kumhyd2
07-13 03:00 PM
guys! who have those documents/letters being sent can you have a scanned copy of these documents/letters so that others can just download them and attach them with their email instead of cut copy paste and format. May be the administrators can have file/document section some where on the site so that people can grab the documents and send out to whoever they want to
wallpaper everyone is broken quote,
shantanup
06-24 10:00 AM
Refer to the following thread. You may get some points.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19630
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19630
hazishak
07-18 06:25 PM
Since on 2nd July they said they will reject the AOS application, what if they would have done some rejection during that time, and by the time July filers get their application back, it is after 17th of August. In that circumstance, can you send the AOS application back arguing USCIS's mistake and ask them to take it back after 08/17 and would they take it back politely or reject it again.
You just simply resend it.
You just simply resend it.
2011 funny love quotes sayings.
Green.Tech
05-23 03:19 PM
Keep the contributions coming guys! These bills are a golden opportunity for us...We don't want IV to stop short of funds on its efforts, do we?
more...
CADude
07-06 01:42 PM
I am 100% agree!! Two Govt Dept has their own ego and problems. They didn't work in tandem. Now they have to face the music of AILF. :D
For sure DoS knew that something is wrong at USCIS end. Looks like they dint get along well on this one. So instead of saying that all the visa numbers has been used up, they said " all the entire 2007 numbers has been made available". Which means they know very well USCIS are still processing the cases, even after July 2nd.
Looks like, DOS trying to clean their hands and put the blame on USCIS.
This is what happened. Again my thoughts based on last fews days before the july 2nd.
USCIS was angered by DOS making it current for all categories. Every one knows there will be a minimum 100K apps flooding their gates. Imagine the revenue loss for them just bcoz of making it current b4 30th july. They expected DOS to make it current from Aug 1st instead of July 1st. Had the immigration bill passed, as promised by the GOVT., they would have stand to gain $4B in grants to secure the border. But the bill crashed on 27th of june. So what do they do to stop this loss of revenue from our application. They have to use of the entire fiscal 2007 quota in three days so that legally they can't accept more applications. Now that is legally correct. But they way they claimed all the visas within 4 days wasn't played by the rules and where the AILF stands chance to file a lawsuit against them.
Someone in the USCIS was hell bent upon forcing the DOS to make it unavailable for July. WHY ?
For sure DoS knew that something is wrong at USCIS end. Looks like they dint get along well on this one. So instead of saying that all the visa numbers has been used up, they said " all the entire 2007 numbers has been made available". Which means they know very well USCIS are still processing the cases, even after July 2nd.
Looks like, DOS trying to clean their hands and put the blame on USCIS.
This is what happened. Again my thoughts based on last fews days before the july 2nd.
USCIS was angered by DOS making it current for all categories. Every one knows there will be a minimum 100K apps flooding their gates. Imagine the revenue loss for them just bcoz of making it current b4 30th july. They expected DOS to make it current from Aug 1st instead of July 1st. Had the immigration bill passed, as promised by the GOVT., they would have stand to gain $4B in grants to secure the border. But the bill crashed on 27th of june. So what do they do to stop this loss of revenue from our application. They have to use of the entire fiscal 2007 quota in three days so that legally they can't accept more applications. Now that is legally correct. But they way they claimed all the visas within 4 days wasn't played by the rules and where the AILF stands chance to file a lawsuit against them.
Someone in the USCIS was hell bent upon forcing the DOS to make it unavailable for July. WHY ?
