Aah_GC
02-28 07:05 AM
I am in the same boat as well. But you answer your question - am almost sure you don't need FP to renew your EAD. Having said that - why would renew your card in June? (Considering that you might not have received your EAD till Aug-Sep'07 of last year).
wallpaper 2012 Mercedes ML AMG5
pappu
04-27 01:13 PM
$1.5 Billion in income taxes, is the amount the 64,000 new H1bs pay every year and I assume a similar or larger sales tax.
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the immigration queue
Unless there is a formal document like Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too | Immigration Policy Center (http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/unauthorized-immigrants-pay-taxes-too)
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Tax_Contributions_by_Unauthorized_Immigrants_04181 1.pdf
a post has no significance. If you wish to work on such a study, it would be make the arguments stronger. It is something some volunteers can take up as an action item.
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the immigration queue
Unless there is a formal document like Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too | Immigration Policy Center (http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/unauthorized-immigrants-pay-taxes-too)
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Tax_Contributions_by_Unauthorized_Immigrants_04181 1.pdf
a post has no significance. If you wish to work on such a study, it would be make the arguments stronger. It is something some volunteers can take up as an action item.
willwin
07-10 09:21 AM
I got my PWD today!!
Filed on 5th Jan and received today.
Next, the LC waiting period starts!!
My LC was approved on 07/07/2010.
On to I140+485 stage next.
Filed on 5th Jan and received today.
Next, the LC waiting period starts!!
My LC was approved on 07/07/2010.
On to I140+485 stage next.
2011 Mercedes ML 2012 (spy photos)
djsnug
06-10 09:28 PM
I think I'll secretly keep Phat7's image as wallpaper on my computer. The woman in there is absolutely beautiful! :D
more...
little_willy
02-23 11:59 AM
Oh really It's a Great news! I don't know this.So if we loose job and use cobra a family can get Insurance for about $250-$300 for 9 months.Do you have any link explaining this to get some more info?
http://personalinsure.about.com/od/health/a/aa021809a.htm
The First Part of The COBRA Stimulus Plan: Reduced Premiums
The COBRA stimulus plan basically has two parts. In the first part, The COBRA stimulus plan will be able to step in and help struggling families trying to pay their COBRA benefits. People who are currently enrolled in the COBRA plan will get a 65% reduction in their premium costs. This will be a huge savings to many families struggling to keep their COBRA benefits.
Part 2: The Ability to Re-Enroll into COBRA
The second part of the COBRA stimulus plan will provide recently unemployed people the ability to re-enroll into the COBRA plan, even if they had denied coverage in the past. This will help a great amount of people who choose not to continue their health insurance through COBRA because they just could not afford it.
9 Key Details about the Cobra Stimulus Plan
1. Valid for people who were involuntarily terminated between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009
2. To be eligible annual income cannot exceed $125,000 for a single person and $250,000 for a couples
3. 65% of existing COBRA premiums will be subsidized by the U.S. Treasury Department
4. Subsidies will be available for up to 9 months
5. If you declined COBRA coverage after September 1, 2008 you will have the option to re-enroll into COBRA with the above subsides
6. Notices of the COBRA subsidies and re-enrollment information will be sent from the COBRA administrator (usually your previous employer)
7. Subsidies will be paid, via a refundable tax credit, directly to the COBRA administrators
8. Subsidies will terminate if the enrollee acquires a new health insurance plan through another employer or is eligible for Medicare
9. Subsidies will only apply to COBRA premiums paid after the effective date of February 17, 2009 and there will be no refund of premiums prior to this date
http://personalinsure.about.com/od/health/a/aa021809a.htm
The First Part of The COBRA Stimulus Plan: Reduced Premiums
The COBRA stimulus plan basically has two parts. In the first part, The COBRA stimulus plan will be able to step in and help struggling families trying to pay their COBRA benefits. People who are currently enrolled in the COBRA plan will get a 65% reduction in their premium costs. This will be a huge savings to many families struggling to keep their COBRA benefits.
Part 2: The Ability to Re-Enroll into COBRA
The second part of the COBRA stimulus plan will provide recently unemployed people the ability to re-enroll into the COBRA plan, even if they had denied coverage in the past. This will help a great amount of people who choose not to continue their health insurance through COBRA because they just could not afford it.
