- 1968 Volkswagen Beetle - Love
- with the Car Town look.
- 1968 Volkswagen Beetle
- car town skins vw beetle
- car town graphics vw
- TABLE car town graphics vw
- 1968 Volkswagen Beetle -
- town graphics vw beetle
- car town graphics vw
- car town graphics vw
- town graphics vw beetle
- car town graphics vw
- town graphics vw beetle
- town graphics vw beetle
- car town graphics vw
- car town graphics vw
- town graphics vw beetle
- car town skins vw beetle
- 1968 Volkswagen Beetle -
images town graphics vw beetle .jpg)
wallpaper 1968 Volkswagen Beetle - Love
.jpg)
2011 with the Car Town look.
more...


more...
.jpg)
2010 1968 Volkswagen Beetle
more...

hair car town skins vw beetle
more...

hot car town graphics vw
more...
house town graphics vw beetle
tattoo TABLE car town graphics vw
more...
pictures 1968 Volkswagen Beetle -
dresses car town graphics vw
more...
makeup car town graphics vw
girlfriend town graphics vw beetle
hairstyles town graphics vw beetle
.jpg)
pmb76
07-13 12:00 AM
People, I think it is best we not doubt the intentions of anybody willing to speak on our behalf. It is a critical hour and we will take all the help we need. Murthy could've just not sent the letter and kept quiet. What would you say to that ? What do you say to other lawyers who have not even done this simple thing of writing a letter to Chertoff ?
Atleast she's not trying to add millions of hits to her website by writing sensational news every hour, unlike some other lawyers :)
I think she deserves a "Thank you" for this nice gesture.
Full Disclosure : My lawyer is not Murthy. I have spoken with her once long time ago and decided not to go with her for other reasons.
Atleast she's not trying to add millions of hits to her website by writing sensational news every hour, unlike some other lawyers :)
I think she deserves a "Thank you" for this nice gesture.
Full Disclosure : My lawyer is not Murthy. I have spoken with her once long time ago and decided not to go with her for other reasons.
wallpaper 1968 Volkswagen Beetle - Love

PresidentO
02-03 05:07 PM
So naive of you to think that Senator-elect (Is she sworn in yet?) Gillibrand would be the person to do this. She is already labeled a flip flopper for courting hispanic groups.
AFAIK, The 8 year wait time she was referring to was not EB wait times. That was posted here on IV, discussed and proved that she was talking in general. Actions speak louder than talk. Talk is free, action is risk for politicians.
Good luck!
AFAIK, The 8 year wait time she was referring to was not EB wait times. That was posted here on IV, discussed and proved that she was talking in general. Actions speak louder than talk. Talk is free, action is risk for politicians.
Good luck!
.jpg)
kondur_007
07-12 04:30 PM
E. APPLICABILITY OF INA SECTION 202(a)(5)(A)AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF �OTHERWISE UNUSED� NUMBERS
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
This is simply the explanation as to why will EB2 India get a huge number and not so much for EB2 China (so when year end statistics come out, there would not be too much noise about why EB2 India got several thousands of visa numbers more than any other category).
Indication that EB2 India will get huge numbers...this is just explanation as to why:)
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
This is simply the explanation as to why will EB2 India get a huge number and not so much for EB2 China (so when year end statistics come out, there would not be too much noise about why EB2 India got several thousands of visa numbers more than any other category).
Indication that EB2 India will get huge numbers...this is just explanation as to why:)
2011 with the Car Town look.

aries22
07-05 10:26 AM
Core is putting their time and mmoney and doing this all for everybody
Pray please tell me what the core did for people stuck in BEC's.
Even these people contributed and once the dates were made current everybody and I'm sorry to say including the core forgot about them.
I know I'll be bashed for wrting this and pls dont get offended but I just had to ask.
Pray please tell me what the core did for people stuck in BEC's.
Even these people contributed and once the dates were made current everybody and I'm sorry to say including the core forgot about them.
I know I'll be bashed for wrting this and pls dont get offended but I just had to ask.
more...

nareshg
04-20 06:47 PM
Hi,
Is there something you need to show for entry at the event ?
Sorry if it is a dumb question.. .I just joined today..
- Naresh
Is there something you need to show for entry at the event ?
Sorry if it is a dumb question.. .I just joined today..
- Naresh

