fast five 350z

images Fast Five meeting in Florida

nissan 350z tokyo drift

chanduv23

07-08 06:10 PM

I am in New York, if any other New York members want to register, we can do it on the July 14th NYC drive.

---

wallpaper nissan 350z tokyo drift

upcoming The Fast and The

raysaikat

04-03 10:56 AM

Yes, they will return the old passport. You should always carry all your passports. However, only the latest passport is the "active" passport. Any new VISA stamp will be on the latest passport.

All VISAs stamped on your old passports remain on the old passports.

---

the Fast and the Furious 5

gene77

08-15 08:28 PM

Hi, I recently filed my I-485 using my pre-approved Eb3 I-140 (PD:May 2004). Around a month back, I applied a new EB2 I140 and that got approved today so I have ported my PDs to this new EB2 I-140. Now, I am planning to file an amendment to replace the EB3 I-140 with EB2 I-140 attached with my I-485. Some people call this process as interfiling too. Can somebody please let me know if he/she has done it before and how long does it take to get affected?

I plan to do this but I am waiting for my EB2 I-140 to be approved. Please see below, I have attached some info I got from Mathew Oh's website. Did you say you applied for your I-140 only 1 month ago and it got approved already? I applied for my EB2 I-140 in Nov and still don't have any approvals.

//NSC Procedure of Transfer of Pending I-1485 From Current Approved Underlying I-140 Petition to New I-140 Petition
� This posting involves aliens who are waiting for the I-485 applications where the underlying I-140 petition was approved but due to retrogression, I-485 cannot be approved. Most of these cases are EB-3 cases. When the same alien obtains an EB-2 labor certification approval through the same employer or a different employer and the visa number is available for the EB-2 for him or her, he should be eligible for filing another I-485 application based on the visa number available EB-2 I-140 petition. This can be achieved either by concurrent I-140/I-485 filing or if the new EB-2 I-140 has already been approved, by filing of stand-alone I-485 application.
� However, in the foregoing situation, the Pearson Memo of 2000 allows the alien to transfer the pending I-485 application from the existing underlying approved I-140 petition to a new EB-2 I-140 petition such that the alien does not have to file another I-485 application to use the second I-140 petition. For this to happen, two conditions must be met: (1) The existing underlying I-140 petition (most likely EB-3) must have been approved before the I-485 transfer is requested. (2) Secondly, the visa number must be "current" for the new I-140 petition (most likely EB-2) before the I-485 transfer is requested. Inasmuch as the visa number is current, the pending I-485 application that suffer from the visa number retrogression can be transferred to the nex I-140 petition.
� According to the Nebraska Service Center, people should take the following procedure to request such transfer of pending I-485 application from one I-140 petition to another I-140 petition:
o Request for Transfer of Pending I-485 Application to a Newly Filed I-140 Petition That Has Visa Number Current: In this situation, he/she is filing a new I-140 petition (probably EB-2 with visa number "current") with the agency to transfer the pending I-485 application and attach it to the new I-140 petition. The NSC states that if he/she files such new I-140 petition, he/she should use "large, bold print in the cover letter or with a separate, brightly colored cover page and notation 'Inter-file I-140 with Pending I-485' and include the Receipt/File Number of Pending I-485 Application, both on the Envelope and Cover Letter.
o Request for Transfer of Pending I-485 Application to Already Approved New I-140 (most likely EB-2 category): NSC asks to print the attached over sheet on brightly colored paper, and submitting it with a cover letter providing the following Information:
 Name of 485 applicant
 Name of I-140 petitioner (employer)
 I-485 Receipt Number
 "A" Number of the 485 applicant
 Prior I-140 petition (1) Receipt Number, (2) Filing Date, and (3) Approval Date
 New I-140 to be inter-filed
 Statement requesting new I-140 be inter-filed with the pending I-485 application
//

---

2011 upcoming The Fast and The

fast five 350z. Nissan 350Z [Z33] in Fast; Nissan 350Z [Z33] in Fast

syedajmal

03-31 04:14 PM

Speeding is a misdemeanor in some states and can cause a false alarm. Just recollect to see if you can recollect anything where you ran into the law even something minor??

