like_watching_paint_dry
09-12 11:10 AM
Not anymore...
EB2 India followed by EB3 India. If we take this "sampling" of information with a mild grain of salt, then it still does tally up with the distribution of the retrogressed dates. EB2 IN is U, EB3 IN is mid April. EB3 RoW is further along down the line.. not many illegals coming under RoW.
Manny, in your next poll you might want to atleast get the 2002 & before, 2003, 2004 2005, 2006+ PD distribution of EB2 India and 01Apr2001-30Apr2001, rest of EB3 India. I think once those 245(i) illegal buttplugs are out of the way, EB3 IN should move at a good pace. But that may not happen until 2012-2014.
EB2 India followed by EB3 India. If we take this "sampling" of information with a mild grain of salt, then it still does tally up with the distribution of the retrogressed dates. EB2 IN is U, EB3 IN is mid April. EB3 RoW is further along down the line.. not many illegals coming under RoW.
Manny, in your next poll you might want to atleast get the 2002 & before, 2003, 2004 2005, 2006+ PD distribution of EB2 India and 01Apr2001-30Apr2001, rest of EB3 India. I think once those 245(i) illegal buttplugs are out of the way, EB3 IN should move at a good pace. But that may not happen until 2012-2014.
wallpaper blog on the ikini line.
paskal
12-14 12:41 AM
Hi all,
Between this thread and the main chapter thread, we have now accumulated a handful of members, looks like we are all set to be an active chapter!
couple of things:
1. IV IL chapter has invited us to their conference call, please check the thread called "Members in MN" under the IV agenda forum, if anyone can participate and report back here it would be great.
2. Conference Call: Anyone have dates or times in mind? btw pappu, question for you: does iv have a way of facilitating these calls?
Looking forward to hearing from you all, together we will surely achieve our objectives...
Puneet
Between this thread and the main chapter thread, we have now accumulated a handful of members, looks like we are all set to be an active chapter!
couple of things:
1. IV IL chapter has invited us to their conference call, please check the thread called "Members in MN" under the IV agenda forum, if anyone can participate and report back here it would be great.
2. Conference Call: Anyone have dates or times in mind? btw pappu, question for you: does iv have a way of facilitating these calls?
Looking forward to hearing from you all, together we will surely achieve our objectives...
Puneet
krish_krish
01-05 12:27 PM
Folks
Is anyone has done adjustment of status from B2 to H1.
My friend is in US with 10 yrs multiple entry visa, and he likes to do adjustment of status. Any advice.
Thanks
Is anyone has done adjustment of status from B2 to H1.
My friend is in US with 10 yrs multiple entry visa, and he likes to do adjustment of status. Any advice.
Thanks
2011 back tattoos bikini line
belmontboy
08-14 08:28 PM
USCIS is considering to "permit pre-filing of I-485 applications upon approval of I-140 petitions for preadjudication of the I-485 applications pending immigrant visa number availability."
News From The Oh Law Firm Site: Link (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
Possible good news for folks who missed 07' July Fiasco and still waiting to file I-485
good morning.
This horse has been beaten to death before.
the pre-adjudication process does not give u any benefits of I-1485.
I hope they don't charge money for pre-adjucation, else this would be another scheme for money making!
News From The Oh Law Firm Site: Link (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
Possible good news for folks who missed 07' July Fiasco and still waiting to file I-485
good morning.
This horse has been beaten to death before.
the pre-adjudication process does not give u any benefits of I-1485.
I hope they don't charge money for pre-adjucation, else this would be another scheme for money making!
more...
j751
10-24 01:41 PM
BTW what does Murthy charge?
eb3_nepa
11-06 11:49 AM
Do I still need a copy of I-140 if I have I-797 extended for 3 years from the existing employer?
If you already have your h1 extended for 3 years then you can get those 3 years with employer 2. Consult a lawyer though, when you actually switch jobs.
