sina
08-26 11:02 AM
My husband's EAD was approved last week. I filed both the EADs (for me and him) together in July (Receipt Date: July 30th). My application has no LUD so far. His EAD was approved last week. This is just weird. When both the applications were filed together why look at one and not look at the other?
wallpaper Black Swan (2010) 720p nSD
prince_waiting
05-10 10:32 AM
7% quota based on national origin is based on law but it is clearly a biased and outdated law. It is beyond my comprehension why should we scared of initiating a litigation against the US government when it is clearly involved in blatant discrimination. The HSMP rules were challenged successfully by Indian high skilled workers in UK, why can't we do the same over here? I pledge to donate USD 200 for a lawsuit if such an action is initiated.
HarshJ
01-06 12:31 PM
Hi,
I had started the thread a while back and I am glad to tell that I finally got my FP notice and completed the FP process.
I had opened a SR on Nov 5th after filing I-485 in July (receipt date Jul 23rd). I got a standard notice in Dec first week indicating that they shall schedule a FP notice when there is an opening available at ASC ( I guess a standard reply from what I have read in the posts). I then took an info pass on Dec 8th and it was also a seemingly non fruitful visit.
Finally on Jan 2nd I got a voice mail at work from attorney (dated Dec 26th) that my FP appt was on Dec 27th. I never got any notice to this effect till Jan 2nd in mail. Hence the attorney sent me his copy by FedEx and I drove the very next day (Jan 4th) to the ASC in Oakland, CA. I explained the situation and they were kind enough to schedule me the same day. The process was pretty straightforward, and was completed in about 10-15 minutes.
My spouse on the other hand did get her notice in mail and her FP appt is on Jan 11th.....
So am not sure what worked....the call to CS, taking an infopass, or just plan praying :)
Anyways, I wish everyone luck here.
I had started the thread a while back and I am glad to tell that I finally got my FP notice and completed the FP process.
I had opened a SR on Nov 5th after filing I-485 in July (receipt date Jul 23rd). I got a standard notice in Dec first week indicating that they shall schedule a FP notice when there is an opening available at ASC ( I guess a standard reply from what I have read in the posts). I then took an info pass on Dec 8th and it was also a seemingly non fruitful visit.
Finally on Jan 2nd I got a voice mail at work from attorney (dated Dec 26th) that my FP appt was on Dec 27th. I never got any notice to this effect till Jan 2nd in mail. Hence the attorney sent me his copy by FedEx and I drove the very next day (Jan 4th) to the ASC in Oakland, CA. I explained the situation and they were kind enough to schedule me the same day. The process was pretty straightforward, and was completed in about 10-15 minutes.
My spouse on the other hand did get her notice in mail and her FP appt is on Jan 11th.....
So am not sure what worked....the call to CS, taking an infopass, or just plan praying :)
Anyways, I wish everyone luck here.
2011 Clint Mansell - Black Swan
WaitingYaar
06-07 10:28 AM
AFAIK all 485 filings have to be sent to NSC. Also, does one need to attach the original I-140 approval with I-485 or a copy of it will suffice?
more...
kondur_007
07-28 01:04 PM
Sorry to read blaming debates between eb3 and eb2. Insted of blaming, it is better to take some action. Based on current practice by DOS, EB3-I will be like this for ever, unless more number opens up by any legislative changes. As per law, each EB catagories are allowed to have 40K visas. As demand for EB2 is more, (paricularly by In,Ch) one can not expect any flow from EB2 to EB3 . This is law one can not change it.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
This is exactly I have been trying to communicate for a long time.
I said this in my previous posts:
Following is my post from May:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18876
Then I said it again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19058&page=2
Then I said it again and again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=261937#post261937
And I urge again, this is not the "fight between EB2 and EB3" but a reality that something needs to be done for EB3. Although I am not EB3 myself, I have many frieds stuck in EB3, and it is very unfair to them and their families to wait several years in line.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
This is exactly I have been trying to communicate for a long time.
I said this in my previous posts:
Following is my post from May:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18876
Then I said it again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19058&page=2
Then I said it again and again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=261937#post261937
And I urge again, this is not the "fight between EB2 and EB3" but a reality that something needs to be done for EB3. Although I am not EB3 myself, I have many frieds stuck in EB3, and it is very unfair to them and their families to wait several years in line.
amitjoey
07-10 02:46 PM
no wonder they are talking about impeachment of GWB and Sr Mcain's press conf. no news of this protest.. I like the way Michael moore trashed them yesterday in his live interview with Wolf on why and how CNN neglected his story all along..