nixstor
03-18 05:17 PM
I can use some help if I am missing some things here.
Snip from 202 a 5 (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=sethitdoc&doc_hit=1&doc_searchcontext=jump&s_context=jump&s_action=newSearch&s_method=applyFilter&s_fieldSearch=nxthomecollectionid|SLB&s_fieldSearch=foliodestination|act202a&s_type=all&hash=0-0-0-1435)
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Paragraph in the above corresond to each category. So paragraph 1 is EB1. Paragraph 2 is EB2 and so on. So the translation is what the VB exactly said.
What does 203 (b) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 say?
Define EB1-EB5 categories. Find it here (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/slbid/1/2/15?hilite=).
I posted the same Q on Ron Gotcher's forum this afternoon and my post did not go through to be moderated (I got the message that the post was submitted and will be posted after moderator approves it) or the mod chose not to post it.
Snip from 202 a 5 (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=sethitdoc&doc_hit=1&doc_searchcontext=jump&s_context=jump&s_action=newSearch&s_method=applyFilter&s_fieldSearch=nxthomecollectionid|SLB&s_fieldSearch=foliodestination|act202a&s_type=all&hash=0-0-0-1435)
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Paragraph in the above corresond to each category. So paragraph 1 is EB1. Paragraph 2 is EB2 and so on. So the translation is what the VB exactly said.
What does 203 (b) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 say?
Define EB1-EB5 categories. Find it here (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/slbid/1/2/15?hilite=).
I posted the same Q on Ron Gotcher's forum this afternoon and my post did not go through to be moderated (I got the message that the post was submitted and will be posted after moderator approves it) or the mod chose not to post it.
more...
.jpg)
eager_immi
01-25 12:10 PM
please add sulekha.com
www.rediff.com
www.greatandhra.com
www.idlebrain.com
www.andhravilas.com
www.sifynews.com
www.samachar.com
www.rediff.com
www.greatandhra.com
www.idlebrain.com
www.andhravilas.com
www.sifynews.com
www.samachar.com
2010 1968 Volkswagen Beetle

webm
04-29 09:00 AM
I opened the mailbox at home this evening and to my complete surprise -- the physical card! Sudden burst of efficiency at USCIs, 6 days from approval to actual delivery of card.
Good luck to everyone else!
Enjoy the Green on hand!!
Good luck to everyone else!
Enjoy the Green on hand!!
more...

sugaur
05-28 09:44 PM
I Wish the border patrol was doing its job more efficiently and doing more searches not less. This way !@#$% illegals would be kicked out and our immigration process wouldnt be held hostage by them.
I live near the Mexican border. There are border check points everywhere when you leave the city. They will stop you, ask you your status. First time I didnt have my passport or anything. He checked my drivers license and politely reminded me about the requirement to carry immigration documents. Since then, I always carry a copy of passport and H1B and have never had any problems.
I hate it when people cry and feel like they are being persecuted when asked to follow the law.
I live near the Mexican border. There are border check points everywhere when you leave the city. They will stop you, ask you your status. First time I didnt have my passport or anything. He checked my drivers license and politely reminded me about the requirement to carry immigration documents. Since then, I always carry a copy of passport and H1B and have never had any problems.
I hate it when people cry and feel like they are being persecuted when asked to follow the law.
hair car town skins vw beetle

geniousatwork
06-11 08:50 AM
done....me and my wife did it
more...

