polapragada
09-13 09:42 PM
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
I completly agree with you.... and others supported the similar thoughts in the thread gave the gree from you all
If they want to jump to EB2 they should not not be allowed to port the PD.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
I completly agree with you.... and others supported the similar thoughts in the thread gave the gree from you all
If they want to jump to EB2 they should not not be allowed to port the PD.
wallpaper Diary of a Wimpy Kid Rodrick
vayumahesh
10-22 09:12 AM
My application was filed under PERM EB2 on May 12th and it got approved on Sep 2nd. Filed I-140 under premium processing yesterday. My attorney has requested earlier priority date (June 2003, EB3) while filing EB2 I-140. He said, once I-140 is approved and priority date porting is done, I-485 may be approved automatically. If not approved for a period of time (say a month or so), interfiling may be requested.
himu73
07-19 11:16 AM
Only lawyer or the employeer contact can call for labor status queries. DOL does not know you exist. Be careful there is no relation between labor and green card AOS. If you call it shows that you intend to immigrate while on H1. It might work against you.
Can anyone please post a 'sample letter' and the contact information?
I want to post a hard copy of the letter personally to the Atlanta center.
Stuck since April 15th.
Can anyone please post a 'sample letter' and the contact information?
I want to post a hard copy of the letter personally to the Atlanta center.
Stuck since April 15th.
2011 quot;Diary Of A Wimpy Kid: Rodrick
gk_2000
08-23 11:06 AM
No dear friend...what if you are already inside this country and waiting for 10 years. Even if you become a manager in these companies, you wont be eligible as you had to have at least one year outside the country. So progressing not going to help. How about a person who is less qualified, less experienced getting GC in six months when you wait for 5-10 years. Its not about jealous, its about fairness and justice. Dont bring in EB2-EB3 here. We are all in this sh*&t togather.
At the end of the day what matters is you have an option open via this route. It is your personal choice if you would rather wait here 10 years or work in your home country for 1 year. Why shut a door that's meant for you? Opportunity is very hard to come by
At the end of the day what matters is you have an option open via this route. It is your personal choice if you would rather wait here 10 years or work in your home country for 1 year. Why shut a door that's meant for you? Opportunity is very hard to come by
more...
reddog
03-12 03:45 PM
All, lets not waste energy in negative direction. Not going to help us anyways. Reddog, why don't you contribute for obvious cause of FOIA?
I already did. I just dont like this DONOR based thread idea. for reasons already stated.
I already did. I just dont like this DONOR based thread idea. for reasons already stated.
akgind
09-14 05:19 PM
This might be true in your case but not with every body else
That is exactly the point. How can you then argue that all PD porting is unethical, period?
That is exactly the point. How can you then argue that all PD porting is unethical, period?
more...
learning01
03-16 12:55 PM
[I posted this comment at another thread a few minutes ago. For a wider read I am also posting here]
Newt said Nothing is going to happen on this Specter or any other immigration bills in Senate. The conference with House will not agree to anything.
I also sincerely believe that Nothing is going to happen I say, these senators are doing CYAs; they will bitch it to media, their constituents, hey look, we did attempt these immigration reforms.
I am talking from my long experience and wisdom and take it from me. The only force that can improve the pitiable conditions of Indian and Chinese due to retrogression and lack of visa numbers is the big corporate employers . Each one whose LC is approved, whose I-140 is approved, who is waiting to file for adjustment of status AND who are indispensable to the employer / work at this stage should write to the HR/ Immigration/ Attorney.
I am in such a position. I am a technical lead in my IT department. PD Nov 2001. I write about these issues and the difficulties once in a month my team manager, or project manager or Immigration department.
Newt said Nothing is going to happen on this Specter or any other immigration bills in Senate. The conference with House will not agree to anything.
I also sincerely believe that Nothing is going to happen I say, these senators are doing CYAs; they will bitch it to media, their constituents, hey look, we did attempt these immigration reforms.
I am talking from my long experience and wisdom and take it from me. The only force that can improve the pitiable conditions of Indian and Chinese due to retrogression and lack of visa numbers is the big corporate employers . Each one whose LC is approved, whose I-140 is approved, who is waiting to file for adjustment of status AND who are indispensable to the employer / work at this stage should write to the HR/ Immigration/ Attorney.
I am in such a position. I am a technical lead in my IT department. PD Nov 2001. I write about these issues and the difficulties once in a month my team manager, or project manager or Immigration department.