CNN sucks big time and others are not too far behind
WRITE TO politicalticker@cnn.com
CNN sucks big time and others are not too far behind
WRITE TO politicalticker@cnn.com
more...
the_jaguar
12-12 09:04 PM
If you think it is that ridiculuous, then you should tell the core members that. They did ask us to call him on the last day of LD. There is nothing wrong in writing to him. In fact, you are making a comparison that is not correct.
Actually, it was an exceptional situation. As you are well aware of, we had to get an unanimous consent if the skil bill were to pass in the LD, so, we needed to have Session's approval. To deflect the situation, he just said that his office hadnt received any positive comments.. When we ended up jamming his phones and gave all the positive comments, what came out of that, nuthing.. he did not budge from his stance.. It was just a ploy and even if the entire US of A had called him, he would not have changed his stance.. He had to score brownie points from his supporters. He knows that the Skil bill will be passed next year, and may be some form of CIR even.. He can then blame it on the democrats and stand for re-election in 2009 with complete support from his supporters..
Its all a gimmick for votes. This is politics, same thing in every country, just more sophisticated here...
Actually, it was an exceptional situation. As you are well aware of, we had to get an unanimous consent if the skil bill were to pass in the LD, so, we needed to have Session's approval. To deflect the situation, he just said that his office hadnt received any positive comments.. When we ended up jamming his phones and gave all the positive comments, what came out of that, nuthing.. he did not budge from his stance.. It was just a ploy and even if the entire US of A had called him, he would not have changed his stance.. He had to score brownie points from his supporters. He knows that the Skil bill will be passed next year, and may be some form of CIR even.. He can then blame it on the democrats and stand for re-election in 2009 with complete support from his supporters..
Its all a gimmick for votes. This is politics, same thing in every country, just more sophisticated here...
2010 Black.Swan
trueguy
07-27 07:34 PM
Its unfortunate that you ask us to UNITE and use 'EB2 elitist protectionism' in the same breath. I am not even going down the road of EB3 'smarter' than EB2 because a reverse argument is equally valid if not more. The law as stated above is what it is - there is a clear categorizaton established by law. If there is a level of frustration with it then a campaign to change it makes sense. However any proposed changes that arbitrarily assigns visa numbers just because 'my HR filed it the way it got filed' then you need to check with your HR and port over to EB2 - if you think your private US degree qualifies you for it. The position determines EB2 or EB3 and I'll leave it at that.
I have no problems in people expressing their opinion in an open forum and lobbying for change. The devil is in the detail. If the change means taking the EB2 excess visas to give to EB3 purely based on length of wait then I have every right to present another point of view - elitist protectionism or not.
I have only seen implications to this effect but nobody has come forward and said it plainly - yes we are EB3 and we want the EB2 excess visas because we have waited seven years. Everybody seems to imply it but nobody wants to call it as plainly as I stated it above. I am only presenting a counter to that.
Seems like You are not waiting for GC for more than 8 years. You have not been separated from ur family for more than 3 years. Thats why you don't agree with EB3-I fight. Look at the PD for last 3 years. EB3-I is stuck in 2001 since early 2005. It has not moved in last 3 years and you are saying People should keep quiet about it. How selfish of you.
I have no problems in people expressing their opinion in an open forum and lobbying for change. The devil is in the detail. If the change means taking the EB2 excess visas to give to EB3 purely based on length of wait then I have every right to present another point of view - elitist protectionism or not.
I have only seen implications to this effect but nobody has come forward and said it plainly - yes we are EB3 and we want the EB2 excess visas because we have waited seven years. Everybody seems to imply it but nobody wants to call it as plainly as I stated it above. I am only presenting a counter to that.
Seems like You are not waiting for GC for more than 8 years. You have not been separated from ur family for more than 3 years. Thats why you don't agree with EB3-I fight. Look at the PD for last 3 years. EB3-I is stuck in 2001 since early 2005. It has not moved in last 3 years and you are saying People should keep quiet about it. How selfish of you.
more...
archanais
07-04 06:09 PM
When I joined Company X (prior employer) I paid for H1b transfer fee and h1b renewal fee(total $3200 + $3000).
