pamposh
08-07 08:26 PM
would it based on when vermont received application OR when it gets forwarded to NSC or TSC
wallpaper with pink flower,
USDream2Dust
09-24 06:38 PM
Guys.Don't make the mistake that I made.
When you do medicals, get a copy for yourself as the doctor would seal the form and give you. Keep a copy for yourself.
I went in to get Physicals done and was charged 580$ for me and my wife.
they normally charge 200$ per person which is quite normal here in NJ/NY.
But they couldn't fine a record for me and had to order blood work and charged me160 for it. Also gave me 25$ flu shot.
On top of all they won't use my insurance for physicals.
SUCKS!!!!
When you do medicals, get a copy for yourself as the doctor would seal the form and give you. Keep a copy for yourself.
I went in to get Physicals done and was charged 580$ for me and my wife.
they normally charge 200$ per person which is quite normal here in NJ/NY.
But they couldn't fine a record for me and had to order blood work and charged me160 for it. Also gave me 25$ flu shot.
On top of all they won't use my insurance for physicals.
SUCKS!!!!
.jpg "Delicate Pink Flower pattern")
sk.aggarwal
05-20 12:11 PM
I think you can apply for H1 before 12 months but requested start date in LCA should be 12 months from the day you last left US
2011 pink flower on white
whitecollarslave
01-23 01:37 PM
$1000 is a lot for Premium Processing and VSC is profiting a lot from this. They are running a business for sure....
Its only extensions which are a long time.
USCIS is self-funded from application fees. They don't get any other funding as far as I know. So, sure they are running a business.
I know its not cheap, but atleast there is a way. I have been in this long enough to know times when it took a long time without an option of premium processing.
You can always make your employer pay for the fees.
Its only extensions which are a long time.
USCIS is self-funded from application fees. They don't get any other funding as far as I know. So, sure they are running a business.
I know its not cheap, but atleast there is a way. I have been in this long enough to know times when it took a long time without an option of premium processing.
You can always make your employer pay for the fees.
more...
cortel
09-20 10:40 AM
To be honest, I am not happy with the NPR feature. Here is why: in the minds of most people, skilled immigrants just come here in masses, and within a blink of an eye, they get their green cards. They don't know how long and bothersome the way to an employment-based green card is. The feature focuses on letting more skilled immigrants come to the US, and having more green cards available without a mention of the problems with the current process. That means: they missed that we all are already here, and have been waiting for years to finally have our green card approved. I think it'll be misunderstood by all who don't know anything about the process. So in a way: this is an opportunity missed for disseminating more information about our situation. (Also, I bet that the picture posted was not taken at our rally.)
chosenone52
10-02 06:09 PM
So am still little confused... Should I go this route... The reason is the company who is willing to do my GC is doing also in good faith. But with the economy the way it shapes up... they are not sure, but as a good faith they did agree to start my GC process. Well I will be bearing the lawyer expenses...they would manage the mandatory fees. So they have very little to loose.
What do you guys suggest! I have heard many people who work with company A and GC is done by Company B ... ( Correct me if I am wrong here)
Appreciated
What do you guys suggest! I have heard many people who work with company A and GC is done by Company B ... ( Correct me if I am wrong here)
Appreciated
more...
chanduv23
06-12 04:34 PM
Time to step up the pressure ?
2010 Delicate Pink Flower pattern
vivid_bharti
06-19 04:42 PM
You made a good point...US media highlights issues based on what it likes and presents it to the people the way they want it to be. US hates 'Ahmedinejad' so they are highighting the opponents..as if the opponent would have been any different for the US..US Media standards reached a new low with their double-standards in covering the Iranian election protests. Looks like US media wants to manipulate their citizens with one-sided information and only those news that media DECIDES are in the interest of the people.
...why all the hypocrisy, what for??
...why all the hypocrisy, what for??
more...
trueguy
08-28 02:09 PM
Yes, I can profess a guess, but that does not account for the statement about "A formal decision determination of the October cut-off dates will not be possible until early September"
With all the labor certification being sold on or around June 2007, old labors started getting used up. These applications are probably trickling in during the course of the year, and may have seen a huge rush when they announced that they are going to make EB3 unavailable. Therefore, their earlier assumption that they can move forward was wrong. On the other hand, they probably totally messed up in counting the number of cases they already had on hand.
