drsilver
July 5th, 2006, 05:27 PM
OK, I've got it all figured out. (I confess, I've got nothing figured out, but it felt good to write that.)
Spent the long weekend reading up on this digital camera stuff and I've decided to go Nikon. Made this decision because I've got a relationship with their systems and some good, old glass that can still be used. Maybe not the best situation with new technology, but certainly not useless.
My quandary now is whether to go with a new D200 or a good used D70. In the past, that would have been an easy decision. When these were the tools of my trade, I was always shooting with one-generation-old technology. When everyone else was shooting with F3s, I used F2s. When the F4 came out, I snatched up a couple of discarded F3s. Made plenty of fine pictures that way.
My concern now is the pace of technology change. Digital photography is in its infancy. One reviewer's opinion is that 1 digital year is about 25 human years. So, 4-year-old digital technology is from the stone age.
Is that really true? It sounds like the D70 is a pretty good, battle-tested box which, over the last few years, has made a ton of perfectly fine images. Is it worth spending twice the money to get the newest and bestest?
One thing that caught my eye is that it sounds like the D200 is quite a bit sturdier than its older brother. I used to beat the snot out of my equipment back in the day, so that was important. Now, probably, not so much. I did read, though, that all the buttons and doors and every possible opening in the D200 is gasket sealed. I live in Seattle, so any camera I own is gonna get rained on. That's a big selling point for me.
I also read that the D200 will also work a little better with my old manual-focus lenses; mainly in the metering department. But neither will let you swap out the viewfinder glass, so I'm stuck with straight ground glass. That was never easy to focus on and my eyes aren't any younger. Guess I'll eventually be investing in at least a few AF lenses.
Tip (or rant, depending on your disposition) Of the Day
(I'm trying to give as much as I take on the board):
As far as camera metering is concerned, it doesn't interest me all that much. If you're at all serious about photography, get yourself a hand-held incident meter. I looked on Ebay yesterday and they're giving them away. You can get a Minolta Autometer IIIF for around $50 or a Flashmeter IV for less than $100. This is the most indispensable piece of equipment I own.
All camera meters are reflective. Personally, I want to know how much light is falling on the bridge of my subject's nose. Skin tones vary tremendously, so I'm not as interested in how much is bouncing back.
No matter how sophisticated a camera's metering system, it's still giving you some kind of a reflective average of some part of the scene. That's usually a good-enough approximation, but it's not exactly what you're looking for. You're better off exposing for the light coming in and letting the reflections take care of themselves. 90% of the time, there will be one part of the scene that you want to expose exactly correctly. The rest can be taken care of by looking in the viewfinder. If there are highlights that are going to blow, move your subject or yourself to an angle that either eliminates them or complements you point of emphasis. When all else fails, you can fix extremes with post-processing.
I've heard folks say that using a hand-held meter is too cumbersome. Takes too much time in fast-moving situations. I call BS. Figuring out whether to use matrix metering or center weighted or 10 or 3 or 1 degree spot or histograms or whatever, then trying to guess what the camera is thinking. That's cumbersome.
I was a photojournalist and shot more than my share of all kinds of action. I always had time to take 5 seconds to get a good incident reading. If you're indoors, walk over and take a reading by your subject. If you're outdoors, stand in light similar to your subject. (No matter how far you are from your subject you're both pretty much the same distance from the sun.)
Anyway, back to my original question. Are there any D70 users out there willing to share their thoughts on this box? Has anyone upgraded to a D200? How did it work out?
Thanks again,
--ken
Spent the long weekend reading up on this digital camera stuff and I've decided to go Nikon. Made this decision because I've got a relationship with their systems and some good, old glass that can still be used. Maybe not the best situation with new technology, but certainly not useless.
My quandary now is whether to go with a new D200 or a good used D70. In the past, that would have been an easy decision. When these were the tools of my trade, I was always shooting with one-generation-old technology. When everyone else was shooting with F3s, I used F2s. When the F4 came out, I snatched up a couple of discarded F3s. Made plenty of fine pictures that way.
My concern now is the pace of technology change. Digital photography is in its infancy. One reviewer's opinion is that 1 digital year is about 25 human years. So, 4-year-old digital technology is from the stone age.
Is that really true? It sounds like the D70 is a pretty good, battle-tested box which, over the last few years, has made a ton of perfectly fine images. Is it worth spending twice the money to get the newest and bestest?
