Thanks to all for sharing their experience and knowledge.
1) Did you both get TB tested? The rules have changed. This is the most common cause for an RFE on medical exam.
2) Is she on any medication? Sometimes this requires a certificate from the prescribing physician. No big deal
Overall, there is probably no cause to worry about this. In fact, this could mean you are close to being approved. Same thing happened to me (see my history in my sig line).
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.
mmk123
07-17 11:57 AM
Let me make it clear, I was NOT trying to bash any other community.
Also, please comment on how do EB legal community defend themselves against all this biased, baseless attacks.
I have nothing against any community, everyone comes with their own skill, position, timing, education, luck etc. I don't control that. I can only control my factors and contribute to the overall clause.
Being my concepts clear, will help me contribute more and justify it more. Hence instead of picking up on my arguments (when I have made my intentions clear), won't help much.
Also, please comment on how do EB legal community defend themselves against all this biased, baseless attacks.
I have nothing against any community, everyone comes with their own skill, position, timing, education, luck etc. I don't control that. I can only control my factors and contribute to the overall clause.
Being my concepts clear, will help me contribute more and justify it more. Hence instead of picking up on my arguments (when I have made my intentions clear), won't help much.
h1bmajdoor
03-04 07:52 PM
this is obviously great news for those affected.
however the speed at which the authorities have acted, and the almost total lack of support from the Congress could imply that politics here is (like desh) is quickly heading down the "what's in it for me" path.
however the speed at which the authorities have acted, and the almost total lack of support from the Congress could imply that politics here is (like desh) is quickly heading down the "what's in it for me" path.
No comments:
Post a Comment