blake lively straight hairstyle
images Her long slicked-back straight
Axilleus
10-23 11:36 AM
I found that EADs from NSC are being issued for filers until Aug13, as of now. I guess the processing time is like a week and half of the week, for every day. So you could be getting in 3 weeks.
Just wondering how do you know that EADs are being issued for Aug 13 filers?
Just wondering how do you know that EADs are being issued for Aug 13 filers?
wallpaper lake lively straight
chanduv23
01-10 09:13 AM
We need every member in the tri state area to attend this. Please show your support
GCapplicant
08-14 02:10 PM
checked with uscis ...she has mentioned we have to wait 90 days for the great receipt .Thats what shows in their system.
if receipt takes so much time how about EAD.
Earlier they mentioned 45 days...now 90 days.No idea.:(
if receipt takes so much time how about EAD.
Earlier they mentioned 45 days...now 90 days.No idea.:(
2011 Blake Lively hit up quot;The Dark
natrajs
05-12 10:09 AM
At last, I received my approval on May 8th 2008. What a relief. I have learned a lot from this fourm. Thanks a lot guys.
Congrats and Best Wishes
Congrats and Best Wishes
more...
ck_b2001
06-07 11:32 AM
I recently renewed my license in Oklahoma and was surprised to find out that on top of shorter expiration date, now my license has �TEMPORARY� written across it. This is new rule that OK is applying for non-residents and non-citizens. Has any body else gone thru similar experience? I am outraged that now I will be discriminated every where. DL is used on day to day basis and every body will question me, suspect me as to why �TEMPORARY� is written on my DL. Even DL office was not sure when this new rule was implemented, how come police officers, general public will know about it. I feel ashamed to even show my DL now. I�ll get hard time getting loans etc b/c people will think I may move out any time as I am here �Temporarily�
Is it only Oklahoma or other states are doing the same? See the link below from official DPS link for sample of DL.
http://www.dps.state.ok.us/
Is it only Oklahoma or other states are doing the same? See the link below from official DPS link for sample of DL.
http://www.dps.state.ok.us/
pnara2
01-03 09:20 PM
Just think that you read a joke!
US Govt will try and squeeze every single penny whereever possible, especially, considering the high unemployment rates lingering around lately!
Infact Indian govt should learn how to milk money from the US corporates who operate in India. Probably they do now but unfortunately the benefits are not reaped by the common masses in india!
US Govt will try and squeeze every single penny whereever possible, especially, considering the high unemployment rates lingering around lately!
Infact Indian govt should learn how to milk money from the US corporates who operate in India. Probably they do now but unfortunately the benefits are not reaped by the common masses in india!
more...
ardnahc
09-01 01:56 PM
Congratulations!
2010 Blake Lively Hair
a_yaja
12-17 10:08 AM
Dear Yaja,
Thanks for your detailed response and i see that there is a valid point in yours.
Pl. let me know If i go for stamping even with out any paystub from the new employer? (joining after 15 days(1-15)) My new employer has agreed to give a letter of employment. Is that enough for the stamping?. If the consulate officer asks for the latest pay stub in my case, can I tell him that I do not have and I have only the old employers pay stub?
Thanks in anticipation.
Regards,
Raj
Yes - that should be good enough. You can tell the visa officer that you just joined the new employer and still do not have any paystubs from them. Get a letter from the new employer with the starting date. That should be good enough. Take all the paystubs from the old employer. Just be truthful and honest and don't worry - you should get your visa without any problem.
Thanks for your detailed response and i see that there is a valid point in yours.
Pl. let me know If i go for stamping even with out any paystub from the new employer? (joining after 15 days(1-15)) My new employer has agreed to give a letter of employment. Is that enough for the stamping?. If the consulate officer asks for the latest pay stub in my case, can I tell him that I do not have and I have only the old employers pay stub?
Thanks in anticipation.
Regards,
Raj
Yes - that should be good enough. You can tell the visa officer that you just joined the new employer and still do not have any paystubs from them. Get a letter from the new employer with the starting date. That should be good enough. Take all the paystubs from the old employer. Just be truthful and honest and don't worry - you should get your visa without any problem.
more...
Heart
10-07 05:35 PM
My I-94 has expired becoz it was issued up to my passport validity. If I have to renew it, is it a good option to cross border and get a new I-94, like going to Mexico or Canada. Please advice. I am not sure how to proceed. No one knows the procedure. Please if anyone knows, advice.
hair lake lively hair straight.
knowDOL
06-19 09:33 PM
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
I don't know what else to say and I am wondering how ignorant you could be. Even 2008 October bulletin will not be current for EB2 India (cutoof date may not be even Dec 05) with the current 140,000 visas per year.
:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
I don't know what else to say and I am wondering how ignorant you could be. Even 2008 October bulletin will not be current for EB2 India (cutoof date may not be even Dec 05) with the current 140,000 visas per year.
more...
SeanDell
06-02 09:29 PM
Hi,
I am on H1B in US. My current H1 is valid till July 6, 2009. Then I have an approved H1 extension valid from July 7, 2009 for the next 3 years to 2012. I also have my I-485 applied and is pending for the priority date to be current. I am planning to go to Canada in the last week of June to complete the Canadian PR Landing formalities. I would be in Canada for about 6 days and plan to use AVR (Automatic Visa Revalidation) while coming back to the US. I have a couple of questions with regards to that:
1. My current passport is valid till September, 2009. Can that be a problem while coming back to the US using AVR (as passport will be expiring in app. 3 months)? Is there any minimum Passport validity period for US POE to enter US?
2. When using AVR, is there a new I-94 issued at the POE or the same previous I-94 is handed over as it is?
3. As I have a pending 485, can the completion of Canadian PR Landing formalities and use of AVR while coming back to US be a problem at the POE or for 485?
I would highly appreciate the replies.
Thanks.
Hi......Can any of the lawyers please shed some light on this?
I am on H1B in US. My current H1 is valid till July 6, 2009. Then I have an approved H1 extension valid from July 7, 2009 for the next 3 years to 2012. I also have my I-485 applied and is pending for the priority date to be current. I am planning to go to Canada in the last week of June to complete the Canadian PR Landing formalities. I would be in Canada for about 6 days and plan to use AVR (Automatic Visa Revalidation) while coming back to the US. I have a couple of questions with regards to that:
1. My current passport is valid till September, 2009. Can that be a problem while coming back to the US using AVR (as passport will be expiring in app. 3 months)? Is there any minimum Passport validity period for US POE to enter US?
2. When using AVR, is there a new I-94 issued at the POE or the same previous I-94 is handed over as it is?
3. As I have a pending 485, can the completion of Canadian PR Landing formalities and use of AVR while coming back to US be a problem at the POE or for 485?
I would highly appreciate the replies.
Thanks.
Hi......Can any of the lawyers please shed some light on this?
hot lake lively hair straight.
chirutha
09-26 05:15 PM
Hi GC_SUCK, Congrats, can you send your details of dates in all stages, will be informative for us, thanks.
more...
house Celebrity Style: Blake Lively
raj2007
06-18 11:19 AM
Nope...once you have used your EAD you cannot go back to H1-B. AFAIK.
but I am not an expert so I guess others around here might have a different take. Best,
you can but it will be new h1 with 6 month validity. I think it will be new H1 and no quota is available now.
Can't you get EAD from local USCIS center after 90 days if it was not processed?
but I am not an expert so I guess others around here might have a different take. Best,
you can but it will be new h1 with 6 month validity. I think it will be new H1 and no quota is available now.
Can't you get EAD from local USCIS center after 90 days if it was not processed?
tattoo lake lively height and weight
drona
08-27 06:01 PM
You can take 1 day off. Leave early morning on Tue to reach the rally. With all the big issues being discussed in Washington every week, we only have a tiny slot. This is our chance to be heard. Join the rally.
more...
pictures Statuesque bombshell Blake
alterego
12-08 04:13 PM
It will not have much impact if any president comes in the case of immigration. Anyhow most of them are not going to Veto. It is the congress who plays important role. President can just initiate the process. Bush tried his best to pass some immigration reform but divided congress defeated all the bills. Who is the reason? Not just anti immigrants but also pro immigrant groups. Expectation from pro immigrants was too much and in some cases impractical. Anti immigrants used those and defeated every time. Also anti immigrants used division in various groups like legal vs illegal, high skilled vs low skilled and H1 vs green card. Some unbiased leader need to bring a bill which should work compromise at the same time that compromise should benefit all the groups. But unfortunately most congressmen are busy in other works. Next congress is critical for any immigration reform
Agreed. However due to the Iraq war. Bush is very unpopular. His conservative base revolted and the republican party did not tow the line and did not support him on this issue, in truth the other side was more helpful than he could have hoped. I agree Bush tried his best, but if he tried in 2001 the result would almost certainly have been different.