9 Key Details about the Cobra Stimulus Plan
1. Valid for people who were involuntarily terminated between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009
2. To be eligible annual income cannot exceed $125,000 for a single person and $250,000 for a couples
3. 65% of existing COBRA premiums will be subsidized by the U.S. Treasury Department
4. Subsidies will be available for up to 9 months
5. If you declined COBRA coverage after September 1, 2008 you will have the option to re-enroll into COBRA with the above subsides
6. Notices of the COBRA subsidies and re-enrollment information will be sent from the COBRA administrator (usually your previous employer)
7. Subsidies will be paid, via a refundable tax credit, directly to the COBRA administrators
8. Subsidies will terminate if the enrollee acquires a new health insurance plan through another employer or is eligible for Medicare
9. Subsidies will only apply to COBRA premiums paid after the effective date of February 17, 2009 and there will be no refund of premiums prior to this date
Sakthisagar
12-01 02:44 PM
Issues facing the 2010 lame-duck session of Congress - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/lameduck/index.html)
1. Tax cuts
The most pressing issue in the lame-duck Congress sounds, at first glance, like a typo.
The federal government spends more money than it takes in. The two parties both agree that this is bad. Here�s what they can�t agree on: How much less should the government take in, in the years to come?
The debate is about income tax cuts, passed under President George W. Bush, which are due to expire Dec. 31. If that happens, a single person earning $46,000 a year might see his or her taxes jump $400, according to the nonprofit Tax Policy Center. A married couple earning a total of $440,000, on the other hand, might see an increase of $20,000.
Most Democrats want to extend tax cuts covering up to the first $250,000 that a family earns in a year. Republican leaders want to keep all the tax cuts, including those on income above $250,000. In a recession, they say, it doesn�t make sense to cut anyone�s taxes.
Congress and the president could agree to a temporary truce, extending all the tax cuts for a few years only. Or, as some Democrats have suggested recently, they could agree to keep tax cuts on incomes less than $1 million.
2. The New START treaty
The point of this U.S.-Russia treaty, signed but not yet ratified, is to continue the slow nuclear stand-down that has followed the Cold War. The two nations would agree to cut deployed long-range nuclear weapons by up to 30 percent and to allow each other to inspect the remaining stockpiles.
The prevention of nuclear armageddon still enjoys wide support on Capitol Hill.
But this treaty does not.
New START must be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate. That was no problem for two past treaties: the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, signed in 1992 by President George H.W. Bush, and the �Moscow Treaty,� signed in 2003 by President George W. Bush.
But now, Sen. John Kyl (Ariz.), the chamber�s second-ranking Republican, has held up the treaty�s passage. Kyl has said he wants more guarantees that the government will properly maintain the nuclear weapons that remain. He also thinks that the lame-duck session is too short a time to consider the issue.
The White House is now trying to work around Kyl to win over nine other Republican. If it can�t, there will be more Republicans � and perhaps more support for denying Obama a foreign policy win � in January.
3. �Don�t ask, don�t tell�
This 17-year-old rule, which bars gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military, has been under attack all year. This fall, a federal judge ruled the ban unconstitutional and ordered it scrapped. A higher court reinstated the ban while it considers the matter on appeal.
And on Tuesday, a Pentagon report concluded that ending the ban would pose a low risk to military readiness. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said that the repeal of the rule �should be done.�
But �don�t ask, don�t tell� isn�t dead yet and could outlive the lame-duck session.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) could bring it up for a vote on the floor this month. But the ascendant GOP is in no mood to cooperate. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) says he�s still worried about the effect on morale, and other Republican leaders say the whole issue is a distraction from their top priority � job creation.
4. The �Continuing resolution�
A continuing resolution (known in Hill jargon as a �CR�) is a bill that�s introduced when Congress can�t agree on a full budget for the federal government.
Instead, it passes a bill to temporarily �continue� funding federal agencies at their present rates.
Congress must pass a new continuing resolution before Friday. If it doesn�t, the government will shut down � as it did in 1995 during a budget showdown between President Bill Clinton and congressional Republicans.
The sticking point is Republican demands to shrink federal spending back to 2008 levels. But a shutdown still seems unlikely; while a lot of voters want smaller government, very few seem to want no government.
Signs from the Hill indicate legislators will beat Friday�s deadline and pass a resolution good for another few weeks, at least.