2010 Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2 Rodrick
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
sukhwinderd
03-10 08:54 AM
i have friends who had issues with suntrust, boa etc. but they gave references of people who were approved from the same banks while on adjustment of status and they were finally approved. my loan is with Amtrust and did not have any issues, i am on EAD, no H1.
hair #39;Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick
dhirajs98
12-24 12:59 PM
USCIS has not even posted January processing times till now. This should have been published by Dec 15th.
God only knows what game they are playing.
God only knows what game they are playing.
more...
test101
07-06 05:17 PM
From OH mathew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin
The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin
The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
hot Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick
Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
08-06 12:29 AM
Angel,
You can write to me at 'sertasheep AT immigrationvoice DOT org' or poll any of the techie members here on how to create a blog. The suggestions would be to create a blog on blogger.com with a google account, as several of the other blogs (iv-tristate, iv-physicians, etc.,) are all on blogger.com.
Please keep your profile updated so that we may contact you. We are glad to welcome Schedule A professionals into the IV community.
Please support "paskal"(physician) in his efforts as he will be able to liaise with policy makers and influencers in the healthcare segment. iv-physicians.blogspot.com is one such effort- don't let the name dissuade you. As long as there are people who are willing to champion a particular cause (provided it is aligned with IV's core objectives and agenda, you can help make a difference, and help yourself as well!)
Hi Angel
If you need any help whatsoever, ps let me know.
You can write to me at 'sertasheep AT immigrationvoice DOT org' or poll any of the techie members here on how to create a blog. The suggestions would be to create a blog on blogger.com with a google account, as several of the other blogs (iv-tristate, iv-physicians, etc.,) are all on blogger.com.
Please keep your profile updated so that we may contact you. We are glad to welcome Schedule A professionals into the IV community.
Please support "paskal"(physician) in his efforts as he will be able to liaise with policy makers and influencers in the healthcare segment. iv-physicians.blogspot.com is one such effort- don't let the name dissuade you. As long as there are people who are willing to champion a particular cause (provided it is aligned with IV's core objectives and agenda, you can help make a difference, and help yourself as well!)
Hi Angel
If you need any help whatsoever, ps let me know.
more...
house #39;Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick
delhiguy79
08-14 04:07 PM
guys i think USCIS is not interested in giving EB 3 guys GC...
as mostly EB 3 guys r ppl with Bachelors (and less than 5 yrs exp) or who are stuck with EB3 due to there company (like me)...
EB 2 guys r mostly with ppl having masters degree from US...so i guess they will definetly get more preference than eb3...
I guess US wants to raise there economy by giving GCs...so that ppl more ppl will buy houses....
I hope something happens for EB3 also...but I guess in Oct bulletin PD for EB3 will b some month in 2001....
so gud luck to all of us
as mostly EB 3 guys r ppl with Bachelors (and less than 5 yrs exp) or who are stuck with EB3 due to there company (like me)...
EB 2 guys r mostly with ppl having masters degree from US...so i guess they will definetly get more preference than eb3...
I guess US wants to raise there economy by giving GCs...so that ppl more ppl will buy houses....
I hope something happens for EB3 also...but I guess in Oct bulletin PD for EB3 will b some month in 2001....
so gud luck to all of us
tattoo Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick
JunRN
05-29 12:59 PM
I don't want to argue either.
In my case, I saved $400 per month as I got mine on 4.5% interest rate. If I got mine on 6% interest rate, I would have paid $144,000 more in the entire duration of my loan. I can't say enough on the value of my house because it is the lowest compared to all my neighbors with same model. The location has the best school district in the city and the elementary school is 3 blocks away.
Refinancing is a tricky part of this game. Refinancing is not always good because most of the time, you will start at month 1 again where the interest part is higher than the principal. It also has closing cost. One should only refinance if the difference is greater than 1%. 1% is only break even.
I am not saying all others should buy now. What I am saying is that we cannot say it's not a good time to buy either. It depends on where you're buying.
In my case, I saved $400 per month as I got mine on 4.5% interest rate. If I got mine on 6% interest rate, I would have paid $144,000 more in the entire duration of my loan. I can't say enough on the value of my house because it is the lowest compared to all my neighbors with same model. The location has the best school district in the city and the elementary school is 3 blocks away.
Refinancing is a tricky part of this game. Refinancing is not always good because most of the time, you will start at month 1 again where the interest part is higher than the principal. It also has closing cost. One should only refinance if the difference is greater than 1%. 1% is only break even.