A new president comes with a mandate and some fresh political capital. It just depends on what issue he wants to start spending it upon. Given how controversial and virtually radioactive this issue has become, I would not blame the next president if they started with something else. However if things start to go well then he/she could start pushing for this and he/she could provide political cover for congress on this.
Our issue ought to be less controversial but in congress, anything pro-immigration seems to be sneered at right now. Everyone is set on this enforcement first policy and don't want to hear a thing else. It is unfortunate.
All said, we and our issues cannot wait until 2009. We have to push and try to get this done whenever an opportunity come up. Even after 2009 nothing is guaranteed and we might just find that things get worse too, especially if there is an economic downturn.
That is why we need to push hard now.
Agreed. However due to the Iraq war. Bush is very unpopular. His conservative base revolted and the republican party did not tow the line and did not support him on this issue, in truth the other side was more helpful than he could have hoped. I agree Bush tried his best, but if he tried in 2001 the result would almost certainly have been different.
A new president comes with a mandate and some fresh political capital. It just depends on what issue he wants to start spending it upon. Given how controversial and virtually radioactive this issue has become, I would not blame the next president if they started with something else. However if things start to go well then he/she could start pushing for this and he/she could provide political cover for congress on this.
Our issue ought to be less controversial but in congress, anything pro-immigration seems to be sneered at right now. Everyone is set on this enforcement first policy and don't want to hear a thing else. It is unfortunate.
All said, we and our issues cannot wait until 2009. We have to push and try to get this done whenever an opportunity come up. Even after 2009 nothing is guaranteed and we might just find that things get worse too, especially if there is an economic downturn.
That is why we need to push hard now.
dresses Leave it up to Blake Lively to
sent4dc
06-19 03:24 AM
Hi everyone:
I have an unusual situation concerning my friend's mother. When he got his green card (about 10 years ago) he filed the green card application for his mother that lived (and still lives) abroad, hoping to alleviate the woes of her getting a short-term traveller's visa every time she traveled to see him.
She received her green card about 4 years ago, but she doesn't want to live in the US for more than a month. Unfortunately it also gets more and more expensive for them to make her travel to US every year, thus pushing her into a violation of her Permanent Resident status and of the recurring Re-entry Permits (that now shrank to a single year).
My friend now wants to suggest his mother to relinquish (i.e. give up) her permanent status but his fear is that once done she will not be able to return back to US to visit him. (He has already become a citizen and is not planning to return to his home country.)
Does anyone here have any suggestions of what could happen if she gives up her permanent resident status?
I have an unusual situation concerning my friend's mother. When he got his green card (about 10 years ago) he filed the green card application for his mother that lived (and still lives) abroad, hoping to alleviate the woes of her getting a short-term traveller's visa every time she traveled to see him.
She received her green card about 4 years ago, but she doesn't want to live in the US for more than a month. Unfortunately it also gets more and more expensive for them to make her travel to US every year, thus pushing her into a violation of her Permanent Resident status and of the recurring Re-entry Permits (that now shrank to a single year).
My friend now wants to suggest his mother to relinquish (i.e. give up) her permanent status but his fear is that once done she will not be able to return back to US to visit him. (He has already become a citizen and is not planning to return to his home country.)
Does anyone here have any suggestions of what could happen if she gives up her permanent resident status?
more...
makeup lake lively straight
GCWhru
06-24 09:16 AM
Xgoogle,
I am in the same boat. I believe you can go ahead and start your full time study, Now I don't think your wife's case is pending based on your work, since you already got your GC.
Even in the worst case you can sponsor your wife with your GC status. I was kidding my wife that I become UC and sponsor her.
I am in the same boat. I believe you can go ahead and start your full time study, Now I don't think your wife's case is pending based on your work, since you already got your GC.
Even in the worst case you can sponsor your wife with your GC status. I was kidding my wife that I become UC and sponsor her.
girlfriend Shifting into a straight hair
485InDreams
02-11 07:56 PM
i haven't recevied my FP notice yet.....
hairstyles lake lively straight hairstyle
immguser
01-07 01:46 PM
I did my three years diploma (polytechnic) and three years engineering degree (B.E.) after that and I had @ eight years of experience while I had applied for GC through EB2 category. I had no problem in getting my I-140 approval; so far I have not received single rfe.
Hi,
Can you send me your Credentials Evaluator. I am also in the same boat 3 year diploma with 3 Year Engineering Degree.
Thanks,
ImmiUser
Hi,
Can you send me your Credentials Evaluator. I am also in the same boat 3 year diploma with 3 Year Engineering Degree.
