RanchCharm
07-17 08:47 PM
Hi Sivamayam,
Thanks for the information. I will listen to the calls. It is soothing though to here something favourable.
I will keep checking this forum & others for similar questions & replies.
Thanks,
Nachi
Thanks for the information. I will listen to the calls. It is soothing though to here something favourable.
I will keep checking this forum & others for similar questions & replies.
Thanks,
Nachi
wallpaper Caption: Gall stone removal.
ita
11-19 09:20 AM
I saw some postings about AP wherein people got 3 AP papers.
Is it ok if you just get 2 AP papers?
Thank you.
Is it ok if you just get 2 AP papers?
Thank you.
GCBy3000
04-15 06:35 PM
I have been in this situation but my work location changed more than 100miles within the same state. My attorney asked me to start another labor.
1. If you think that you will move back one the 485 is adjucated, then you dont have to worry. OTherwise, you have file a new labor. Atleast you are safe since your 140 is approved. You can port your PD.
2. If it is within few miles then it should not affect. Still you have to check with your attorney. Few miles sometimes puts you in different couty or state or even in different country. So the term "Few Miles" is relative one and it is better to check with attorney.
1. If you think that you will move back one the 485 is adjucated, then you dont have to worry. OTherwise, you have file a new labor. Atleast you are safe since your 140 is approved. You can port your PD.
2. If it is within few miles then it should not affect. Still you have to check with your attorney. Few miles sometimes puts you in different couty or state or even in different country. So the term "Few Miles" is relative one and it is better to check with attorney.
2011 Gall Stone Remedies
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
more...
raju123
07-08 05:06 PM
I don't know the thinking of some people. immigration-law has nicely covered flower campaign. What is the reason to criticize?
We have very fewwwwwww friends for our cause. Mathew Oh is one of them. Do you guys want to loose few friends???? Are we going to win any battle without others support???
Please delete your negative comments and I request not to do any negative comments for like minded organization or person.
We have very fewwwwwww friends for our cause. Mathew Oh is one of them. Do you guys want to loose few friends???? Are we going to win any battle without others support???
Please delete your negative comments and I request not to do any negative comments for like minded organization or person.
waiting4gc
04-15 04:42 PM
Its nice to see good news from more and more people. Enjoy your new found freedom!!
Hi folks,
Just got back from UK on Friday after a month of family time, medicals and our embassy interview! Wanted to let you all know that we were approved and happily back in the US!!
Congrats on the latest admin wins and movements in campaigns/projects. I wanted to say a huge thank you but not farewell to the many kind folks who kept my spirits high in the short time I have been with IV:
abhijitp, needhelp, digital2k, paskal, gsc999, waiting4gc, pappu, chanduv23, santb1975, nolaindian32, walking dude, ja1hind, logiclife and many more. All of you rock and America is very lucky to have such genuine and brilliant people like you. I wish you the very best for your own journey.
I will be around for sure, just have to concentrate on securing some work and life for a bit, finally!
my best :)
Hi folks,
Just got back from UK on Friday after a month of family time, medicals and our embassy interview! Wanted to let you all know that we were approved and happily back in the US!!
Congrats on the latest admin wins and movements in campaigns/projects. I wanted to say a huge thank you but not farewell to the many kind folks who kept my spirits high in the short time I have been with IV:
abhijitp, needhelp, digital2k, paskal, gsc999, waiting4gc, pappu, chanduv23, santb1975, nolaindian32, walking dude, ja1hind, logiclife and many more. All of you rock and America is very lucky to have such genuine and brilliant people like you. I wish you the very best for your own journey.
I will be around for sure, just have to concentrate on securing some work and life for a bit, finally!
my best :)
more...
peer123
04-09 01:47 PM
I guess you won't find much love for labor transfer cases in these forums but AFAIK AC21 has nothing to do with whom the labor was filed for.
I appreciate your help, but just to justify you, I have been in this country for more than 8 years now and I have no clue what happened to my labor, I applied it way back in 2001 and one more 2004.
anyway, I think many have been helped. and I wish everyone the best...
I appreciate your help, but just to justify you, I have been in this country for more than 8 years now and I have no clue what happened to my labor, I applied it way back in 2001 and one more 2004.
anyway, I think many have been helped. and I wish everyone the best...
2010 group gall stone
quizzer
11-01 05:39 PM
Hello,
I'm trying to see the list of people who applied EB2 at NSC in 2006 and still waiting for updates/result.
Please keep updating this thread with ur dates and updates like if any SR was raised, any LUD's after ND etc.
Mine RD is Dec 11 2006...no updates till now.SR was raised on 20th oct 2007.
We will try to track if people get updates after posting here.
