pisebtovas: justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures

Friday, June 24, 2011

justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures

images Justin Bieber e Selena Gomez: justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures. Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

logiclife

03-24 03:00 PM

Assuming that those numbers are wrong, you think they will listen to our request and correct it? No way.

wallpaper Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures. Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

jlander

January 10th, 2005, 09:23 PM

I bought the new Sigma 105 ex dg lens from b&h and it shipped today. I just couldn't bring myself to pay so much for the Nikon when every review of the sigma that I read said it was just as good. I should get the lens on Wednesday.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

I bought a 4+ closup lens to put on the front so that I can get even greater magnification. Has anyone ever used them?<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

As far as expresscamera.com goes, I learned my lesson. I searched for �expresscamera complaints� AFTER I got off the phone. I can't believe I fell for the bait and switch. When I completed my online order, I got an email that I had to call to verify the order. When I did, the operator asked what camera I was using and then asked why I was buying a 35mm film lens for a digital camera.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

This caught me by surprise and also made me feel a bit stupid. I asked what the difference was and what he recommended. He then sent me to another page on his site that had the sigma lens for $850 on sale for $750. He then told me that there was a rebate for $150 and he could file it for me for a fee of $50. I told him that I'd file it myself and he offered to wave the $50 fee. He then said that shipping would take 2 weeks and when I balked, said that he would upgrade the shipping to 3 day. The standard shipping price was over $50 with insurance. My total price on the lens was just under $650. By that time, I would have paid anything.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

I searched their site and found the Sigma ex dg lens for sale elsewhere for $370. The search function on the site does not work correctly, so it was not easy. What a scam... They have their technique down to a science. I doubt that many people actually end up with what they originally ordered.

USCIS FAQ3 released [Archive] - Immigration Voice

View Full Version : USCIS FAQ3 released

Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

zCool

04-01 05:27 PM

"Bought" the labor?
So you broke the LAW..
And now you want to know how to break it further??
You are ignorant, and CRIMINAL!
Not to mention stupid!
Get the heck outta here..

2011 Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

ca_immigrant

02-11 12:08 PM

Hi Folks,

What is the fastest and perhaps a little economic way to get documents over to chennai (Tamil Nadu) or Calicut (Kerala) from here in San Jose, ca.

USPS has this service called Express Mail ($27.95) or Priority Mail ($12.95)
I guess USPS is claiming 6-10 days (guess no gurantee) to india.

Other couriers seems to be $70+ (FedEx, UPS, DHL)..

Anyone has had good luck with USPS ? or do you suggest the couriers mentioned above ?

Need to get docs for an interview for parents on Feb 26th in Chennai...

Thanks in Advance for your reply !!

more...

Justin Bieber And Selena Gomez

fromnaija

09-01 12:27 PM

Thanks for re-posting this. I obviously missed all your previous posts on this topic. It gives me some hope for approval next month; I haven't received a 2nd FP request since 9/28/07. (I have an LUD, I have an LUD yay!)

-Nola

Congrats on your approval which I read about on another thread. This proves my point about FP reuse via BSS.

Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

WeShallOvercome

12-12 07:50 PM

Fellow IV members who have their GCs approved and some of those who are still waiting:

I have a few questions on how my brand new GC will help me in my situation..

My current project is ending 12/31 and I have about 20 PTO days left(yes, I get PTO from my desi employer)...Like many others I have signed a 'bond' with them that I will not leave them before july 2008.

Now after my current project is over, can they force me to use my PTO? or ask me to go on unpaid vacation even if I'm willing to work for them if they have work for me...

What if I get something on my own but my employer is not able to find work for me and pay me... Am I still bound by the contract I signed with them?

Thanks for your inputs

more...

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

GCard_Dream

04-06 11:51 AM

I know some of you can answer this in your sleep. You guys are that knowledgable. Care to help?

I guess the only question that remains now is if I beat the clock and am able to file I-485 (assuming everything works out in EB2 case) before the current H1B expires, what would my status be until I receive my EAD. My understanding is that is takes few months for the EAD to be approved but the H1 has long expired. Are you in status or out of status then?

2010 Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures. Justin Bieber e Selena Gomez:

Justin Bieber e Selena Gomez:

asiehouston

09-05 09:19 PM

I finally got my AP, 15 days after my EAD (100 days total) . I was happy to open the packet, until this......

THEY SENT ME MY AP WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PICTURE!!!!!!!

Everything else is Correct (address, DOB, A# etc...)

GURUS, please advise what should I do...... I am so pissed!!!!! Thankfully my EAD has the correct pic.... I had done an E-file....June 7th and my previous AP expires Sept 20

more...

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

piyu7444

03-26 02:44 PM

I got another CRIS email today. Can anyone tell me what is the 'standard processing' mentioned in the email below?
Anyone else know what this means for the status of my application?

Thanks.

-----------------------------
*** DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS E-MAIL ***

The last processing action taken on your case

Receipt Number: LINXXXXXXXXX

Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS

Current Status: This case is now pending at the office to which it was transferred.

The I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS was transferred and is now pending standard processing at a USCIS office. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done, counting from when USCIS received it. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. To receive e-mail updates, follow the link below to register.

If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision from USCIS within the current processing time listed*, please contact USCIS Customer Service at (800) 375-5283.

*Current processing times can be found on the USCIS website at www.uscis.gov (http://www.uscis.gov) under Case Status and Processing Dates.
*** Please do not respond to this e-mail message.

Sincerely,

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

Someone else had posted earlier a similar topic/question.