If you already have your h1 extended for 3 years then you can get those 3 years with employer 2. Consult a lawyer though, when you actually switch jobs.
more...
vdesai_8
03-16 12:27 PM
You don't need to buy insurance. The State governments offer free insurance to people who need it. Atleast your family members would qualify for it.
2010 ikini line tattoos to the
genscn
07-30 01:39 PM
Is it mention some where on USCIS website? I live in GA but since I-140 was filed at Nebraska center, My attorney sent my I-1485 at Nebraska too.
Yes
Yes
more...
peacocklover
10-25 04:20 PM
Situation: approved I-140 (EB-2), getting close to 5th year of H1B.
questions:
1. if i change employers, can I use my priority date even though my employer has not given me a copy of the filed/approved I-140? If i can, what if the old employer cancels the i-140: can I still use the PD from the approved 140?
2. if i start a new gc process with a new company, what stage of my GC should i be in so that my h1 can be extended beyond the 6th year? should the perm be filed or should the 140 be filed before the beginning of 5th year?
3. once h1 is extended beyond the 6th year for say 3 years, can I transfer my h1 to a new employer?
thanks.
learner
I'm not attorney but I'm suggesting based on my experience .I know answers as Ive gone through this recently...
1. Yes , Your PD for approved 140 is your possession. You can port it in your future 485 process of GC with your future employer even if your old employer revokes it.
2. You can get three year extension to your new H1 transfer with your current approved 140 of old employer.
3. Yes, You can.
Please let me know if you have any concerns.
questions:
1. if i change employers, can I use my priority date even though my employer has not given me a copy of the filed/approved I-140? If i can, what if the old employer cancels the i-140: can I still use the PD from the approved 140?
2. if i start a new gc process with a new company, what stage of my GC should i be in so that my h1 can be extended beyond the 6th year? should the perm be filed or should the 140 be filed before the beginning of 5th year?
3. once h1 is extended beyond the 6th year for say 3 years, can I transfer my h1 to a new employer?
thanks.
learner
I'm not attorney but I'm suggesting based on my experience .I know answers as Ive gone through this recently...
1. Yes , Your PD for approved 140 is your possession. You can port it in your future 485 process of GC with your future employer even if your old employer revokes it.
2. You can get three year extension to your new H1 transfer with your current approved 140 of old employer.
3. Yes, You can.
Please let me know if you have any concerns.
hair Tattoos on Private. Bikini Area
Nikith77
01-20 02:50 PM
LOOKs Goooood
more...
Ennada
01-29 11:05 PM
Legalizing unauthorized immigrants would help economy, study says - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/07/immigration.economy/index.html#cnnSTCText)
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
hot flipping her ikini bottom to
srarao
08-18 12:01 PM
Hi
http://www.immigration-law.com
--must be of great help
-Rao.
http://www.immigration-law.com
--must be of great help
-Rao.
more...
house Look how feminine this tattoo
piyu7444
09-15 11:56 AM
Hello,
My wife got her H1B approved last year and her start date was 10/01/07. She started working towards the end of Nov. She did not get any paychecks for 2007 before Dec 31st and started getting paid only in 2008. So she did not receive a W2 for 2007. I am about to file my tax for 2007 (had filed an extension) and would like to know the following.
1: I assume this should not impact me from filing a joint return. Am I right ?
2: Would I qualify for the stimulus check for $1200 since both of us were employed in 2007 ? Since she did not get a W2, I was not sure if I would get only $600.
3: Both of us have filed for I-485 and our applications are pending approval. Would there be any problem with her I-485 in the future (like any query) since in 2007, her status was converted to H1B (from H4) and she did not get a W2 ? I am being told USCIS does a complete background check on the applicant with respect to each status he/she has had.
Thanks in advance.
For point # 3 you can always tell USCIS that she joined the company in Nov 2007. It is not required to join the co. on Oct 1 although one gets converted to h1b from h4 when you change status in US. There is something like late joining also hence no pay !
Obviously the employer should have paid her but if she is working thru a desi firm I would understand what would be the case......