---

more...

fast five 350z. Los Autos De Fast Five (NFS; Los Autos De Fast Five (NFS

Pawankalyan

11-07 01:44 PM

I have applied 485 (both for me and wife on Aug 13th 2007) without submitting the medicals...still waiting for 485 receipts...
Just trying to figure out anybody on the same boat..

---

fast five 350z. nissan 350z fast five

jay1ram2

11-23 02:19 PM

Well Said.

---

more...

Green fast five 350z.

rockstart

07-30 07:21 PM

I think EB2 is easy if you have US Masters. Since you have a 3 year degree you need to prove that it is equivalent to US BS degree

---

2010 the Fast and the Furious 5

Fast Five meeting in Florida

gc28262

03-11 09:28 AM

I had the same issue. Still awaiting my AP which was applied in Nov 2008.
When I called up TSC where my application was filed, they kept insisting that they have really mailed it and they cannot issue it again unless they receive the AP saying it is undelivered.

I am sure my address is correct as per their records. I got my EAD delivered at the same address without any issue.

Finally I called them again, this time I talked to a more knowledgeable accommodating IO.

Keep calling the service center till you get an instruction similar to the following.

This is the instruction provided
----------------------------------------------------------
Fill out I-131 Application or use the copy of your original application
attach two photos

Mention the receipt no on the top of the form
Also mention REPLACEMENT : no Fees included
Add a covering letter explaining the situation

Post it to the following address

USCIS Texas Service Center
ADDRESS ( This is a special address, This not the standard USCIS address)

On Lower Left corner of the envelope mention:
do Not open in the mail room, No fees are attached

------------------------------------------------------------------

I am still awaiting my AP after doing this. :confused:

---

more...

the fast and the furious:

techbuyer77

07-20 08:54 AM

If u dont use ur EAD for the first 6 months, then u can join the new employer any time using ur H1B. But immediately after the date of EAD activation, u will need to stick with the corresponding employer for the next 6 mnths.[/QUOTE]

this is not correct. You can use EAD to work wherever and whenever you want. If you get laid off after let say 1 month from filing, it is safer to transfer h1b, but it is not true that if you use EAD you should go back to original sponsor.
You must only go back IF AOS IS APPROVED within 180 dyas from filing.

---

hair fast five 350z. Nissan 350Z [Z33] in Fast; Nissan 350Z [Z33] in Fast

As told by Fast Five#39;s car

yabadaba

01-26 10:59 AM

If you want to track how fast are they processing - you have to go by "Notice Date" because that's the day they first saw your Application. If you want to charge AC21 or calculate iVisa Bulletion's Retrogression do by "Receipt Date" for calculating "180 days Portability" etc....

In the "Pre-July 2nd world" those 2 dates used to vary by 1 or 2 days so no one used to care.

Well - so NSC is doing I-140 for Apr 23rd and Texas is July 21st... I would have got my freedom by now if i had filed I-140 at Texas :) Another good thing in this Bulletin Vermont H1b extension processing have moved a lot - from Apr 23rd to Oct 1st 2007 - wow !!!

Good Luck folks!!
TSC is june 21st for I-140

---

more...

The Nissan 350z $39990.00

jcrajput

06-18 02:58 PM

We are planning to visit India in the month of November. We are looking to stamp our passport with H1B/H4 visas at Mumbai. How we can select appointment dates for the week of November 9 to November 13.
I have tried to look at VFS website (https://www.vfs-usa.co.in) but not showing any dates after month of July...
Can anyone please help me?

Also, we are looking to stamp our passport the next day when we arrive in Mumbai. Do anyone know the good hotel near by embassy to stay?

I really appriciate your help.

Thank you.

---

hot fast five 350z. Los Autos De Fast Five (NFS; Los Autos De Fast Five (NFS

nissan-350z-tuning

nabs501

07-27 04:05 PM

I had filed FOIA request to USCIS requesting a copy of I140 approval notice. My I140 was approved after which I changed employer. I need I140 approval notice to keep my original priority date.
But after filing G639, I got a response back from USCIS saying the case has been sent to DoS for visa approval and that I should contact DoS directly regarding the case.
Also remember, G639 form is for FOIA request for USCIS only.
You need to file a letter to DoS (google "DOS + foia" and you would see format of the letter)
Other than this,I have also filed Form I824 (Action on approved petition) with $200 filing fees requesting I140 approval from USCIS. I guess looking at the processing time, I will have to wait for another 6 months before I hear back from USCIS

---

more...


house fast five, drag, racing,

upcoming The Fast and The

GIDOC

07-18 01:47 AM

We should still encourage Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren to look into why this happened in the first place. This should not happen again.