I am not saying all others should buy now. What I am saying is that we cannot say it's not a good time to buy either. It depends on where you're buying.
more...
pictures Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick
bsbawa10
09-12 10:12 AM
I doubt how effective a letter campaign would be.
We did letter campaign's couple of times and it didn't bring any coverage or change.
I still believe a clock (backward or distorted) is a good idea.
It is not letter only, it is sending pamphlets along with the letters which is meant to put them to shame. (zero cost). Please see the sample pamphlets from my earlier posts.
We did letter campaign's couple of times and it didn't bring any coverage or change.
I still believe a clock (backward or distorted) is a good idea.
It is not letter only, it is sending pamphlets along with the letters which is meant to put them to shame. (zero cost). Please see the sample pamphlets from my earlier posts.
dresses Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Roderick
GC_1200
09-10 04:55 PM
Contributed $100 via Google checkout.
more...
makeup Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2:
Libra
09-14 12:45 PM
bump
girlfriend Yeah, it#39;s a kid#39;s film,
sunny1000
07-06 06:24 PM
And how does it not apply to AOS.
For Consular processing people have to plan trips and get medical and all that.
Why doesnt the same analogy apply to AOS. - Please explain...:confused:
The difference is that AOS is handled by USCIS and the CP is done by DOS. It is the USCIS which ran out of the 60000 visas (supposedly) before July 1st even though DOS opened those numbers up for the entire July.
Now, DOS is saying to USCIS " you guys used your quota even before the rush started and so, we won't give you any more visa numbers but, we will continue to honor our quota via CP which we accounted for July". Just my interpretation. Don't shoot the messenger ;)
For Consular processing people have to plan trips and get medical and all that.
Why doesnt the same analogy apply to AOS. - Please explain...:confused:
The difference is that AOS is handled by USCIS and the CP is done by DOS. It is the USCIS which ran out of the 60000 visas (supposedly) before July 1st even though DOS opened those numbers up for the entire July.
Now, DOS is saying to USCIS " you guys used your quota even before the rush started and so, we won't give you any more visa numbers but, we will continue to honor our quota via CP which we accounted for July". Just my interpretation. Don't shoot the messenger ;)
hairstyles The Wimpy Kid Movie Diary
Sakthisagar
02-24 01:15 PM
As Ron Gotcher (imminfo.com) predicted Jobs bill passed at Senate.
Senate Votes 70-28 to Approve $15 Billion Jobs Bill
Though modest in scope, the bill was hailed by Democrats as evidence that the parties could work together.
Read Further.
Senate Votes 70-28 to Approve $15 Billion Jobs Bill - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/politics/25jobs.html?partner=rss&emc=rss)
Senate Votes 70-28 to Approve $15 Billion Jobs Bill
Though modest in scope, the bill was hailed by Democrats as evidence that the parties could work together.
Read Further.
Senate Votes 70-28 to Approve $15 Billion Jobs Bill - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/us/politics/25jobs.html?partner=rss&emc=rss)
chmur
01-06 12:57 PM
what matters more , IMHO, is some of the basic skills like motivation, hunger for goal, work ethic, stress management etc which typically is categorized as life skills. Which are not teachable.
Immigrants have these in plenty, that probably explains why a graduate from village school in India, can kick ass in a duke and later succeed at work too.
Education helps, quality education starts one off with advantage. But that's about it...life is marathon not a 4-6 year sprint @ universities.
These studies by wadhwa and co should start looking at these and not just patents , quality of education etc .
,
Immigrants have these in plenty, that probably explains why a graduate from village school in India, can kick ass in a duke and later succeed at work too.
Education helps, quality education starts one off with advantage. But that's about it...life is marathon not a 4-6 year sprint @ universities.
These studies by wadhwa and co should start looking at these and not just patents , quality of education etc .
,
seahawks
09-09 11:55 PM
and i am NOT the real Lou Dobbs. But in all seriousness guy, I think we really have to wake up. We are illegal immigrants....
And we are not asking for Amnesty...
There is no deying the fact that this country has benefited from us much than us. How about some moral abligation and sense of fairness from this great country???
Wish you could attend the rally. "Waking up" equals coming to the rally:) Thank you for contribution, appreciate very much.
And we are not asking for Amnesty...
There is no deying the fact that this country has benefited from us much than us. How about some moral abligation and sense of fairness from this great country???
Wish you could attend the rally. "Waking up" equals coming to the rally:) Thank you for contribution, appreciate very much.
No comments:
Post a Comment