I do not think this will impact your 485 as long as you have pay chqs. coming for her in continuation thereafter and w-2 for 2008 meets the Amount on h1b LCA. USCIS will generally look for w-2 and might ask for recent pay stubs.
I have been interviewed for 485 (random pick) and they did not care to look at my pay stub even when I asked them to.........
Ensure that w-2 has the correct numbers else it can be trouble.
Consult a lawyer as all the above is my experience and limited knowledge.......
Hope it helps!!
My wife got her H1B approved last year and her start date was 10/01/07. She started working towards the end of Nov. She did not get any paychecks for 2007 before Dec 31st and started getting paid only in 2008. So she did not receive a W2 for 2007. I am about to file my tax for 2007 (had filed an extension) and would like to know the following.
1: I assume this should not impact me from filing a joint return. Am I right ?
2: Would I qualify for the stimulus check for $1200 since both of us were employed in 2007 ? Since she did not get a W2, I was not sure if I would get only $600.
3: Both of us have filed for I-485 and our applications are pending approval. Would there be any problem with her I-485 in the future (like any query) since in 2007, her status was converted to H1B (from H4) and she did not get a W2 ? I am being told USCIS does a complete background check on the applicant with respect to each status he/she has had.
Thanks in advance.
For point # 3 you can always tell USCIS that she joined the company in Nov 2007. It is not required to join the co. on Oct 1 although one gets converted to h1b from h4 when you change status in US. There is something like late joining also hence no pay !
Obviously the employer should have paid her but if she is working thru a desi firm I would understand what would be the case......
I do not think this will impact your 485 as long as you have pay chqs. coming for her in continuation thereafter and w-2 for 2008 meets the Amount on h1b LCA. USCIS will generally look for w-2 and might ask for recent pay stubs.
I have been interviewed for 485 (random pick) and they did not care to look at my pay stub even when I asked them to.........
Ensure that w-2 has the correct numbers else it can be trouble.
Consult a lawyer as all the above is my experience and limited knowledge.......
Hope it helps!!
tattoo in the ikini line.
bobzibub
12-15 06:02 PM
Have anyone heard any updates from AILA about this issue? if one knows this for sure, atleast in these days, people can start working a second (may be non-technical) job on EAD...that way you should be able to save some money for the rainy days...
AILA wouldn't be the ones to update us wouldn't they? USCIS is the one that makes the call. We can pester AILA to ask for an "update on the status of the decision making process" and that would likely make them finally do something.
I've asked the ombudsman on this issue. Never got a response.
IMHO:
I think that after a year (It must be getting close now) of being formally asked by AILA, USCIS basically must allow moonlighting under an EAD because they did not cite any law against it. They basically accepted AILA's interpretation when they stated that they "took it under advisement" and left it at that. Even if there is a magical law that appears now barring the practice, their inaction after so long has "blue skied" the moonlighting for at least those already practicing it. What alternative conclusion could an immigrant draw?
AILA wouldn't be the ones to update us wouldn't they? USCIS is the one that makes the call. We can pester AILA to ask for an "update on the status of the decision making process" and that would likely make them finally do something.
I've asked the ombudsman on this issue. Never got a response.
IMHO:
I think that after a year (It must be getting close now) of being formally asked by AILA, USCIS basically must allow moonlighting under an EAD because they did not cite any law against it. They basically accepted AILA's interpretation when they stated that they "took it under advisement" and left it at that. Even if there is a magical law that appears now barring the practice, their inaction after so long has "blue skied" the moonlighting for at least those already practicing it. What alternative conclusion could an immigrant draw?
more...
pictures #39;Brian#39; on ikini line
EB-VoiceImmigration
09-08 02:32 AM
As I understood from one of the attorney's post in this forum, that we can port priority date if we submit sufficient documentation while applying for I-140(for second GC process).
If I-140 is applied and pending or already approved then I' not sure if there is any chance to submit addendum to port the date..may be attorneys can help here.