Jimi_Hendrix
11-08 07:04 PM
San Diego - District 49 100.0% of 318 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Darrell Issa (I)
GOP 48,622 63.6%
Jeeni Criscenzo
Dem 25,478 33.3%
Lars Grossmith Lib 2,319 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 50 100.0% of 578 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Brian Bilbray (I)
GOP 91,990 53.3%
Francine Busby
Dem 74,932 43.4%
Paul King Lib 3,175 1.8%
Miriam Clark PFP 2,586 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 51 100.0% of 299 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Bob Filner (I)
Dem 46,455 67.0%
Blake Miles
GOP 21,284 30.7%
Dan Litwin Lib 1,638 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 52 100.0% of 623 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Duncan Hunter (I)
GOP 96,600 65.0%
John Rinaldi
Dem 46,996 31.6%
Michael Benoit Lib 5,105 3.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 53 100.0% of 393 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Susan Davis (I)
Dem 73,731 66.9%
Woody Woodrum
GOP 33,773 30.7%
Ernie Lippe Lib 2,680 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Francisco - District 8 100.0% of 473 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Nancy Pelosi (I)
Dem 101,002 80.5%
Mike DeNunzio
GOP 13,043 10.4%
Krissy Keefer Grn 9,611 7.7%
Philip Berg Lib 1,880 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Francisco - District 12 100.0% of 107 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Tom Lantos (I)
Dem 22,953 81.7%
Mike Moloney
GOP 5,137 18.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Joaquin - District 11 100.0% of 576 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 44,965 50.7%
Jerry McNerney
Dem 43,721 49.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Joaquin - District 18 100.0% of 201 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dennis Cardoza (I)
Dem 15,615 74.2%
John Kanno
GOP 5,425 25.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Luis Obispo - District 22 100.0% of 86 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Kevin McCarthy
GOP 23,695 62.4%
Sharon Beery
Dem 14,267 37.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Luis Obispo - District 23 100.0% of 78 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lois Capps (I)
Dem 24,314 60.5%
Victor Tognazzini
GOP 15,843 39.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Mateo - District 12 100.0% of 356 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Tom Lantos (I)
Dem 80,382 73.8%
Mike Moloney
GOP 28,569 26.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Mateo - District 14 100.0% of 162 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Anna Eshoo (I)
Dem 32,249 72.4%
Rob Smith
GOP 10,329 23.2%
Carol Brouillet Grn 1,070 2.4%
Brian Holtz Lib 889 2.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Barbara - District 23 100.0% of 220 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lois Capps (I)
Dem 43,244 65.2%
Victor Tognazzini
GOP 23,118 34.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Barbara - District 24 100.0% of 131 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Elton Gallegly (I)
GOP 17,639 66.2%
Jill Martinez
Dem 9,000 33.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 11 100.0% of 54 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Jerry McNerney
Dem 6,067 60.9%
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 3,897 39.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 14 100.0% of 284 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Anna Eshoo (I)
Dem 65,960 70.8%
Rob Smith
GOP 23,203 24.9%
Brian Holtz Lib 2,195 2.4%
Carol Brouillet Grn 1,858 2.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 15 100.0% of 436 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Honda (I)
Dem 95,775 71.9%
Raymond Chukwu
GOP 37,358 28.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 16 100.0% of 470 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Zoe Lofgren (I)
Dem 81,796 72.5%
Charel Winston
GOP 31,003 27.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Cruz - District 14 100.0% of 140 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Anna Eshoo (I)
Dem 14,388 66.7%
Rob Smith
GOP 5,713 26.5%
Carol Brouillet Grn 734 3.4%
Brian Holtz Lib 729 3.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Cruz - District 17 100.0% of 177 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Sam Farr (I)
Dem 39,954 84.0%
Anthony De Maio
GOP 7,593 16.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Shasta - District 2 100.0% of 138 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 30,989 67.2%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 13,728 29.8%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 1,388 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sierra - District 4 100.0% of 23 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 832 53.2%
Charlie Brown
Dem 604 38.6%
Dan Warren Lib 127 8.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Siskiyou - District 2 100.0% of 87 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 8,352 63.2%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 4,454 33.7%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 408 3.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Solano - District 3 100.0% of 17 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 1,775 57.1%
Bill Durston
Dem 1,255 40.3%
Douglas Tuma Lib 47 1.5%
Michael Roskey PFP 34 1.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Solano - District 7 100.0% of 133 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Miller (I)
Dem 29,457 80.2%
Camden McConnell Lib 7,282 19.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Solano - District 10 100.0% of 83 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Ellen Tauscher (I)
Dem 13,406 63.2%
Darcy Linn
GOP 7,793 36.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sonoma - District 1 100.0% of 81 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 14,041 66.4%
John Jones
GOP 6,115 28.9%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 611 2.9%
Timothy Stock PFP 381 1.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sonoma - District 6 100.0% of 389 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lynn Woolsey (I)
Dem 75,560 68.0%
Todd Hooper
GOP 31,189 28.1%
Richard Friesen Lib 4,379 3.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Stanislaus - District 18 100.0% of 191 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dennis Cardoza (I)