They agreed to sponsor my green card(just to give required paperwork) and they asked me to pay GC cost, So far I have paid $1500 for labor +$1700 advertisement + $1700 for I-140 + $3750 just now to file I-485 for me and for my spouse as dates were current to my lawyer . I have labor and I-140 approved from Company X.
I was compromising my personal life by staying away from my family and company X didn't find any client near to my home. I decided to stay at home hoping Company X will find some client near to my home. I was on a bench(no salary for a month).When I asked for a "employment letter "to file I-485 Comapny X said they can't give because they are not paying me , I said I will resign and then you give me "future employement letter". I resiged Company X( i found company Y near to my home), in 10 days they cancelled my H1b visa without informing me, gladly I found Company Y and H1b transfer took place before they could cancel my H1b. Company X is reluctant even today to give future emplyement letter.They are ready to do corp-to-corp, forthat have to pay them H1b tranfer cost of $3200(as my prior h1b got cancelled by company X) . I don't beleive its worth going back to them , but at the same time never wanted to lose $8650 green card cost.
To join Company Y again I paid h1b transfer fee and , company Y expects me to pay Green card cost again. I am on 7th year extension. New H1b is valid till 2010(3 yr extension on I-140 approval from company X).
Shall I start green card again with company Y ?
Company X doesn't respond to emails/calls. There should some law to protect us from such employers. BTW Employer X was an american employer and wants to follow book-rules.Example .. informing USCIS to windraw H1b petition.
:( I am almost in tears.
They agreed to sponsor my green card(just to give required paperwork) and they asked me to pay GC cost, So far I have paid $1500 for labor +$1700 advertisement + $1700 for I-140 + $3750 just now to file I-485 for me and for my spouse as dates were current to my lawyer . I have labor and I-140 approved from Company X.
I was compromising my personal life by staying away from my family and company X didn't find any client near to my home. I decided to stay at home hoping Company X will find some client near to my home. I was on a bench(no salary for a month).When I asked for a "employment letter "to file I-485 Comapny X said they can't give because they are not paying me , I said I will resign and then you give me "future employement letter". I resiged Company X( i found company Y near to my home), in 10 days they cancelled my H1b visa without informing me, gladly I found Company Y and H1b transfer took place before they could cancel my H1b. Company X is reluctant even today to give future emplyement letter.They are ready to do corp-to-corp, forthat have to pay them H1b tranfer cost of $3200(as my prior h1b got cancelled by company X) . I don't beleive its worth going back to them , but at the same time never wanted to lose $8650 green card cost.
To join Company Y again I paid h1b transfer fee and , company Y expects me to pay Green card cost again. I am on 7th year extension. New H1b is valid till 2010(3 yr extension on I-140 approval from company X).
Shall I start green card again with company Y ?
Company X doesn't respond to emails/calls. There should some law to protect us from such employers. BTW Employer X was an american employer and wants to follow book-rules.Example .. informing USCIS to windraw H1b petition.
:( I am almost in tears.
hair Black Swan (2010) BRRip H264-
mchundi
12-15 02:09 AM
I myself will not support for skill Bill in current form. Too much H1b numbers will not only create a problem for US citizens it will also for current H1bs as well future H1bs. That 20% automatic adjustment and exemption for Cap for MS persons will increase supply and it will be tough to find a job if too many people are in the market. There are abundant jobs in India. Let people wait in India for 1 or 2 years to come here. Sustained immigration without increasing unemployment is better for US as well as potential immigrants. Otherwise Hate will increase. It may be easy to talk Capitalism and fittest will survive. When those people talking will be unemployed for more than 6 months with kids in the family will realise the truth. In the Forum most of the people are young and they did not face any issue other than Green card.
But speed with which Corporations and Lawyers are working the Skill bill be passed in current form soon. We will wait and see after 3 years after increasing H1B. My prediction is Limited increase in H1 with Moderate increase in GC numbers will solve the problem for all the gc waiting people without big reaction from anti immigrants and that will boost sustained immigration.
Well, it is not a perfect world. It is not a perfect system. When CIR comes up every group will push for their interests. If u send a mail to any Senator, all u get is a standard reply about H1-B. It will be impossible to educate every ligislator. We have to do the best we can to voice our concerns and go with the tide. We cannot nitpick the sections of the CIR and tell the legislators vote only for these. We just make sure that our issues are addressed in whatever bill comes up.