5. Unemployment benefits
Another looming deadline. On Tuesday, emergency unemployment insurance � he federal checks given to the jobless � expired. If nothing is done to extend the benefits, advocates say as many as 3 million people will see their checks cut off by the end of January.
Some Republicans have voiced concerns about the high cost of these benefits. In the middle of last month, the House failed to approve a plan to extend them, with all but 11 Democrats voting for it and all but 21 Republicans voting against it.
6. Childhood nutrition
On Wednesday, House Democratic leaders plan to call a vote that could be a measure of the muscle they�ve got left. At issue: a bill that would feed schoolchildren better food.
If they can�t win on that, it could be a long month.
The bill is intended to give more poor children access to subsidized meals at school. It also would improve the quality of those meals and give more federal money to school districts that comply with higher nutrition standards.
�Kids that have food insecurity learn at a slower rate than their peers,� House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters Tuesday. �Food insecurity� is Washington-speak for �hunger.�
The bill passed the Senate unanimously. But it will face some Republican opposition in the House from members who say it will impose more costs on struggling school systems.
7. The DREAM Act
This bill is aimed at illegal immigrants who came to this country as children. If they go to college or join the military as adults, it would give them a chance to obtain legal residency.
As attitudes toward illegal immigrants have hardened, support for the bill has collapsed among Republicans and many Democrats. To them, it looks like a kind of amnesty for lawbreakers.
On Tuesday, Reid could promise only a �test vote� on the issue: he would bring the issue to the Senate floor, and take his chances. The implicit message was that Reid might lose � but lose in a way that showed Hispanic voters he was trying.
1. Tax cuts
The most pressing issue in the lame-duck Congress sounds, at first glance, like a typo.
The federal government spends more money than it takes in. The two parties both agree that this is bad. Here�s what they can�t agree on: How much less should the government take in, in the years to come?
The debate is about income tax cuts, passed under President George W. Bush, which are due to expire Dec. 31. If that happens, a single person earning $46,000 a year might see his or her taxes jump $400, according to the nonprofit Tax Policy Center. A married couple earning a total of $440,000, on the other hand, might see an increase of $20,000.
Most Democrats want to extend tax cuts covering up to the first $250,000 that a family earns in a year. Republican leaders want to keep all the tax cuts, including those on income above $250,000. In a recession, they say, it doesn�t make sense to cut anyone�s taxes.
Congress and the president could agree to a temporary truce, extending all the tax cuts for a few years only. Or, as some Democrats have suggested recently, they could agree to keep tax cuts on incomes less than $1 million.
2. The New START treaty
The point of this U.S.-Russia treaty, signed but not yet ratified, is to continue the slow nuclear stand-down that has followed the Cold War. The two nations would agree to cut deployed long-range nuclear weapons by up to 30 percent and to allow each other to inspect the remaining stockpiles.
The prevention of nuclear armageddon still enjoys wide support on Capitol Hill.
But this treaty does not.
New START must be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate. That was no problem for two past treaties: the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, signed in 1992 by President George H.W. Bush, and the �Moscow Treaty,� signed in 2003 by President George W. Bush.
But now, Sen. John Kyl (Ariz.), the chamber�s second-ranking Republican, has held up the treaty�s passage. Kyl has said he wants more guarantees that the government will properly maintain the nuclear weapons that remain. He also thinks that the lame-duck session is too short a time to consider the issue.
The White House is now trying to work around Kyl to win over nine other Republican. If it can�t, there will be more Republicans � and perhaps more support for denying Obama a foreign policy win � in January.
3. �Don�t ask, don�t tell�
This 17-year-old rule, which bars gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military, has been under attack all year. This fall, a federal judge ruled the ban unconstitutional and ordered it scrapped. A higher court reinstated the ban while it considers the matter on appeal.
And on Tuesday, a Pentagon report concluded that ending the ban would pose a low risk to military readiness. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said that the repeal of the rule �should be done.�
But �don�t ask, don�t tell� isn�t dead yet and could outlive the lame-duck session.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) could bring it up for a vote on the floor this month. But the ascendant GOP is in no mood to cooperate. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) says he�s still worried about the effect on morale, and other Republican leaders say the whole issue is a distraction from their top priority � job creation.
4. The �Continuing resolution�
A continuing resolution (known in Hill jargon as a �CR�) is a bill that�s introduced when Congress can�t agree on a full budget for the federal government.