---

tattoo fast five 350z. nissan 350z fast five

fast five 350z. at end of fast five,; at end of fast five,. TinyTears

san3297

08-31 01:07 PM

Cant i use the I 94 attached to my 797 document.Will it not solve my problem.

---

more...


pictures Green fast five 350z.

Debut “Fast Five” Trailer

EADchallenged

07-27 04:17 PM

CIR is akin to churning the ocean and in an election year highly unlikely. Our best opportunity this year would be to get some retrogression relief in this bill. Filing for 485 gets some extra dollars for the ICE and at the same time does not add a single extra immigrant. Is this being pursued seriously?

---

dresses nissan-350z-tuning

Fast Five Cars Movie Fast

go_guy123

08-24 04:52 PM

ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)

Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta

As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).

Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.

Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.

A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.

In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.

At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�

The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8

Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.

Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10

�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�

Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:

1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�

It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.

---

more...


makeup the fast and the furious:

fast five, drag, racing,

Blog Feeds

06-25 01:20 AM

VIA USCIS

Introduction

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is seeking public comment on a proposed federal rule that would adjust fees for immigration benefit applications and petitions.* The proposal, posted to the*Federal Register (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-13991.htm)*on June 11, 2010 for public viewing, would increase overall fees by a weighted average of about 10 percent but would not increase the fee for the naturalization application.

Background

USCIS is a fee-based organization with about 90 percent of its budget coming from fees paid by applicants and petitioners to obtain immigration benefits.* The law requires USCIS to conduct fee reviews every two years to determine whether it is recovering its costs to administer the nation�s immigration laws, process applications, and provide the infrastructure needed to support those activities.* This proposed rule results from a comprehensive fee review begun in 2009.*********

USCIS�s fee revenue in fiscal years 2008 and 2009 was much lower than projected, and fee revenue in fiscal year 2010 remains low.* While USCIS did receive appropriations from Congress, budget cuts of approximately $160 million have not bridged the remaining gap between costs and anticipated revenue.* A fee adjustment, as detailed in the proposed rule, is necessary to ensure USCIS recovers the costs of its operations while also meeting the application processing goals identified in the 2007 fee rule.*

Highlights of 2010 Proposed Fee Rule

The proposed fee rule would increase the average application and petition fees by approximately 10 percent.

Understanding the unique importance of naturalization, USCIS is proposing that the naturalization application fee not be increased.

The proposed rule would establish three new fees for:



Regional center designation under the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program (EB-5);
Individuals seeking civil surgeon designation; and
Recovery of the cost of processing immigrant visas granted by the Department of State.
The rule also proposes to adjust fees for the premium processing service.* This would ensure that USCIS can continue to modernize to become a more efficient and effective organization.

The proposed fee structure also reduces fees for five individual applications and petitions as a result of lower processing costs:



Petition for Alien Fianc� (Form I-129F);
Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539);
Application to Adjust Status From Temporary To Permanent Resident (Form I-698);
Application for Family Unity Benefits (Form I-817); and
Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document (Form N-565).*
Current and Proposed Immigration Fees