One thing that caught my eye is that it sounds like the D200 is quite a bit sturdier than its older brother. I used to beat the snot out of my equipment back in the day, so that was important. Now, probably, not so much. I did read, though, that all the buttons and doors and every possible opening in the D200 is gasket sealed. I live in Seattle, so any camera I own is gonna get rained on. That's a big selling point for me.
I also read that the D200 will also work a little better with my old manual-focus lenses; mainly in the metering department. But neither will let you swap out the viewfinder glass, so I'm stuck with straight ground glass. That was never easy to focus on and my eyes aren't any younger. Guess I'll eventually be investing in at least a few AF lenses.
Tip (or rant, depending on your disposition) Of the Day
(I'm trying to give as much as I take on the board):
As far as camera metering is concerned, it doesn't interest me all that much. If you're at all serious about photography, get yourself a hand-held incident meter. I looked on Ebay yesterday and they're giving them away. You can get a Minolta Autometer IIIF for around $50 or a Flashmeter IV for less than $100. This is the most indispensable piece of equipment I own.
All camera meters are reflective. Personally, I want to know how much light is falling on the bridge of my subject's nose. Skin tones vary tremendously, so I'm not as interested in how much is bouncing back.
No matter how sophisticated a camera's metering system, it's still giving you some kind of a reflective average of some part of the scene. That's usually a good-enough approximation, but it's not exactly what you're looking for. You're better off exposing for the light coming in and letting the reflections take care of themselves. 90% of the time, there will be one part of the scene that you want to expose exactly correctly. The rest can be taken care of by looking in the viewfinder. If there are highlights that are going to blow, move your subject or yourself to an angle that either eliminates them or complements you point of emphasis. When all else fails, you can fix extremes with post-processing.
I've heard folks say that using a hand-held meter is too cumbersome. Takes too much time in fast-moving situations. I call BS. Figuring out whether to use matrix metering or center weighted or 10 or 3 or 1 degree spot or histograms or whatever, then trying to guess what the camera is thinking. That's cumbersome.
I was a photojournalist and shot more than my share of all kinds of action. I always had time to take 5 seconds to get a good incident reading. If you're indoors, walk over and take a reading by your subject. If you're outdoors, stand in light similar to your subject. (No matter how far you are from your subject you're both pretty much the same distance from the sun.)
Anyway, back to my original question. Are there any D70 users out there willing to share their thoughts on this box? Has anyone upgraded to a D200? How did it work out?
Thanks again,
--ken
wallpaper PRİNCE WİLLİAM AT LUNCH KATE
alterego
10-27 07:58 PM
I think the lawyer wants her to get the h4 stamped so she can stay in status in case of any problems with the 485, especially since you are maintaining your H1b/AOS pending on which she is a dependent.
Since she has not used the H1b or got it stamped and since you have applied for 485 before it was to take effect, she is safe with your dependent 485 AOS and H4 status. Cancelling her H1b will benefit you guys from any confusion at the consulate. Either way the AP will allow her to return in AOS without problems.
Since she has not used the H1b or got it stamped and since you have applied for 485 before it was to take effect, she is safe with your dependent 485 AOS and H4 status. Cancelling her H1b will benefit you guys from any confusion at the consulate. Either way the AP will allow her to return in AOS without problems.
newuser
07-29 08:19 PM
Quoting what reason did the DMV confiscated your driver's license?
2011 kate middleton lunch. Issa dress Kate Middleton
cygent
07-02 02:13 AM
Hello IVans,
Does anyone feel the same? any thoughts?
But only because they know everybody will be frustrated with the wait & opt for PP - Another clever manipulation IMHO.
Does anyone feel the same? any thoughts?
But only because they know everybody will be frustrated with the wait & opt for PP - Another clever manipulation IMHO.
more...
amitga
01-25 11:17 AM
Govt of India will do nothing to stop harrassment of NRIs at Indian Airport (customs) and we are thinking that they will do something here.
agesilaus
September 1st, 2006, 06:36 PM
Nice HDR work
more...
beautifulMind
11-27 04:31 PM
to be fair to USCIS they did try to get out of the fiasco on july 1 by moving the dates back again Eventually they were forced to accept it again..
They clearly knew this was cash cow so why did they want to cancel it in the first place..