But speed with which Corporations and Lawyers are working the Skill bill be passed in current form soon. We will wait and see after 3 years after increasing H1B. My prediction is Limited increase in H1 with Moderate increase in GC numbers will solve the problem for all the gc waiting people without big reaction from anti immigrants and that will boost sustained immigration.
Well, it is not a perfect world. It is not a perfect system. When CIR comes up every group will push for their interests. If u send a mail to any Senator, all u get is a standard reply about H1-B. It will be impossible to educate every ligislator. We have to do the best we can to voice our concerns and go with the tide. We cannot nitpick the sections of the CIR and tell the legislators vote only for these. We just make sure that our issues are addressed in whatever bill comes up.
more...
Macaca
07-09 12:21 PM
We need to define immediately available.
Now lets see how the above LAW (including immediately available) was followed in the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when .27 = 140K = 37,800 GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
10K+ GCs were returned in 2006 but soma (??) categories were not available.
Now lets see how the above LAW (including immediately available) was followed in the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when .27 = 140K = 37,800 GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
10K+ GCs were returned in 2006 but soma (??) categories were not available.
hot lack swan duckload free full
kondur_007
07-26 05:49 PM
There is not much use for just fighting EB3-I. You can send a letter or lobbey and they will hear it. Thats all. There are so much discrepancies in immigration policy of USA(The impact is for just for potential immigrants not for the country) I do not think they will spend time to resolve each and every small discrepancy. There are more more severe issues in the country than resolving EB3-I. Of course that is a big issue for those who are impacted.
But the problem will be automatically resolved if STEM/and or Recapture bill is passed. That is a big picture and that will get more attention than just lobbying for EB3-I.
I agree. If "vertical spillover" occurs again, the only benefit would go to EB3-ROW.
It is very very difficult to convince anyone to overflow EB2 ROW -> EB3 ROW -> EB3 I (leaving EB2 I out of loop). (eventhough USCIS did it in past)
If someone tries to re-interprete, it will end up like:EB2 ROW -> EB3 ROW -> EB2I -> EB3 I, still no real benefit to EB3 I; only EB2 I will loose with some benefit to EB3 ROW.
Bottom line is, we need more visa numbers and that's what we need to campaign for. May it be recapture, or STEM exemption or anything else.
I am not saying this just because I am EB2, but these are the facts. Additionally, there is a big chance of new immigration law as soon as new president comes (likely some form of CIR) and we need to be prepared to have our agenda included in that; rather than splitting ourselves.
But the problem will be automatically resolved if STEM/and or Recapture bill is passed. That is a big picture and that will get more attention than just lobbying for EB3-I.
I agree. If "vertical spillover" occurs again, the only benefit would go to EB3-ROW.
It is very very difficult to convince anyone to overflow EB2 ROW -> EB3 ROW -> EB3 I (leaving EB2 I out of loop). (eventhough USCIS did it in past)
If someone tries to re-interprete, it will end up like:EB2 ROW -> EB3 ROW -> EB2I -> EB3 I, still no real benefit to EB3 I; only EB2 I will loose with some benefit to EB3 ROW.
Bottom line is, we need more visa numbers and that's what we need to campaign for. May it be recapture, or STEM exemption or anything else.
I am not saying this just because I am EB2, but these are the facts. Additionally, there is a big chance of new immigration law as soon as new president comes (likely some form of CIR) and we need to be prepared to have our agenda included in that; rather than splitting ourselves.
more...
house General : Black.Swan.2010.
caprianurag
08-27 05:00 PM
Applied on Aug 9th for i-140, i485 and EAD.
No reciepts yet
No reciepts yet
tattoo Black Swan (2010)
siva008
11-17 03:27 PM
Done
more...
pictures Black Swan - SANTi
maag
05-30 07:28 AM
Will I need passport size photos at the time of landing (like for applying PR or any other form) and if required how many photos are required.
dresses Black Swan 2010 BluRay 1080p
javadeveloper
07-20 09:28 PM
We'll do these things for common/generic issues like visa recapture,not counting dependents visas,removing per country quota.
#1.EB3s will start contributing , let's say $100 Each
#2.EB2s will match the amount in #1
#3.GC holders(Both EB2&EB3 - IV members) will contribute $250 to help their IV friends.
I am ready to contribute any EB2 & EB3 guys are ready? I am happy to contribute $500 more after I get GC
#1.EB3s will start contributing , let's say $100 Each
#2.EB2s will match the amount in #1
#3.GC holders(Both EB2&EB3 - IV members) will contribute $250 to help their IV friends.