Instead, it passes a bill to temporarily �continue� funding federal agencies at their present rates.
Congress must pass a new continuing resolution before Friday. If it doesn�t, the government will shut down � as it did in 1995 during a budget showdown between President Bill Clinton and congressional Republicans.
The sticking point is Republican demands to shrink federal spending back to 2008 levels. But a shutdown still seems unlikely; while a lot of voters want smaller government, very few seem to want no government.
Signs from the Hill indicate legislators will beat Friday�s deadline and pass a resolution good for another few weeks, at least.
5. Unemployment benefits
Another looming deadline. On Tuesday, emergency unemployment insurance � he federal checks given to the jobless � expired. If nothing is done to extend the benefits, advocates say as many as 3 million people will see their checks cut off by the end of January.
Some Republicans have voiced concerns about the high cost of these benefits. In the middle of last month, the House failed to approve a plan to extend them, with all but 11 Democrats voting for it and all but 21 Republicans voting against it.
6. Childhood nutrition
On Wednesday, House Democratic leaders plan to call a vote that could be a measure of the muscle they�ve got left. At issue: a bill that would feed schoolchildren better food.
If they can�t win on that, it could be a long month.
The bill is intended to give more poor children access to subsidized meals at school. It also would improve the quality of those meals and give more federal money to school districts that comply with higher nutrition standards.
�Kids that have food insecurity learn at a slower rate than their peers,� House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters Tuesday. �Food insecurity� is Washington-speak for �hunger.�
The bill passed the Senate unanimously. But it will face some Republican opposition in the House from members who say it will impose more costs on struggling school systems.
7. The DREAM Act
This bill is aimed at illegal immigrants who came to this country as children. If they go to college or join the military as adults, it would give them a chance to obtain legal residency.
As attitudes toward illegal immigrants have hardened, support for the bill has collapsed among Republicans and many Democrats. To them, it looks like a kind of amnesty for lawbreakers.
On Tuesday, Reid could promise only a �test vote� on the issue: he would bring the issue to the Senate floor, and take his chances. The implicit message was that Reid might lose � but lose in a way that showed Hispanic voters he was trying.
more...
bogy
05-25 01:52 AM
yep, thats why I am planning to do a masters. If all else fails.. migrate to canada :D
2010 Mercedes Benz Ml 2012.
Green06
09-05 10:28 AM
I am in the same boat. No 485 receipts for me or my wife. Got EAD and AP receipts only for myself. 485 filled at NSC on July 2nd. EAD and AP also filled at NSC but on Aug 15, 2007. I think NSC is still data entering July 2nd cases.
more...
lreddi
08-14 11:45 PM
Hi Cool Blues,
My case is also similar to yours. I also received denial today without RFE. Can you plz mail me to lreddi123@@@@@gmail so that we can discuss more . Consultancy name starts with letter
'V'
My case is also similar to yours. I also received denial today without RFE. Can you plz mail me to lreddi123@@@@@gmail so that we can discuss more . Consultancy name starts with letter
'V'
hair 2012 MERCEDES M CLASS GRILL
bigboy007
11-05 10:50 PM
OK i e-filed and it showed Nebraska address generating LIN no's instead of MSC etc , it prompted me where my 485 is and i think since it is at NSC it routed automatically to NSC
more...
pa_arora
07-02 12:09 PM
Read that again..they said it right..."All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation" have been made available.
SO to say they have made available whatever they had for 2007..and they are now out of it.
-p
===================
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation
have been made "available".=============
================================
I think they meant to put UNAVAILABLE there....
bastards dont know how to spell !!!
SO to say they have made available whatever they had for 2007..and they are now out of it.
-p
===================
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation
have been made "available".=============
================================
I think they meant to put UNAVAILABLE there....
bastards dont know how to spell !!!
hot mercedes ml class
drirshad
03-13 04:31 PM
03/13/2009: Senate Bill, S. 577 to Punish Immigration Sharks Defrauding and Victimizing Immigrants and Related Parties
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
more...
house Обнаружен новый Mercedes ML
telekinesis
10-14 07:12 PM
Wow! No-tec, thats pretty **** sweet. Have any links you could give me to make thrill ISH like that, ya know, like tutorials!
tattoo Rendered: 2012 Mercedes-Benz
GCwaitforever
06-20 03:02 PM
I have EB2 i-140 approved with PD Dec. 05. I am planning to change the employer.. was just waiting to see if CIR gonna help.. but looks like its not. If I change job now, I will have to do labor, i140 once again!! might be able to maintain PD. .. my question is... I believe that in Octo. 06, new quota for GC will be available. What are the guesses that the PD will become current (at least for Eb2 India) in Octo 06?? Some educated guesses are highly appreciated.