Dem 19,821 62.4%
John Kanno
GOP 11,923 37.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Stanislaus - District 19 100.0% of 248 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Radanovich (I)
GOP 27,971 60.0%
TJ Cox
Dem 18,629 40.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sutter - District 2 100.0% of 68 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 11,968 67.6%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 5,198 29.4%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 534 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Tehama - District 2 100.0% of 47 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 10,060 69.1%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 4,046 27.8%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 461 3.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Trinity - District 2 100.0% of 23 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 3,104 58.8%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 1,939 36.8%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 233 4.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Tulare - District 21 100.0% of 257 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Devin Nunes (I)
GOP 34,318 66.2%
Steven Haze
Dem 15,967 30.8%
John Miller Grn 1,579 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Tuolumne - District 19 100.0% of 76 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Radanovich (I)
GOP 10,713 59.3%
TJ Cox
Dem 7,355 40.7%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Ventura - District 23 100.0% of 127 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lois Capps (I)
Dem 18,199 71.1%
Victor Tognazzini
GOP 7,405 28.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Ventura - District 24 100.0% of 423 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Elton Gallegly (I)
GOP 66,976 59.9%
Jill Martinez
Dem 44,921 40.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Yolo - District 1 100.0% of 121 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 25,597 65.9%
John Jones
GOP 11,348 29.2%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 1,409 3.6%
Timothy Stock PFP 507 1.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Yolo - District 2 100.0% of 25 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 3,931 64.1%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 2,050 33.5%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 147 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Yuba - District 2 100.0% of 46 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 6,895 66.3%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 3,085 29.7%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 414 4.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Darrell Issa (I)
GOP 48,622 63.6%
Jeeni Criscenzo
Dem 25,478 33.3%
Lars Grossmith Lib 2,319 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 50 100.0% of 578 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Brian Bilbray (I)
GOP 91,990 53.3%
Francine Busby
Dem 74,932 43.4%
Paul King Lib 3,175 1.8%
Miriam Clark PFP 2,586 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 51 100.0% of 299 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Bob Filner (I)
Dem 46,455 67.0%
Blake Miles
GOP 21,284 30.7%
Dan Litwin Lib 1,638 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 52 100.0% of 623 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Duncan Hunter (I)
GOP 96,600 65.0%
John Rinaldi
Dem 46,996 31.6%
Michael Benoit Lib 5,105 3.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Diego - District 53 100.0% of 393 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Susan Davis (I)
Dem 73,731 66.9%
Woody Woodrum
GOP 33,773 30.7%
Ernie Lippe Lib 2,680 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Francisco - District 8 100.0% of 473 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Nancy Pelosi (I)
Dem 101,002 80.5%
Mike DeNunzio
GOP 13,043 10.4%
Krissy Keefer Grn 9,611 7.7%
Philip Berg Lib 1,880 1.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Francisco - District 12 100.0% of 107 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Tom Lantos (I)
Dem 22,953 81.7%
Mike Moloney
GOP 5,137 18.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Joaquin - District 11 100.0% of 576 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 44,965 50.7%
Jerry McNerney
Dem 43,721 49.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Joaquin - District 18 100.0% of 201 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dennis Cardoza (I)
Dem 15,615 74.2%
John Kanno
GOP 5,425 25.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Luis Obispo - District 22 100.0% of 86 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Kevin McCarthy
GOP 23,695 62.4%
Sharon Beery
Dem 14,267 37.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Luis Obispo - District 23 100.0% of 78 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lois Capps (I)
Dem 24,314 60.5%
Victor Tognazzini
GOP 15,843 39.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Mateo - District 12 100.0% of 356 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Tom Lantos (I)
Dem 80,382 73.8%
Mike Moloney
GOP 28,569 26.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
San Mateo - District 14 100.0% of 162 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Anna Eshoo (I)
Dem 32,249 72.4%
Rob Smith
GOP 10,329 23.2%
Carol Brouillet Grn 1,070 2.4%
Brian Holtz Lib 889 2.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Barbara - District 23 100.0% of 220 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lois Capps (I)
Dem 43,244 65.2%
Victor Tognazzini
GOP 23,118 34.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Barbara - District 24 100.0% of 131 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Elton Gallegly (I)
GOP 17,639 66.2%
Jill Martinez
Dem 9,000 33.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 11 100.0% of 54 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Jerry McNerney
Dem 6,067 60.9%
Richard Pombo (I)
GOP 3,897 39.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 14 100.0% of 284 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Anna Eshoo (I)
Dem 65,960 70.8%
Rob Smith
GOP 23,203 24.9%
Brian Holtz Lib 2,195 2.4%
Carol Brouillet Grn 1,858 2.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 15 100.0% of 436 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Honda (I)
Dem 95,775 71.9%
Raymond Chukwu