Its a lot of money and its definitely a lot of work as well..There are also no signs of hiring new stafff..most of extra cash they getting is being pumped into other gov projects so the staff is still being overworked and I am sure will be complaning
They clearly knew this was cash cow so why did they want to cancel it in the first place..
Its a lot of money and its definitely a lot of work as well..There are also no signs of hiring new stafff..most of extra cash they getting is being pumped into other gov projects so the staff is still being overworked and I am sure will be complaning
2010 kate middleton lunch. kate middleton red suit prince
larmani
09-17 08:08 PM
We received our receipts on Aug 24 and we haven't got any FP notices. Ours is TSC.
more...
JazzByTheBay
08-21 11:25 AM
I filed at TSC, transferred to CSC, receipted, transferred to NSC - so not exactly the same situation. Interesting to note your case filed on 7/27/07 is being processed.
Mine was filed on 06/30/2007
RD: 07/02/2007.
USCIS says they're processing by ND ("when it was entered... ").
Signs of life @NSC, nevertheless.... :)
jazz
I got RFE on my case my case is NSC-CSC-NSC Transfer. Got Soft LUD in last 2 days and got RFE mail yesterday night. Waiting to hear back from lawyer about type of RFE. But atleast seems like they had started working on my case and if no RFE it would have been approved.
Mine was filed on 06/30/2007
RD: 07/02/2007.
USCIS says they're processing by ND ("when it was entered... ").
Signs of life @NSC, nevertheless.... :)
jazz
I got RFE on my case my case is NSC-CSC-NSC Transfer. Got Soft LUD in last 2 days and got RFE mail yesterday night. Waiting to hear back from lawyer about type of RFE. But atleast seems like they had started working on my case and if no RFE it would have been approved.
hair kate middleton lunch with
ashwin_27
02-25 12:48 PM
Absolutely agree. That is definitely the way the other side will argue against the "dependents exemption" provision. But doesnt mean we shouldn't ask for it :). its another way to reduce the backlog. And while the practical aspect of what you describe is completely true...what we can argue is - is it fair to bring in thousands of workers and their familes for "work" using one criteria (we do not need families to work for industries) and then ask them to pack up because of backlogs created by another criteria? (too many of you came to work now you suffer because we use a different logic to make you permanently settle here)
it is a part of IV provisions and proposals. we ask for 10 things and push hard and might get 1 or 2 through.
H1B is temporary visa.
Green Card is permanent.
On H1B you can even come to USA for 1 day and go back. But on Greencard you are asking to say here permanently with family. You are also asking for family be given all Green Card benefits like ability to work etc. So it makes sense to count dependents. On H1B the employer is only giving you the job and calling you. So you get work permit. Wife and children do not. You are being called only because USA needs your valuable skills and they cannot find Americans. There is no I485 stage on H1B visa. Wife coming on H4 is only to stay with you. This is understood even before she applied for the visa. So there is no reason for wife to complain that she cannot work on H4. On Greencard I485 stage, once the employer has established no American is available to work, you petition USCIS to allow your wife to stay with you as you also will stay permanently. in I485 you ask for the benefits of permanent residency for wife and children.
So it makes sense for counting dependents in the quota. What we should focus on is removing country limits. Country limits are discriminatory. It is morally wrong.
it is a part of IV provisions and proposals. we ask for 10 things and push hard and might get 1 or 2 through.
H1B is temporary visa.
Green Card is permanent.
On H1B you can even come to USA for 1 day and go back. But on Greencard you are asking to say here permanently with family. You are also asking for family be given all Green Card benefits like ability to work etc. So it makes sense to count dependents. On H1B the employer is only giving you the job and calling you. So you get work permit. Wife and children do not. You are being called only because USA needs your valuable skills and they cannot find Americans. There is no I485 stage on H1B visa. Wife coming on H4 is only to stay with you. This is understood even before she applied for the visa. So there is no reason for wife to complain that she cannot work on H4. On Greencard I485 stage, once the employer has established no American is available to work, you petition USCIS to allow your wife to stay with you as you also will stay permanently. in I485 you ask for the benefits of permanent residency for wife and children.