The answer to your first question is yes. You can change employers without any impact, by using AC 21 provisions.
Regarding the second question: EB2 India is going to take a long time to come to 2005 PD. I would say, atleast another three years.
The answer to your first question is yes. You can change employers without any impact, by using AC 21 provisions.
Regarding the second question: EB2 India is going to take a long time to come to 2005 PD. I would say, atleast another three years.
more...
pictures Mercedes-Benz has banked a
mambarg
07-26 02:52 PM
Good that we see more proof of Apps received on Jun 29 getting receipted.
I am sure Aug 1st , NSC will become compaint to their receipting release and start receipting everyone who had applied till July 10th.
I am sure Aug 1st , NSC will become compaint to their receipting release and start receipting everyone who had applied till July 10th.
dresses 2012 Mercedes ML AMG
coolvigo
07-12 11:02 PM
Guys,
Looks like a good news here....read following link.....looks like couple ppl have posted that their lawyers advised them to file for 485 in this case :-)
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
:)
Looks like a good news here....read following link.....looks like couple ppl have posted that their lawyers advised them to file for 485 in this case :-)
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
:)
more...
makeup Mercedes 2012 Pictures
ashutrip
06-15 04:52 PM
that is not a backlog in the sense of retrogression based backlog. That is like any other processing time for any other type of application
Chicago is taking 2-3 weeks then y Atl is taking 6 months
Chicago is taking 2-3 weeks then y Atl is taking 6 months
girlfriend 2012 Mercedes ML-Class Spotted
coolwiz26
07-03 12:59 AM
I will sue them too. They need to be punished for what they have done. pls tell me the procedure and I will do it.
-C
-C
hairstyles SPY – 2012 Mercedes-Benz M-
sniranjank
07-23 02:08 PM
Delivery date: Jul 19, 2007 9:29 AM
Sign for by: K.LAWSON
EB3- India - Jul03
Sign for by: K.LAWSON
EB3- India - Jul03
chanduv23
06-18 03:13 PM
u never went to india since 5 years, your crazy :)
I met a US citizen of Indian origin who came to US in 1991 on a tourist visa and in those days, they managed to get green cards - dunno how. He never visited India. Got married here and still visualizes India as how it was in 80s.
I met a US citizen of Indian origin who came to US in 1991 on a tourist visa and in those days, they managed to get green cards - dunno how. He never visited India. Got married here and still visualizes India as how it was in 80s.
mallickarjunreddy
05-19 07:29 AM
I fear a backlash as by now ewr would have made my company to be marked for secondary scrutiny. this is how the story unfolded
CBP --who is your manager
XYZ -- Mr ABC who is based in atlanta ..
CBP. hmmm.. can i have his phone #
CBP calls Mr ABC .. we r deporting XYZ hs papaers r not in order ..
no call back # nothing ..
meanwhile XYZ is asked to sign papers ..
I know we can refuse but those people r so intimidating and I guess if you dont sign ICE agents come in and tell you that it could take months to send you back
so poor xyz has no option but to sign and get a stamp on his passport that he is being deported
Councilor access is a myth and so is trying to call and talk to the CBP officers
and this is not a small body shop .. it has atleast 500 people working on various projects across US and those people were not on bench
i can field any questions ...
CBP --who is your manager
XYZ -- Mr ABC who is based in atlanta ..
CBP. hmmm.. can i have his phone #
CBP calls Mr ABC .. we r deporting XYZ hs papaers r not in order ..
no call back # nothing ..
meanwhile XYZ is asked to sign papers ..
I know we can refuse but those people r so intimidating and I guess if you dont sign ICE agents come in and tell you that it could take months to send you back
so poor xyz has no option but to sign and get a stamp on his passport that he is being deported
Councilor access is a myth and so is trying to call and talk to the CBP officers
and this is not a small body shop .. it has atleast 500 people working on various projects across US and those people were not on bench
i can field any questions ...
No comments:
Post a Comment