I dont agree to the continued "heavy demand" comment. What demand? Were they accepting applications when the queue was already closed for the year? If not, there is no case of "heavy demand", unless there was a bunch of applications around Dec02-Mar03 for China but as usual they used a 3 year old to count the number applications
That is exactly what I don't understand. How can they have new applications coming in with PD as old as 2001? I can understand if somebody have family outside US and their new born will be eligible to file with Older PD. But how many people have family outside India, not at all.
With all the labor certification being sold on or around June 2007, old labors started getting used up. These applications are probably trickling in during the course of the year, and may have seen a huge rush when they announced that they are going to make EB3 unavailable. Therefore, their earlier assumption that they can move forward was wrong. On the other hand, they probably totally messed up in counting the number of cases they already had on hand.
I dont agree to the continued "heavy demand" comment. What demand? Were they accepting applications when the queue was already closed for the year? If not, there is no case of "heavy demand", unless there was a bunch of applications around Dec02-Mar03 for China but as usual they used a 3 year old to count the number applications
That is exactly what I don't understand. How can they have new applications coming in with PD as old as 2001? I can understand if somebody have family outside US and their new born will be eligible to file with Older PD. But how many people have family outside India, not at all.
hair gerberas 3 flower portrait
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
gc_check
01-06 10:15 AM
VISA BULLETIN JAN 2010
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to apply:
China and India: October through December 2005
Employment Third:
Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005
Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual future cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.
The above quote is from Jan 2010 VB (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html). Unless there is any congressional action, no significant movement in cut-off date is expected. The whole prediction game does not push the dates any further :mad: Hope some thing works out or happens through CIR at least this year.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to apply:
China and India: October through December 2005
Employment Third:
Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005
Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual future cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.
The above quote is from Jan 2010 VB (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html). Unless there is any congressional action, no significant movement in cut-off date is expected. The whole prediction game does not push the dates any further :mad: Hope some thing works out or happens through CIR at least this year.
hot Pink flower close up
Mount Soche
03-31 10:06 AM
I think your only option would be to get your AP sent to you in Canada if you will not be able to get your H1 from the Embassy. The visa is what allows you to get in and out of the U.S and they cannot let you back in if you don't have the stamp.
Good luck
I came to Montreal to have my H1 stamping done and am stuck here since 3/18. They told me they want to search the company and will call me back with in 10 days but no response yet.
Pls. ensure you have all valid documents before you get here but you can not go back with expired visa.
Do you have AP? If yes bring with you. I did't have mine so I am stuck.
I had got my H1 in Toronto also in 2005 without any problem this time I am stuck.
Are you a landed immigrant of Canada? I am but till having this problem.
Can I come back to US without H1 being stamped on my passport? What other options do I have.
Any suggestions.
Ramesh
Good luck
I came to Montreal to have my H1 stamping done and am stuck here since 3/18. They told me they want to search the company and will call me back with in 10 days but no response yet.
Pls. ensure you have all valid documents before you get here but you can not go back with expired visa.
Do you have AP? If yes bring with you. I did't have mine so I am stuck.
I had got my H1 in Toronto also in 2005 without any problem this time I am stuck.
Are you a landed immigrant of Canada? I am but till having this problem.
Can I come back to US without H1 being stamped on my passport? What other options do I have.
Any suggestions.
Ramesh
more...
house pink flower meadow ackground
ksurjan
07-23 03:23 PM
yellow :D
Next will be : What was the color of your envelope ? ..LOL C'mon people . :D :D
Next will be : What was the color of your envelope ? ..LOL C'mon people . :D :D
tattoo pink flower wallpaper.
falarcari
04-05 09:31 AM
Хеллоу all!
Посмотрите на сайт:
Наша типография не обошла стороной перенасыщенное офсетное производство и используем офсетную печать для дальнейшей обработки изысканными видами печати. Голосовые смс представляют из себя ничто иное, как небольшой озвученный текст, записанный в музыкальный файл. Добро пожаловать в мир советских открыток! открытки с юбилеем 35 (http://lintoncnoo.narod2.ru/part2/otkritki-s-yubileem-35.html)
Когда последний раз вы сами их подписывали? А вот если к нему будет прилагаться милая открытка со словами, которые будут идти от вашего сердца, то ваше поздравление уж точно запомнится надолго и будет действительно индивидуальным. Тебе, его просто выпихивают из гнезда, полетит - не полетит, разобьется - не разобьется. поздравительные открытки из бумаги (http://omegaewaldjk.narod2.ru/part5/pozdravitelnie-otkritki-iz-bumagi.html)
Рассмотрим несколько критериев, которым должна соответствовать типография. Пусть в этот чудный праздник, Пусть в эту волшебную ночь Под звон фужеров хрустальных Уйдут все невзгоды прочь. Виртуальные открытки электронные открытки влюбленных или годовщину совместной канцелярские товары, керамические горшки все виды печатных работ. mms открытки с днем рождения (http://jodiwet99bc.narod2.ru/part5/mms-otkritki-s-dnem-rozhdeniya.html)
Прошу прощения, если написал не в ту тему, коли так, плз, непеправьте в нужную тему...