So it makes sense for counting dependents in the quota. What we should focus on is removing country limits. Country limits are discriminatory. It is morally wrong.
more...
krishmunn
10-18 04:51 PM
New York Real Estate License FAQs from New York real estate school online. (http://new-york.realestateschoolonline.com/FAQ.aspx)
so from this link and answer to question number 4, I take you can't even get a license to be a real estate agent in the state of NY, let alone someone sponsor your greencard. Sorry to be so brutal, but with a Master's degree I bet u can get a much better job than a real estate agent. Just my 2 cents.
4.Q: Can I get a New York real estate license if I am not a citizen of the USA or NY resident?
A: You must be either a US citizen or lawfully admitted alien, but you do NOT need to be a resident of New York.
Lawfully admitted alien include H1, L1 and all others. But I agree, it is probably not possible to get a GC or H1 being a real estate agent.
so from this link and answer to question number 4, I take you can't even get a license to be a real estate agent in the state of NY, let alone someone sponsor your greencard. Sorry to be so brutal, but with a Master's degree I bet u can get a much better job than a real estate agent. Just my 2 cents.
4.Q: Can I get a New York real estate license if I am not a citizen of the USA or NY resident?
A: You must be either a US citizen or lawfully admitted alien, but you do NOT need to be a resident of New York.
Lawfully admitted alien include H1, L1 and all others. But I agree, it is probably not possible to get a GC or H1 being a real estate agent.
hot Kate headed off after having
Uncertain
04-28 03:53 PM
Since the queue for EB3 India is very long, and if many EB3 India people change over to EB2, that will slow down EB2 India and this is what the May 2011 Visa Bulletin also says.
But shouldnt this make EB3 India go faster?
Then why do we see slow movement in EB3 India?
But shouldnt this make EB3 India go faster?
Then why do we see slow movement in EB3 India?
more...
house kate middleton lunch with
gk_2000
12-02 07:22 PM
The bill also says...
1. The illegal's application needs to be processed expeditiously.
2. The USCIS can not increase the fee for that
Means...the 2 million illegals will be put ahead of the legals who are rotting in line for years. To process these docs, USCIS needs more resource and needs to hire more people but they can not increase the fee. So USCIS will come after the legals and increase their fee. These democrats wants to rob legals and reward illegas.
and you are hoping once this bill passed they will consider us...YOU MADE MY DAY.
so WTFs
Hopefully, the bill would have been vetted enough by the time it passes, and these areas cleaned up. This would be a good test for the US political system
1. The illegal's application needs to be processed expeditiously.
2. The USCIS can not increase the fee for that
Means...the 2 million illegals will be put ahead of the legals who are rotting in line for years. To process these docs, USCIS needs more resource and needs to hire more people but they can not increase the fee. So USCIS will come after the legals and increase their fee. These democrats wants to rob legals and reward illegas.
and you are hoping once this bill passed they will consider us...YOU MADE MY DAY.
so WTFs
Hopefully, the bill would have been vetted enough by the time it passes, and these areas cleaned up. This would be a good test for the US political system
tattoo kate middleton phone Kate
dvb123
02-28 05:52 PM
Bump
more...
pictures kate middleton lunch with
beppenyc
03-20 08:15 PM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-20-2006/0004323801&EDATE=
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
dresses Prince William Kate Middleton
n2b
04-17 01:41 PM
I am currently on EAD and used AC 21. Just in case if I suspect that there might be some issue during final I 485 approval, can I have my company apply for my H1 transfer before I 485 is approved?
If I do so, what will be the status of the I 485 application after H1B transfer?
This is a bit confusing question to answer but if I apply for my H1B transfer now, what will be its validity date?
All help appreciated. Thanks all in advance.
If I do so, what will be the status of the I 485 application after H1B transfer?
This is a bit confusing question to answer but if I apply for my H1B transfer now, what will be its validity date?
All help appreciated. Thanks all in advance.
more...
makeup kate middleton lunch with william kate. kate middleton lunch prince
jgh_res
06-20 11:11 AM
Are you trying your luck to get an RFE with digital pics?
Read the following post:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1678834&highlight=digital#post1678834
Some are successful with digital pics but there are lot of them who had issues with digital pics including me, twice. All the best!!!!!
get the photos from CVS, they give you 6 photos for 8 bucks
Read the following post:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1678834&highlight=digital#post1678834
Some are successful with digital pics but there are lot of them who had issues with digital pics including me, twice. All the best!!!!!
get the photos from CVS, they give you 6 photos for 8 bucks
girlfriend mar Due to kate middleton
sundarpn
06-30 04:04 PM
eb3retro,
Did u change employers on EAD? or H1b transfer?