If I-140 is applied and pending or already approved then I' not sure if there is any chance to submit addendum to port the date..may be attorneys can help here.
dresses ikini line hair.
Leo07
02-17 04:24 PM
you can find this on state Dept site.Although, this is the first one that I came across, it appears that this will be updated monthly. ( this one is dated Jan 30,2010)
Source:Welcome to Travel.State.Gov (http://www.travel.state.gov)
Where does one get this document that you have posted here?
Source:Welcome to Travel.State.Gov (http://www.travel.state.gov)
Where does one get this document that you have posted here?
more...
makeup just above ikini line is
waitingnwaiting
05-20 10:43 AM
We are beneficiaries of my husband on a EB3 petition. due to retrogression issue,
Was your question
We are beneficiaries of my husband on a EB3 petition. due to retrogression issue, I want to sue someone. Whom should I start with?
Guys
Lets complete her questions with various possible choices and help her. Happy Friday. :D
Was your question
We are beneficiaries of my husband on a EB3 petition. due to retrogression issue, I want to sue someone. Whom should I start with?
Guys
Lets complete her questions with various possible choices and help her. Happy Friday. :D
girlfriend just above ikini line is
sidshar
05-15 04:22 PM
My PD is 2006 last year dates went current and I got it. I guess luck played a role.
hairstyles ikini line. ikini line hair
seahawks
10-29 12:22 PM
Follow the instructions that they provided to you and to the P.O box provided by them. Your attorney should have the information on how to go about this. Also provide a small write up with the refiling stating that refiling due to missing signature and put include receipt reference number and details. I think you should be okay.
Again I am not an attorney but please make photocopies of all correspondence before you send it again.
Again I am not an attorney but please make photocopies of all correspondence before you send it again.
prioritydate
10-01 09:11 PM
Folks
this is a Q for my Friend
He was working at Lehman before the company filed for chapter 11
... He has been told that salary will be paid for 3 months
Right now he is at home and looking for other offers and no H1b transfer has been started
Question is ... Is he OK ( in status ) currently or a H1b transfer has to be done ASAP
thanks
They are paying 3 months salary for a guy on H1B? Who is paying him?
this is a Q for my Friend
He was working at Lehman before the company filed for chapter 11
... He has been told that salary will be paid for 3 months
Right now he is at home and looking for other offers and no H1b transfer has been started
Question is ... Is he OK ( in status ) currently or a H1b transfer has to be done ASAP
thanks
They are paying 3 months salary for a guy on H1B? Who is paying him?
ThinkTwice
02-18 01:47 PM
I have my first GC interview next month. I had a DUI few years back that I forgot to mention in the 485 app as I thought this was a traffic related offense. I want to know what are my options now? My lawyer suggests I file for some kind of waiver and suggests I take an attorney with me to the interview. She also asked me to get court certified copies of the conviction and that I completed all the required tasks assigned by the court.
Is this going to affect my GC in anyway? I need some guidance here.
You have a lot of work ahead of you, first thing .. you should
- get a consultation with a good lawyer who specializes in these kind of cases and discuss your options.
- you have only one month to prepare so you should be aggressive about collecting all the documentation required for the interview. sites like trackiit have some threads that talk about documentation needed for DUI related interviews
- A straight forward DUI without any accidents etc should be ok, I have seen posts where people with DUI's have gone for and cleared the interviews, but your case is different you have not mentioned the DUI in your application.
Is this going to affect my GC in anyway? I need some guidance here.
You have a lot of work ahead of you, first thing .. you should
- get a consultation with a good lawyer who specializes in these kind of cases and discuss your options.
- you have only one month to prepare so you should be aggressive about collecting all the documentation required for the interview. sites like trackiit have some threads that talk about documentation needed for DUI related interviews
- A straight forward DUI without any accidents etc should be ok, I have seen posts where people with DUI's have gone for and cleared the interviews, but your case is different you have not mentioned the DUI in your application.
No comments:
Post a Comment