I am ready to contribute any EB2 & EB3 guys are ready? I am happy to contribute $500 more after I get GC
more...
makeup Black Swan (2010)
jhaalaa
03-28 01:32 PM
Average worldwide processing time for employment based green card applications is 1.43 years (Priority Date to GC approval).
In simple words, it takes 5.5 years to wrap up the 1 year GC demand for Indian applicants presuming there is no overflow from any other country GC visa quota.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg
Above conclusion is drawn after comparing the statistics for just the 2007 PERM data from DOL.
http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/perm07.pdf
I also assumed that there are 1000 Non-Perm cases for India alone, but changing it would not affect the results a lot.
Just imagine the demand that would have been in years 2000~2002 and thats a project for another er!
Unless we stand up unitedly, talk to the senators and raise our voice, we can plan on retiring on H1. It may be now or never!
In simple words, it takes 5.5 years to wrap up the 1 year GC demand for Indian applicants presuming there is no overflow from any other country GC visa quota.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pezNTiCXNupwoSrZGE4kqcg
Above conclusion is drawn after comparing the statistics for just the 2007 PERM data from DOL.
http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/perm07.pdf
I also assumed that there are 1000 Non-Perm cases for India alone, but changing it would not affect the results a lot.
Just imagine the demand that would have been in years 2000~2002 and thats a project for another er!
Unless we stand up unitedly, talk to the senators and raise our voice, we can plan on retiring on H1. It may be now or never!
girlfriend Black Swan (2010) 480p BRrip
kannan
05-07 06:21 PM
I got biometrics notice today. Will they take FP also on the same day or Will I get another notice for FP?
hairstyles Hotfile Fileserve
simple1
05-01 03:21 PM
I second that. Technically they should not be. thanks MCQ, H1 and H4 is a great example
If at all they are counted they must be counted in FB2A not EB.
Honestly, I don’t care if they are counted or not. Why would 5 year old kid get counted in EB quota. I don’t get it.
as long as they are not counted in EBquota. There is no legal basis for that. Or atleast I could not find one.
I have long been of the opinion - told to me by an immigration lawyer, that when you file your I-485 when the PD is current, and your dependents file also that only the Primary counts towards the quota, dependent GC's do not count towards the employment based visa quota - so this may be a moot point as to whether or not they should be in the family or employment based lists.
Much like when you file for an H1B, the H4 for your dependants does not count agains the overall H quota.
If at all they are counted they must be counted in FB2A not EB.
Honestly, I don’t care if they are counted or not. Why would 5 year old kid get counted in EB quota. I don’t get it.
as long as they are not counted in EBquota. There is no legal basis for that. Or atleast I could not find one.
I have long been of the opinion - told to me by an immigration lawyer, that when you file your I-485 when the PD is current, and your dependents file also that only the Primary counts towards the quota, dependent GC's do not count towards the employment based visa quota - so this may be a moot point as to whether or not they should be in the family or employment based lists.
Much like when you file for an H1B, the H4 for your dependants does not count agains the overall H quota.
fightnow
07-06 04:14 PM
Legal Immigrants Protest at San Jose on July 7
Location: City Hall
200 E Santa Clara St
San Jose, CA Yahoo Google Map
When: From Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:00 am to Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:30 pm
11:00 AM: Meet at San Jose City Hall (200 E Santa Clara St, meter and paid
parking lot)
11:30 AM: Go to the square in front of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Library (
150 E San Fernando St)
12:30 PM: Walk towards 635 N 1st St through S 4th St, E San Carlos St,
Markety Street and N 1St St.
1:15 PM: Arrive at 635 N 1st St and stay till 2:00 PM
2:30 PM: back to City Hall
Rule #1. Abide by law
Rule #2. Stay on sidewalks.
Rule #3. Follow traffic rules, show courtesy to other pedestrians. Do not
block building entrances
Rule #4. It might help if you dress professionally. Get your best attire out, suit or blazer and tie, and similar business attire if you're a lady.(Newly added by sertasheep)
What to bring: plenty of water, snack, sunblock and your SIGNS.