Also when you renewed EAD & AP:
1. Did you do it yourself? or did u have your new employer do it?
2. Did u get any RFE's when you renewed your EAD/AP well after you switched employers. (I assume you changed addresses in this process).
thx
Did u change employers on EAD? or H1b transfer?
Also when you renewed EAD & AP:
1. Did you do it yourself? or did u have your new employer do it?
2. Did u get any RFE's when you renewed your EAD/AP well after you switched employers. (I assume you changed addresses in this process).
thx
hairstyles kate middleton red issa dress.
satyasaich
07-12 06:14 PM
that the new 140 gets approved(for which i have no doubt) with old priority date.
then go ahead for 485.
the only point here is to play SAFE, and try to be on H1 until the new 140 is approved
Will this be same if you are with same employer??
I mean
Having PD 2003 Jan - EB3 - approved 140
Can this be used to file new I 485 with NEW PERM LABR - EB2??
does EB2 140 needs to be approved ??
then go ahead for 485.
the only point here is to play SAFE, and try to be on H1 until the new 140 is approved
Will this be same if you are with same employer??
I mean
Having PD 2003 Jan - EB3 - approved 140
Can this be used to file new I 485 with NEW PERM LABR - EB2??
does EB2 140 needs to be approved ??
arung
01-02 01:14 PM
They took just a week for me.
hebbar77
09-10 12:28 PM
MY PD is july 2004 (I485 filed on 2 July 2007 with ND date 8/9/2007) and I did not get any approvals so I opened a SR on 09/03/09.
Yesterday I received a "DISTURBING" response to the SR saying that my dates are not current because I am in EB3. I am EB2 and had only I140 approved way back in Nov 2006. So I created another SR (with the help of a nice CSR by calling USCIS yesterday 09/09/09) today morning I went for an infopass appointment in DallaS, TX to check why the USCIS is saying my case is in EB3 and not EB2. Luckily at the Infopass I was assigned to a Desi IO to help me with my issue. He spent lot of time looking researching my case and told me that my case is EB2 and the dates are current. During my Infopass appointment the IO noticed that someone audited my case few seconds before and showed me the screen where it showed that my case was PreAdjudicated. He said it looks like soneone is working on the case and I should hear from USCIS quickly. I am sure that the Second SR triggered some one to look at the case. And might be they corrected the EB category.
Now I am eagerly awaiting my approval (primary + 2 Dependents).
My suggesstion to people who are waiting (With PD's before Feb 2005 ) are to Open SR , make Infopass appointments to check on the status. Its very important to know if there are any problems in your case similar to mine.
If anyone needs any help with Opening SR or creating Infopass PM me and I will be glad to help.
My case looks same as urs! thanks for writing.
I just hung up with USCIS before I read this.
first person transferred the call to someone else , that person gave me an email address to forward the earlier SR response and explain the problem!
Yesterday I received a "DISTURBING" response to the SR saying that my dates are not current because I am in EB3. I am EB2 and had only I140 approved way back in Nov 2006. So I created another SR (with the help of a nice CSR by calling USCIS yesterday 09/09/09) today morning I went for an infopass appointment in DallaS, TX to check why the USCIS is saying my case is in EB3 and not EB2. Luckily at the Infopass I was assigned to a Desi IO to help me with my issue. He spent lot of time looking researching my case and told me that my case is EB2 and the dates are current. During my Infopass appointment the IO noticed that someone audited my case few seconds before and showed me the screen where it showed that my case was PreAdjudicated. He said it looks like soneone is working on the case and I should hear from USCIS quickly. I am sure that the Second SR triggered some one to look at the case. And might be they corrected the EB category.
Now I am eagerly awaiting my approval (primary + 2 Dependents).
My suggesstion to people who are waiting (With PD's before Feb 2005 ) are to Open SR , make Infopass appointments to check on the status. Its very important to know if there are any problems in your case similar to mine.
If anyone needs any help with Opening SR or creating Infopass PM me and I will be glad to help.
My case looks same as urs! thanks for writing.
I just hung up with USCIS before I read this.
first person transferred the call to someone else , that person gave me an email address to forward the earlier SR response and explain the problem!
No comments:
Post a Comment