amsgc
07-02 09:36 PM
Regarding your argument on fairness:
On the contrary, under the current system immigrants from all nations do not have an equal opportunity to apply for a green card. Immigrants from the retrogressed countries are at an unfair disadvantage.
It is easy to see: A guy from ROW and a guy from India both are equally qualified engineers who have a EB2 PD of Jan 2008. The guy from ROW can apply to adjust status now, but the guy from India cannot apply until five years from now. That doesn't tell me that both immigrants have an equal opportunity.
Both immigrants would have had an equal opportunity if both could apply for GC at the same time. Once you have entered the country, have been gainfully employed, and your immigrant petition has been approved, how does it matter whether you came from India, china or Timbuktu? Your employer needs you for your skills, not your place of birth. Do you resolve your day to day office problems with your birth certificate pasted to your forehead?
Regarding your argument on diversity:
You need to understand that the country cap (set up 50 years ago) was NOT set up to give all countries an equal shot at sending EB immigrants to the US. The cap was based and an already existing xenophobic tendency (formally expressed way back in 1924) and the desire to retain the cultural and racial character of the US of '65. They would do fine with only handful of you if you didn't eat, drink, talk, walk and look like them.
Now, you need to understand another important point - The world has changed by leaps and bounds in the last fifty years, all made possible by advances in technology and a conscientious effort by governments to educate their people. As a result there are highly skilled people all over the world, who bring their own unique character and experience to the work place. And things have changed dramatically in the US too. Among other things, the US has become more accommodating to people of different cultural identities. Economically, the US is in need of more high skilled people than ever before. This is an irreversible trend, where the US of today is more interested in who you are and what you bring to the table than what you look like. If a few thousand Indians or Chinese are given the green card, based on their SKLLS, it will not alter the racial and cultural character of 300000000 Americans (that's 300 followed by six zeros). Rather it will only make it richer.
Usually politicians work in reactionary mode – they will espouse an idea once it is obvious that they can’t do without it. The fact that discussion to remove country caps in EB has come up in the congress means that the American people have already written it off as an absurd idea.
The law will change, whether you like it or not.
Read here and get yourself some education:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Services_Act_of_1965
Regarding the agenda:
The agenda of this organization is pretty darn obvious if you care to go through the home page. The idea is to get as close as possible to a system of immigration that appropriately addresses the needs of the US economy and is fair to both Peter and Paul. A system which gives out a green card in a timely fashion, based on skills, job requirements, and the time when the process was started. We need to advocate a change because the current system says to Paul "screw you" and rewards Peter.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
On the contrary, under the current system immigrants from all nations do not have an equal opportunity to apply for a green card. Immigrants from the retrogressed countries are at an unfair disadvantage.
It is easy to see: A guy from ROW and a guy from India both are equally qualified engineers who have a EB2 PD of Jan 2008. The guy from ROW can apply to adjust status now, but the guy from India cannot apply until five years from now. That doesn't tell me that both immigrants have an equal opportunity.
Both immigrants would have had an equal opportunity if both could apply for GC at the same time. Once you have entered the country, have been gainfully employed, and your immigrant petition has been approved, how does it matter whether you came from India, china or Timbuktu? Your employer needs you for your skills, not your place of birth. Do you resolve your day to day office problems with your birth certificate pasted to your forehead?
Regarding your argument on diversity:
You need to understand that the country cap (set up 50 years ago) was NOT set up to give all countries an equal shot at sending EB immigrants to the US. The cap was based and an already existing xenophobic tendency (formally expressed way back in 1924) and the desire to retain the cultural and racial character of the US of '65. They would do fine with only handful of you if you didn't eat, drink, talk, walk and look like them.
Now, you need to understand another important point - The world has changed by leaps and bounds in the last fifty years, all made possible by advances in technology and a conscientious effort by governments to educate their people. As a result there are highly skilled people all over the world, who bring their own unique character and experience to the work place. And things have changed dramatically in the US too. Among other things, the US has become more accommodating to people of different cultural identities. Economically, the US is in need of more high skilled people than ever before. This is an irreversible trend, where the US of today is more interested in who you are and what you bring to the table than what you look like. If a few thousand Indians or Chinese are given the green card, based on their SKLLS, it will not alter the racial and cultural character of 300000000 Americans (that's 300 followed by six zeros). Rather it will only make it richer.
Usually politicians work in reactionary mode – they will espouse an idea once it is obvious that they can’t do without it. The fact that discussion to remove country caps in EB has come up in the congress means that the American people have already written it off as an absurd idea.
The law will change, whether you like it or not.
Read here and get yourself some education:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Services_Act_of_1965
Regarding the agenda:
The agenda of this organization is pretty darn obvious if you care to go through the home page. The idea is to get as close as possible to a system of immigration that appropriately addresses the needs of the US economy and is fair to both Peter and Paul. A system which gives out a green card in a timely fashion, based on skills, job requirements, and the time when the process was started. We need to advocate a change because the current system says to Paul "screw you" and rewards Peter.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
hot car town graphics vw

NKR
02-20 03:17 PM
Thanks Googler. This wait for GC has made me forget the definition of patience :)
more...
house town graphics vw beetle

StuckInTheMuck
07-30 07:39 AM
At the risk of giving someone the idea of starting a new thread on dottiness (all sorts of stuff are popping up these days :)) - you can see your DI (dot index) by clicking "User Profile" at the top right of this page (assuming you are logged on to IV), and then clicking "User Control Panel", which opens the list of your dots w/o comments (I am yet to figure out the point system that comes with it). This does not tell you though who gave what, unless they announce themselves.
And I thank you for your vote of confidence on the relevance issue :)
And I thank you for your vote of confidence on the relevance issue :)
tattoo TABLE car town graphics vw

anandrajesh
07-02 12:00 PM
Well, this is a clear sign of "You are not Needed here, get the heck out of our country". May be we should heed to this msg and move out.
I wasted My money, Time, Took a Few shots at the Doctor, declined a good Permanent Offer for all this. What a Waste...
This is a sad sad news
UPDATE ON JULY VISA AVAILABILITY
The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
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. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO: July 2, 2007
I wasted My money, Time, Took a Few shots at the Doctor, declined a good Permanent Offer for all this. What a Waste...
This is a sad sad news
UPDATE ON JULY VISA AVAILABILITY
The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
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. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO: July 2, 2007
more...
pictures 1968 Volkswagen Beetle -
ingegarcia
02-15 04:40 PM
How is ROW getting screwed?. Look at the situation as individuals applying irrespective of country of birth. Last Year, there were 120,000(approx) applicants and only 60,000(approx) H1-b1 visas. NOW: It just happens that a lot or 60%were natives of one country. But that does not mean anything... There could be more ROW applicants who could apply, no body is stopping them. There are just not enough ROW applicants that employers can find.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.
This is not true otherwise EB3 ROW would not be in 2005.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.
This is not true otherwise EB3 ROW would not be in 2005.
dresses car town graphics vw