See google map for the route:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=&saddr=200+E+Santa+Clara+St,+San+Jose,+CA&daddr=S+4th+St+%4037.337490,+-121.887320+to%3A150+E+San+Fernando+St,+san+jose,+c a+to%3AS+4th+St+%4037.332980,+-121.883940+to%3AS+Market+St+%4037.331030,+-121.888360+to%3A37.333859,-121.890907+to%3AN+Market+St+%4037.338380,+-121.894240+to%3AW+St+James+St+%4037.339080,+-121.892780+to%3A635+N+1st+St,+San+Jose,+CA+to%3A20 0+E+Santa+Clara+St+San+Jose,+CA+95113&mrcr=4,5&mrsp=5&sz=15&mra=dme&sll=37.335736,-121.886315&sspn=0.015764,0.039911&ie=UTF8&z=15&om=1
Disclaimer: Event leaders take no responsibility and will not be held
responsible for any injuries or accidents that may occur during the
posted events. It is your responsibility to abide by law. By joining
this event, you are taking responsibility for your own safety and well-being.
UPDATE FROM IV CORE :
Bay area residents:
Please begin the process of getting permit from the city to do this in the time-frame and route mentioned. But please move the date to either saturday July 14th or July 21st.
People wont be able to come tommorow so this must be done July 14th or July 21. Also, the rally should not be about just the July bulletin. It should be about backlogs and numerical caps as the root cause of this mess.
But do get city permit for around 100 people (that's what I expect will show up in Bay area based on past experience with Gutierrez rally).
Let's get some attention from CEOs of Oracle, Cisco, Sun and Google and also some attention from Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Nancy Pelosi. There is NO better place than Bay area to do this, especially San Jose.
Let's do this.
Location: City Hall
200 E Santa Clara St
San Jose, CA Yahoo Google Map
When: From Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:00 am to Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:30 pm
11:00 AM: Meet at San Jose City Hall (200 E Santa Clara St, meter and paid
parking lot)
11:30 AM: Go to the square in front of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Library (
150 E San Fernando St)
12:30 PM: Walk towards 635 N 1st St through S 4th St, E San Carlos St,
Markety Street and N 1St St.
1:15 PM: Arrive at 635 N 1st St and stay till 2:00 PM
2:30 PM: back to City Hall
Rule #1. Abide by law
Rule #2. Stay on sidewalks.
Rule #3. Follow traffic rules, show courtesy to other pedestrians. Do not
block building entrances
Rule #4. It might help if you dress professionally. Get your best attire out, suit or blazer and tie, and similar business attire if you're a lady.(Newly added by sertasheep)
What to bring: plenty of water, snack, sunblock and your SIGNS.
See google map for the route:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=&saddr=200+E+Santa+Clara+St,+San+Jose,+CA&daddr=S+4th+St+%4037.337490,+-121.887320+to%3A150+E+San+Fernando+St,+san+jose,+c a+to%3AS+4th+St+%4037.332980,+-121.883940+to%3AS+Market+St+%4037.331030,+-121.888360+to%3A37.333859,-121.890907+to%3AN+Market+St+%4037.338380,+-121.894240+to%3AW+St+James+St+%4037.339080,+-121.892780+to%3A635+N+1st+St,+San+Jose,+CA+to%3A20 0+E+Santa+Clara+St+San+Jose,+CA+95113&mrcr=4,5&mrsp=5&sz=15&mra=dme&sll=37.335736,-121.886315&sspn=0.015764,0.039911&ie=UTF8&z=15&om=1
Disclaimer: Event leaders take no responsibility and will not be held
responsible for any injuries or accidents that may occur during the
posted events. It is your responsibility to abide by law. By joining
this event, you are taking responsibility for your own safety and well-being.
UPDATE FROM IV CORE :
Bay area residents:
Please begin the process of getting permit from the city to do this in the time-frame and route mentioned. But please move the date to either saturday July 14th or July 21st.
People wont be able to come tommorow so this must be done July 14th or July 21. Also, the rally should not be about just the July bulletin. It should be about backlogs and numerical caps as the root cause of this mess.
But do get city permit for around 100 people (that's what I expect will show up in Bay area based on past experience with Gutierrez rally).
Let's get some attention from CEOs of Oracle, Cisco, Sun and Google and also some attention from Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Nancy Pelosi. There is NO better place than Bay area to do this, especially San Jose.
Let's do this.
REDS
11-06 01:47 PM
I too am sailing in the same boat.
Opened an SR yesterday with USCIS for FP.
my 485 was filed with TSC on july 17 and have got EAD and AP but no FP so far.
Opened an SR yesterday with USCIS for FP.
my 485 was filed with TSC on july 17 and have got EAD and AP but no FP so far.
No comments:
Post a Comment