Thanks
I'm trying to see the list of people who applied EB2 at NSC in 2006 and still waiting for updates/result.
Please keep updating this thread with ur dates and updates like if any SR was raised, any LUD's after ND etc.
Mine RD is Dec 11 2006...no updates till now.SR was raised on 20th oct 2007.
We will try to track if people get updates after posting here.
Thanks
more...
anjans
04-29 06:21 PM
Nice article here. It also compares the experience on how folks did once they went back. The needle is surely moving away from USA.
America is bleeding competitiveness | VentureBeat (http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/28/brain-drain-or-brain-circulation-america-is-bleeding-competitiveness/)
America is bleeding competitiveness | VentureBeat (http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/28/brain-drain-or-brain-circulation-america-is-bleeding-competitiveness/)
hair ladder stones removal
vikki76
04-21 05:49 PM
Guys, let us refrain from making incorrect statements. This can affect someone's decision negatively. Post answers only if your are sure that it is a correct answer or have personal experience.
Yes, I am 100% sure. One can move from H1-B to H-4 and then back to H1-B within 12 months and not get counted towards cap.
Of course, if you some one wants legal advice, they would need to pay for it rt through a lawyers? That is given .
Yes, I am 100% sure. One can move from H1-B to H-4 and then back to H1-B within 12 months and not get counted towards cap.
Of course, if you some one wants legal advice, they would need to pay for it rt through a lawyers? That is given .
more...
sw33t
05-07 12:25 AM
The Civil Rights Division's Coordination and Review Section can handle individual complaints alleging discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, and religion by State and local law enforcement agencies that receive financial assistance from the Department of Justice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/cor/index.php
Most major city police departments receive grants from the DOJ.
Here is the Dept. of Justice website giving more information -
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/complaints.php#Police
Don't try going to the department directly or filing a form directly. Not recommended as they will not be friendly.
Also contact your local community organization leaders and let them know about the incident.
It might be a good idea to setup a protocol or a process in place in the event something like this happens again. Memorize a contact number and educate your family members on what to do.
Here is more information on your rights if you are detained or arrested -
http://www.msba.org/departments/commpubl/publications/brochures/legalrights.htm
The above link is a compilation by the Maryland Bar Association but it is pretty close to what you can do and what you can't.
File a complaint over here - http://www.policeabuse.com/index.php?option=com_performs&formid=44 if you live in a small town/city. Its Free.
BTW, this is a very popular technique to evict a neighbor who is not wanted around. :) But then again, I might be speculating about your living situation.
I hope you did not commit an act of domestic violence.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/cor/index.php
Most major city police departments receive grants from the DOJ.
Here is the Dept. of Justice website giving more information -
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/complaints.php#Police
Don't try going to the department directly or filing a form directly. Not recommended as they will not be friendly.
Also contact your local community organization leaders and let them know about the incident.
It might be a good idea to setup a protocol or a process in place in the event something like this happens again. Memorize a contact number and educate your family members on what to do.
Here is more information on your rights if you are detained or arrested -
http://www.msba.org/departments/commpubl/publications/brochures/legalrights.htm
The above link is a compilation by the Maryland Bar Association but it is pretty close to what you can do and what you can't.
File a complaint over here - http://www.policeabuse.com/index.php?option=com_performs&formid=44 if you live in a small town/city. Its Free.
BTW, this is a very popular technique to evict a neighbor who is not wanted around. :) But then again, I might be speculating about your living situation.
I hope you did not commit an act of domestic violence.
hot Gall stones, gallbladder
nozerd
02-26 09:46 AM
Thanks Sanju,
I already have testing experience since I am used to reviewing test plans from a functional perspective and am aware of testing methodology.
Is there a market our there for testing ?
Thanks
I already have testing experience since I am used to reviewing test plans from a functional perspective and am aware of testing methodology.
Is there a market our there for testing ?
Thanks
more...
house Surgery for Gallstones
kriskris
04-17 11:14 AM
My wife (going to use AP), My little son (US citizen) & my mother-in-law (Visitor Visa) are coming back to Dallas from India on Monday. My mother-in-law left USA in November 2008 and coming back again now. Would it be safe to send all three of them to the same counter at the POE? or would it be safe to send them to 2 separate counters.
My worry is that if they go together, the officer may think that my mother-in-law is here again for baby sitting or something like that since her leaving USA is less than 6 months. I know that there is no such requirement that a person has to be outside US for a certain period of time before entering again, but I am still wondering would it cause any problems. On the flip side if they go to different counters they may let her in without any issues, since my mother-in-law doesn't know English (I am planning to give a letter for the purpose of her trip), Please suggest?