I was trying to find the what is invloved in "Preliminary Processing" and this is what I found at
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVA...e8fe53f9aa0e3c (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=2ab34436fb933cfd72e8fe53f9aa0 e3c)
(f) Preliminary Processing : The evidence supplied with the application is first reviewed by an officer at the National Benefits Center (NBC) to establish that the applicant meets the basic qualifying criteria to apply: he or she is an eligible alien, and he or she is not statutorily ineligible due to a felony conviction or convictions of three or more misdemeanors. If the applicant passes the preliminary processing at NBC, the application is forwarded to the District Office with jurisdiction over the applicant’s residence for an int erview and adjudication of the remaining eligibility requirements (e.g., continuous residence, physical presence, admissibility, citizenship skills, etc.). If more than one A-file exists for an applicant, files should be consolidated prior to forwarding. If filed by the applicant, EAD and advance parole requests may be processed after such applicant passes the preliminary processing. If the applicant lacks sufficient evidence to pass the preliminary processing, a Notice of Intent to Deny should be issued.

My assumption is that STD processing is same as preliminary processing.

Hope it helps.

hair Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

justin bieber and selena gomez

CantLeaveAmerica

04-16 02:09 PM

not a good place for IT...dallas or austin is better than houston...

I dont agree..IT is good in Houston too..depends on what ur skillset is though

more...

Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez

anzerraja

07-20 03:16 AM

Lately the members of IV have come to know that Aman Kapoor, the co-founder of IV has sold his house and spent around $64000/- towards the administrative costs of IV. This too was brought to our attention from a regular member like you and me, without which this would not have come to our knowledge at all.

So some of the members have taken an initiative to reimburse Aman and other core IV team members with the expenses they have incurred so far towards the administrative costs of IV. Note that the time they have spent and the sufferings cannot be compensated. Let us do the least by atleast compensating the money. Please do not donate directly to IV funds.

There is a funding drive in this other thread towards reimbursing the administrative costs of IV.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10708

Could you please pledge an amount ?

hot Justin Bieber And Selena Gomez

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

ramaonline

09-25 06:09 PM

if u stay outside the US for 366 days, the h1 clock is reset - then u can re-enter in h1 status for a new 6 year term - u must have an approved h1b petition, the new petition is subject to cap. (which gets exhausted really soon) -

more...

house Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez

seahawks

07-26 08:42 AM

I was able to find this phrase, please check the context from the link provided.

"Where the beneficiary has been counted against the quota during the past six years, and never been out of the US for more than one year during the past six years, a petition is exempt."

http://www.hooyou.com/news/news060906h1b.html

tattoo Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures. Justin Bieber Photos - Justin

Justin Bieber Photos - Justin

gk_2000

08-29 01:25 AM

Not only mine. There are many in the same scenario. Its the feeling of being close to the finishline but stll can't cross it. Sudden Influx of anything let it be USCIS is not good.

I was so busy worrying I don't have proper shoe, that I didn't notice a person pass by with no leg

more...

pictures Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

Templarian

11-11 11:20 PM

:lol: Bribery is hard.

dresses Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber

trig1

01-15 03:14 PM

Are ovals allowed? I can probably guess the answer to this, but just wanted to double check before I made my entry.

more...

makeup Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez

caond

05-07 05:41 AM

I am holding J-1 student visa (academic training) from 8/2007 and will be expired on 7/31/2010, sponsor by U of Colorado. I am working as a postdoc for a project funded by NIH until 2013 at VCU. My advisor want to change my visa category from J-1 student to J-1 scholar, sponsor by VCU, to continue the project.

According to an international advisor at VCU where I am applying J-1 scholar, I cannot change from J-1 student to J-1 scholar due to 12-month bar:

[Time spent in the United States in any J status (including J-2 status) during the 12-month period preceding the prospective professor or research scholar's program begin date may affect the alien's eligibility for participation as a Professor or Research Scholar.

22 C.F.R. � 62.20(d)(2) establishes what is referred to as the "12-month bar." The general proposition of the 12-month bar is that an alien is not eligible to begin an exchange program as a Professor or Research Scholar based on a DS-2019 issued "to begin a new program" if he or she was physically present in any J status (including J-2 status) for "all or part of" the "twelve month period immediately preceding the date of program commencement set forth on his or her Form DS-2019." ]

But according to an international advisor at University of Colorado (my current sponsor for J1 student) that the 12-month bar is not applicable for me due to exception:
[(A) J-1 transfers. The 12 month bar is not applicable to those who will begin a program by transferring to a new program sponsor under the transfer procedures of 22 C.F.R. � 62.42 ;
22 C.F.R. � 62.20(d)(2)(i) ]

Who is right? What should I do? :confused:

I appreciate any help !!!

girlfriend Justin Bieber Photos - Justin

Justin Bieber And Selena Gomez

austingc

08-18 02:31 PM

What do you guys think about Jadoo TV? I heard that it's good and no monthly fees.
Is anyone using it?

hairstyles Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures. Justin Bieber Photos - Justin

Justin Bieber Photos - Justin

go_guy123

08-24 04:52 PM

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GreenCardLegion

03-01 05:47 PM

Hey Tiger,

Dont take my words or advise for granted if one year you had less than your prevailing wage on W2 it may be ok as you have 2 more years of W2 with equal or more than prevailing wage.

Honestly I cannot say for sure your extension will be denied. But it helps for you to pay a couple of hundred dollars and talk over the phone to experienced attorneys like Sheela Murthy and get advise on your situation and options and whether there are chances of denial. I would assume you are OK but again I am no LAWYER :) I really wish you luck in your extension

VMH_GC

07-17 04:02 PM

Let us start sending Thank you flowers to IV core memebers such as Logic life, pappu ( i know only these two people) Please add to the list if you know anybody belong to Core team.

pisebtovas

Friday, June 24, 2011

justin bieber and selena gomez in hawaii pictures

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers

Blog Archive

About Me

1