Application/Petition Description*

Current Fees*

Proposed Fees

I-90 Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card

$290

$365

I-102 Application for Replacement/Initial Nonimmigrant Arrival-Departure Document $320 $330 I-129 Petition for a Nonimmigrant worker $320 $325 I-129F Petition for Alien Fiance(e) $455 $340 I-130 Petition for Alien Relative $355 $420 I-131 Application for Travel Document $305 $360 I-140 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker $475 $580 I-290B Notice of Appeal or Motion $585 $630 I-360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er) or Special Immigrant $375 $405 I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status $930 $985 I-526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur $1,435 $1,500 I-539 Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status $300 *$290 I-600/600A Orphan Petitions $670 $720 I-687 Application for Status as a Temporary Resident $710 $1,130 I-690 Application for Waiver on Grounds of Inadmissibility $185 $200 I-694 Notice of Appeal of Decision $545 $755 I-698 Application to Adjust Status From Temporary to Permanent Resident $1,370 $1,020 I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence $465 $505 I-765 Application for Employment Authorization $340 $380 I-817 Application for Family Unity Benefits $440 $435 I-824 Application for Action on an Approved Application or Petition $340 $405 I-829 Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions $2,850 $3,750 Civil Surgeon Designation* *$0** $615 I-924 Application for Regional Center Under the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program *$0 $6,230 N-300 Application to File Declaration of Intention* $235 $250 N-336 Request for Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings $605 $650 N-400 Application for Naturalization $595 $595 N-470 Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes $305 $330 N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document $380 $345 N-600/N-600K Naturalization Certificate Applications $460 *$600 Waiver Forms (I-191, I-192, I-193, I-212, I-601, I-612) $545 $585 Immigrant Visa* $0 $165 Biometric Services $80 $85






Last updated:06/09/2010





More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2010/06/24/uscis-seeks-public-comment-on-proposal-to-adjust-fees-for-immigration-benefits-fact-sheet.aspx?ref=rss)

---

girlfriend fast five 350z. at end of fast five,; at end of fast five,. TinyTears

Nissan 350z - Fast Luxury

bablata2007

11-27 04:29 PM

Is this a feasible option? Incase I lose the job, can I change to H4 status based on my wife's H1B? Then wait out the 180 days period and get back to another job?

---

hairstyles The Nissan 350z $39990.00

Cf lip painted | Fast SSG

kumar1

12-27 12:02 PM

I would say, you will be unemployed during that search period.
what if i want to join a company(like Teksystems,GCI,etc,...) on an hourly basis on their W2.What will be my status when an assignment is over and i have to search for another project.

---

sunny1000

06-26 09:56 PM

Thanx once again Ms. Sen for you so valuable response. Is there anyways, you could tell me the email address. It will be then easy for me to talk to him when I have all the information. Another question, has the email to be sent out only by the lawyer, or the company can directly do that?

Thanx once again...

It is:

streamline.tsc@dhs.gov

There is a specific format to send this email. Here is the link to the PDF:

http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/tsc-streamline-procedure.pdf

Here is the original post:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/visa-bulletin-status-tracker-processing-times/22849-tsc-streamline-processing.html

---

msyedy

01-12 06:57 PM

I understand this topic has been discussed ad nauseam, so I'm not raising this issue per se. I do not know where we stand on the likelihood of this provision getting passed by Feb 15th, but I do know that the Core group must be trying their best to get some provisions along these lines.

But just in case the "AOS without current PD" is seen as too big a change by the law makers or its sponsors in the undustry, I think it might be worthwhile to consider some of its watered-down alternatives. The law makers themselves may have a perception of this provision "creating a log jam at the AOS stage", not unlike the (mis)perception of some of IV members themselves!

Some alternatives are:
(a) Ability to file I-485 if the I-140 has been approved for X years, or if the I-140 has been pending for Y years (this is similar the provision of the ability to file H1 extensions beyond 6 years if a labor is pending). The advantage of this provision is that this will sound familiar with an already existing law; and will let the floodgates to AOS slowly and in a more controlled manner.

(b) Ability to file I-485 if the PD is within N years of the published PD in the Visa Bulletin. For example, assuming N = 2 years, India EB3 with PD 5/11/03 and India EB2 01/08/05 can file. Again this has the advantage of a more controlled entry via the Visa Bulletin, but at least it'll start clearing the queue and people can get their EAD, FBI name check, while waiting for the visa numbers to be available.

(c) If an Labor has been approved for X years
(d) If the alien has been on H1 for Y years
or a combination of any of the above

Please understand that I whole heartedly support the "AOS without current PD" provision; it's just that it would be wise to be ready with some alternatives should the need arise.


Why are you making it more complicated. People here want to get things done faster and relief for everyone.
According to your statement .(New formulas). people with I-140 approved for x years can file I-485 and so on......

If we are fighting for something nice, why not fight and say that we need everyone to be able to file I-485 like it was earlier. Reducing jam in USCIS is not a simple issue.By decreasing the number of I-485 filing the amount of time cannot be accuratly estimated that would take it to clear a case. USCIS can increase filling fees which they are thinking of doing to handle the current log jam they have, so I think we stick to and follow IV core.

---