perm2gc
01-05 02:59 AM
An idea!!
Lets just put our post on codeguru.com , expertsexchange.com etc etc....
I'm pretty sure lot of techies visit there from all kind of nationalities.....
Good Idea..Can you post in those websites and post the details here.
Thank You
Lets just put our post on codeguru.com , expertsexchange.com etc etc....
I'm pretty sure lot of techies visit there from all kind of nationalities.....
Good Idea..Can you post in those websites and post the details here.
Thank You
more...
makeup car town graphics vw

makemygc
07-01 09:57 PM
Everyone is busy partying.
Please contribute and then we might be able to appreciate your right on asking status of IV core. But do not forget IV is nothing but a shadow of ours. If you can't move, do you think your shadow will move. So do your part first and then ask what IV is doing.
Please contribute and then we might be able to appreciate your right on asking status of IV core. But do not forget IV is nothing but a shadow of ours. If you can't move, do you think your shadow will move. So do your part first and then ask what IV is doing.
girlfriend town graphics vw beetle

redgreen
08-10 08:47 PM
so what you are basically asking is give gc to everybody who wants. country quota is meaningless (we know that!). qualifications are worthless. nobel prize or manual laborer (all are humans!). illegals also should be given gc without any reservations!
so when we start a campaign try to be reasonable. don't just 'focus' on our 'wishes'. think creatively how to solve the problem we are all facing, by understanding the basics of the whole process.
Good point. But there should be no holy cows where justice is concerned
so when we start a campaign try to be reasonable. don't just 'focus' on our 'wishes'. think creatively how to solve the problem we are all facing, by understanding the basics of the whole process.
Good point. But there should be no holy cows where justice is concerned
hairstyles town graphics vw beetle

anilsal
12-11 04:04 PM
USCIS cannot do anything on the matter. INA is clear on the AOS conditions, one of which is "An immigrant visa is IMMEDIATELY available at time of filing for adjustment of status" (INA 245, 8 USC 1225)
INA should be changed which should be done through a legislative process, not through any rule making.
I think the act says that the alien should have filed an application, only after which does the question of available visa comes into picture.
http://www.americanlaw.com/aos.html
I think this act is not the applicable one.
So I think we are still green to discuss this. Do you interpret the same?
INA should be changed which should be done through a legislative process, not through any rule making.
I think the act says that the alien should have filed an application, only after which does the question of available visa comes into picture.
http://www.americanlaw.com/aos.html
I think this act is not the applicable one.
So I think we are still green to discuss this. Do you interpret the same?
sanjaymm
10-29 01:43 PM
I have mailed a notorized letter. I have also forwarded the link to other friends who may have missed this action item.
Sanjay
Sanjay
greencard_fever
03-15 06:13 PM
what i am saying is how and why is it that inspite of the PD having been current as I detailed in my original post for so long during 2000-2005 for EB 2 India, why are there applicants from way back in 2002 and 2003 still waiting?
Honestly, I thought they should have been already processed and gotten their Green cards by now.
All I am trying to figure out is how many applicants from 2004-2005 are still in the proverbial 'PIPELINE' waiting. Unless they are done, the PD is not gonna move.
If we can have it move conclusively to 2005-2006 regions relatively quickly, most problems are solved.
BTW, what are the chances that the PD may become "Current" again for EB2/EB3 India over the next 40 months?
Thanks
like Name check delays and Backlog elimation of LC was done in last 2007 which might possible that quite a bit of LC with PD 2002 - 2004 was got approved and were not able to file 485 because EB2 was "U" after August-2007
Honestly, I thought they should have been already processed and gotten their Green cards by now.
All I am trying to figure out is how many applicants from 2004-2005 are still in the proverbial 'PIPELINE' waiting. Unless they are done, the PD is not gonna move.
If we can have it move conclusively to 2005-2006 regions relatively quickly, most problems are solved.
BTW, what are the chances that the PD may become "Current" again for EB2/EB3 India over the next 40 months?
Thanks
like Name check delays and Backlog elimation of LC was done in last 2007 which might possible that quite a bit of LC with PD 2002 - 2004 was got approved and were not able to file 485 because EB2 was "U" after August-2007
Post Title
→volkswagen beetle car town template
Post URL
→http://leyleetattoos.blogspot.com/2011/06/volkswagen-beetle-car-town-template.html
Visit Leylee Tattoo for Daily Updated Leylee Tattoo