My worry is that if they go together, the officer may think that my mother-in-law is here again for baby sitting or something like that since her leaving USA is less than 6 months. I know that there is no such requirement that a person has to be outside US for a certain period of time before entering again, but I am still wondering would it cause any problems. On the flip side if they go to different counters they may let her in without any issues, since my mother-in-law doesn't know English (I am planning to give a letter for the purpose of her trip), Please suggest?
tattoo ladder stones removal
pgc10
02-03 01:00 PM
My lawyer advises that there's no point in sending information to USCIS unless they ask for it, or is required by law or regulations. The chances of such unsolicited information making it to your files, or being acted upon are slim to none. If you wish, you could send the AC21 information on your own. Retaining a lawyer to send this information, and paying them a few hundred bucks to do so is sheer waste of money, in my opinion. There's no guarantee that it will avoid an RFE. USCIS does not have the time or resources to process unsolicited information. You should hire a lawyer (and have them submit a G-28) if you wish to transfer your representation to a new lawyer, and tell them that they are being retained to respond to RFEs and such. This "AC21 letter" thing is something that lawyers have come up with...its not necessary, and even if it is, you can do it yourself...all you need is an employment verification letter from your new employer.
I'd like to believe that USCIS doesn't act upon such information. However, look at this guy's case.
He says he got a "response" from USCIS after filing for AC21 stating that the information he sent was now "attached" to his existing application.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23339
I'd like to believe that USCIS doesn't act upon such information. However, look at this guy's case.
He says he got a "response" from USCIS after filing for AC21 stating that the information he sent was now "attached" to his existing application.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23339
more...
pictures Gall Stone Removal|Cause
gauravster
12-03 09:25 AM
One more thing that you might look into is the vacations that you hae taken. Generally speaking, if you spend time outside the US, you can exclude that time from the H1B 6 year limit. So if you took an average of 2 week vacation every year, you could get about 12 additional weeks. So your H1B would expire closer to Dec end, instead of 30 Sep.
You might need to provide documentation to prove this though. The additional time might be valuable nevertheless.
You might need to provide documentation to prove this though. The additional time might be valuable nevertheless.
dresses known gallstones,
kumarh1b
01-28 05:16 PM
Can some please advice me how to proceed further Please find the denial notice for your reference. All your inputs means a lot to me. Please help me and guide in proper direction.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
more...
makeup and gallbladder stones
reddog
04-08 04:19 PM
All i am asking is the media they know and number of users. I dont know what you talking about.
Ok, how do we contact the state representative. Through the county representative, then the city, then street?
We are IV. I believe that is what chandu meant. Core is just a group of people who incidentally reserved the domain name and configured joomla.
Ok, how do we contact the state representative. Through the county representative, then the city, then street?
We are IV. I believe that is what chandu meant. Core is just a group of people who incidentally reserved the domain name and configured joomla.
girlfriend Gallstones and gallbladder
Suvendra
01-11 01:53 PM
I am on EAD and using AC21 working for new employer.
hairstyles group gall stone
CRAZYMONK
01-11 10:21 AM
Hello,
wanted to know, what happens to employees of Vision Systems Group and its sister company's employees immigration status. as every one know VSGINC has allegations from USCIS on immigration fraud and H-1B.
Employees like me no where related to there fraud. how USCIS reacts on employees pending 485?. Most of the employees are moved out using AC21.
It all depends on the case to case. I know the company which is in the same situation. I heard bad stories that happened to their employees.
Which status you are in now?
wanted to know, what happens to employees of Vision Systems Group and its sister company's employees immigration status. as every one know VSGINC has allegations from USCIS on immigration fraud and H-1B.
Employees like me no where related to there fraud. how USCIS reacts on employees pending 485?. Most of the employees are moved out using AC21.
It all depends on the case to case. I know the company which is in the same situation. I heard bad stories that happened to their employees.
Which status you are in now?
rimzhim
06-05 10:22 PM
At this time ONLY 30% of EB2 Indians have current PDs. I've asked this question before - don't you all think that maybe dates will not have to retrogress again? I mean, 30% is too low a percentage for triggering a backward movement of PD.
Any thoughts?
Seems like a good guess to me. In fact, EB-2-India might move forward.
Any thoughts?
Seems like a good guess to me. In fact, EB-2-India might move forward.
learning01
04-06 10:11 PM
There is no serious effort by the republicans. They are fractured, divided, into groups. They have no motivation to get this comprehensive bill passed. I have been observing the tactics and attitudes of these republican senators and democratic senators. I am more shocked by the game of one-upmanship on the part of Frist, Kyl, Cornyn, Craig. I don't see rhyme or reason in their sppeches. The bill has no life for the next 3 weeks.
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
No comments:
Post a Comment