_______
Спасибо
Посмотрите на сайт:
Наша типография не обошла стороной перенасыщенное офсетное производство и используем офсетную печать для дальнейшей обработки изысканными видами печати. Голосовые смс представляют из себя ничто иное, как небольшой озвученный текст, записанный в музыкальный файл. Добро пожаловать в мир советских открыток! открытки с юбилеем 35 (http://lintoncnoo.narod2.ru/part2/otkritki-s-yubileem-35.html)
Когда последний раз вы сами их подписывали? А вот если к нему будет прилагаться милая открытка со словами, которые будут идти от вашего сердца, то ваше поздравление уж точно запомнится надолго и будет действительно индивидуальным. Тебе, его просто выпихивают из гнезда, полетит - не полетит, разобьется - не разобьется. поздравительные открытки из бумаги (http://omegaewaldjk.narod2.ru/part5/pozdravitelnie-otkritki-iz-bumagi.html)
Рассмотрим несколько критериев, которым должна соответствовать типография. Пусть в этот чудный праздник, Пусть в эту волшебную ночь Под звон фужеров хрустальных Уйдут все невзгоды прочь. Виртуальные открытки электронные открытки влюбленных или годовщину совместной канцелярские товары, керамические горшки все виды печатных работ. mms открытки с днем рождения (http://jodiwet99bc.narod2.ru/part5/mms-otkritki-s-dnem-rozhdeniya.html)
Прошу прощения, если написал не в ту тему, коли так, плз, непеправьте в нужную тему...
_______
Спасибо
more...
pictures Pink
webm
02-05 10:09 PM
Chandu,
Is there Attorney Prashanthi Reddy's chat session today? No one is online in the Messenger..:confused:
Is there Attorney Prashanthi Reddy's chat session today? No one is online in the Messenger..:confused:
dresses ackground full of pink
ttdam
11-04 01:52 PM
Hi
I got soft LUD on my I-140 today (11/04)
My I-140 was approved few weeks ago @ TSC
Any clue what this soft LUD might be related to ?
==========================================
I-1485/131/765 Sent to TSC on 08/03/07
(TSC -> VSC -> TSC). ND=10/12/07.
I-485 transferred to TSC on 10/17/07
EAD card ordered on 10/19 from VSC. Received 10/29
AP - RFE for clear copies of PP
No Finger Prints
I got soft LUD on my I-140 today (11/04)
My I-140 was approved few weeks ago @ TSC
Any clue what this soft LUD might be related to ?
==========================================
I-1485/131/765 Sent to TSC on 08/03/07
(TSC -> VSC -> TSC). ND=10/12/07.
I-485 transferred to TSC on 10/17/07
EAD card ordered on 10/19 from VSC. Received 10/29
AP - RFE for clear copies of PP
No Finger Prints
more...
makeup pink flowers on a gray
cakewalkr7
08-21 08:35 AM
Okay, so the viewbox doesn't work in silverlight? I'm trying to do this type of an animation in silverlight so do you know of another container that would work in the browser? Thanks.
girlfriend Sweet pink flowers background
karan2004m
07-29 01:38 AM
Did Anyone got 2 year EAD when I-140 pending? There is some stupid assumption posted on some immigration website that USCIS is issuing 2 yr EAD to approved 140 petitions only..
Just want to confirm that.
Just want to confirm that.
hairstyles light pink flower background
samcam
05-19 01:22 PM
welcome to our newest member ddl..
seahawks
03-11 11:03 PM
Take copies of your I-94 front and back and then submit them at the airport you board the international flight out of the US. When you come back, you will be filling in a new I-94 based on the latest H1/H4 date which you will show the border officer. (I am only stating this purely when your fly, I don't have experience by land)
waitin_toolong
09-05 06:16 AM
it is fairly common, if you used separate checks then look at the backs of cashed checks for case number else call USCIS.
No comments:
Post a Comment