Thanks,
ImmiUser
sk.aggarwal
04-05 04:05 PM
Thanks, just got a call from HR. They have got PWD for me.
GCHope2011
11-05 08:16 AM
Please read the editorial from today's WSJ by John Boehner. We should adjust our thinking to this reality and try to eat the elephant one bite at a time. Trying to swallow anything all at once is certainly not John Boehner's idea of legislation.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
================================================== =====
I grew up in a small house on a hill in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 brothers and sisters. My dad ran a bar, Andy's Caf�, that my grandfather Andrew Boehner opened in 1938. We didn't have much but were thankful for what we had. And we didn't think much about Washington.
That changed when I got involved with a small business, which I eventually built into a successful enterprise. I saw firsthand how government throws obstacles in the way of job-creation and stifles our prosperity. It prompted me to get involved in my government, and eventually took me to Congress.
Millions of Americans have had a similar experience. They look at Washington and see an arrogance of power. They see a Congress that doesn't listen, that is ruled by leaders who seem out of touch and dismissive, even disdainful, of the anger that Americans feel toward their government and the challenges they face in an economy struggling to create jobs.
The political landscape has been permanently reshaped over the past two years. Overreaching by elected officials�in the form of pork-laden "stimulus" spending, permanent bailouts, and policies that force responsible taxpayers to subsidize irresponsible behavior�has awakened something deep in our national character. This has led to a surge of activism by citizens demanding smaller, more accountable government and a repudiation of Washington in Tuesday's elections.
Tired of politicians who refuse to listen, Americans who previously were not involved or minimally involved in the political process are now helping to drive it. While their backgrounds are as diverse as the country itself, their message to Washington is the same: Government leaders are servants of the people; the people are not servants of their government.
View Full Image
David Klein
The members of the 112th Congress must heed this message if there is to be any hope of repairing the shattered bonds of trust between the American people and their elected leaders. And that begins with the speaker of the House, who as leader of the institution must lead by example.
Accordingly, there are several steps I believe the next speaker should be prepared to take immediately. Among them:
� No earmarks. Earmarks have become a symbol of a broken Washington, and an entire lobbying industry has been created around them. The speaker of the House shouldn't use the power of the office to raid the federal Treasury for pork-barrel projects. To the contrary, the speaker should be an advocate for ending the current earmark process, and should adhere to a personal no-earmarks policy that stands as an example for all members of Congress to follow.
I have maintained a no-earmarks policy throughout my time of service in Congress. I believe the House must adopt a moratorium on all earmarks as a signal of our commitment to ending business as usual in the spending process.
� Let Americans read bills before they are brought to a vote. The speaker of the House should not allow any bill to come to a vote that has not been posted publicly online for at least three days. Members of Congress and the American people must have the opportunity to read it.
Similarly, the speaker should insist that every bill include a clause citing where in the Constitution Congress is given the power to pass it. Bills that can't pass this test shouldn't get a vote. House Republicans' new governing agenda, "A Pledge to America," calls for the speaker to implement such reforms immediately.
� No more "comprehensive" bills. The next speaker should put an end to so-called comprehensive bills with thousands of pages of legislative text that make it easy to hide spending projects and job-killing policies. President Obama's massive "stimulus" and health-care bills, written behind closed doors with minimal public scrutiny, were the last straw for many Americans. The American people are not well-served by "comprehensive," and they are rightly suspicious of the adjective.
� No more bills written behind closed doors in the speaker's office. Bills should be written by legislators in committee in plain public view. Issues should be advanced one at a time, and the speaker should place an emphasis on smaller, more focused legislation that is properly scrutinized, constitutionally sound, and consistent with Americans' demand for a less-costly, less-intrusive government.
The speaker of the House, like all members of Congress, is a servant of the American people. The individual entrusted with that high honor and responsibility should act accordingly. A speaker's mission should not be to consolidate power in the speaker's office, but rather to ensure that elected officials uphold their oath to defend the Constitution and the American people we serve. If a speaker carries out that mission successfully, the result should be legislation that better reflects the considerable challenges we face as a nation.
The American people deserve a majority in Congress that listens to the people, focuses on their priorities and honors their demands for smaller, more accountable government. Accountability starts at the top, in the office of the speaker.
Mr. Boehner, a congressman representing Ohio's Eighth District since 1991, is the House Republican leader.
0 Yorum:
Yorum Gönder
Kaydol: Kayıt Yorumları [Atom]
<< Ana Sayfa