GOP 37,358 28.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Clara - District 16 100.0% of 470 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Zoe Lofgren (I)
Dem 81,796 72.5%
Charel Winston
GOP 31,003 27.5%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Cruz - District 14 100.0% of 140 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Anna Eshoo (I)
Dem 14,388 66.7%
Rob Smith
GOP 5,713 26.5%
Carol Brouillet Grn 734 3.4%
Brian Holtz Lib 729 3.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Santa Cruz - District 17 100.0% of 177 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Sam Farr (I)
Dem 39,954 84.0%
Anthony De Maio
GOP 7,593 16.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Shasta - District 2 100.0% of 138 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 30,989 67.2%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 13,728 29.8%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 1,388 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sierra - District 4 100.0% of 23 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
John Doolittle (I)
GOP 832 53.2%
Charlie Brown
Dem 604 38.6%
Dan Warren Lib 127 8.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Siskiyou - District 2 100.0% of 87 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 8,352 63.2%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 4,454 33.7%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 408 3.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Solano - District 3 100.0% of 17 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dan Lungren (I)
GOP 1,775 57.1%
Bill Durston
Dem 1,255 40.3%
Douglas Tuma Lib 47 1.5%
Michael Roskey PFP 34 1.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Solano - District 7 100.0% of 133 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Miller (I)
Dem 29,457 80.2%
Camden McConnell Lib 7,282 19.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Solano - District 10 100.0% of 83 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Ellen Tauscher (I)
Dem 13,406 63.2%
Darcy Linn
GOP 7,793 36.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sonoma - District 1 100.0% of 81 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 14,041 66.4%
John Jones
GOP 6,115 28.9%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 611 2.9%
Timothy Stock PFP 381 1.8%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sonoma - District 6 100.0% of 389 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lynn Woolsey (I)
Dem 75,560 68.0%
Todd Hooper
GOP 31,189 28.1%
Richard Friesen Lib 4,379 3.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Stanislaus - District 18 100.0% of 191 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Dennis Cardoza (I)
Dem 19,821 62.4%
John Kanno
GOP 11,923 37.6%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Stanislaus - District 19 100.0% of 248 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Radanovich (I)
GOP 27,971 60.0%
TJ Cox
Dem 18,629 40.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Sutter - District 2 100.0% of 68 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 11,968 67.6%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 5,198 29.4%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 534 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Tehama - District 2 100.0% of 47 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 10,060 69.1%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 4,046 27.8%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 461 3.2%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Trinity - District 2 100.0% of 23 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 3,104 58.8%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 1,939 36.8%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 233 4.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Tulare - District 21 100.0% of 257 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Devin Nunes (I)
GOP 34,318 66.2%
Steven Haze
Dem 15,967 30.8%
John Miller Grn 1,579 3.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Tuolumne - District 19 100.0% of 76 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
George Radanovich (I)
GOP 10,713 59.3%
TJ Cox
Dem 7,355 40.7%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Ventura - District 23 100.0% of 127 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Lois Capps (I)
Dem 18,199 71.1%
Victor Tognazzini
GOP 7,405 28.9%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Ventura - District 24 100.0% of 423 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Elton Gallegly (I)
GOP 66,976 59.9%
Jill Martinez
Dem 44,921 40.1%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Yolo - District 1 100.0% of 121 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Mike Thompson (I)
Dem 25,597 65.9%
John Jones
GOP 11,348 29.2%
Pamela Elizondo Grn 1,409 3.6%
Timothy Stock PFP 507 1.3%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Yolo - District 2 100.0% of 25 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 3,931 64.1%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 2,050 33.5%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 147 2.4%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
Yuba - District 2 100.0% of 46 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Count % Votes Cast
Wally Herger (I)
GOP 6,895 66.3%
A. J. Sekhon
Dem 3,085 29.7%
E. Kent Hinesley Lib 414 4.0%
Updated: 11/8/2006 7:43 PM ET
more...
.jpg "quotes everyone sure To")
YesGC_NoGC
02-12 12:11 PM
PD Dec 2004 from DBEC
2010 quotes because everyone,
sundarpn
09-11 07:47 AM
$200.
Google Order #146039509019830
GO IV!
Google Order #146039509019830
GO IV!
more...
gc_maine2
04-04 10:27 AM
:confused::confused:
I am excerpting Internal Revenue Code Section 1361 below:
Internal Revenue Code
� 1361 S corporation defined.
(a) S corporation defined.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this title, the term �S corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect for such year.
(2) C corporation.
For purposes of this title, the term �C corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a corporation which is not an S corporation for such year.
(b) Small business corporation.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this subchapter, the term �small business corporation� means a domestic corporation which is not an ineligible corporation and which does not�
(A) have more than 100 shareholders,
(B) have as a shareholder a person (other than an estate, a trust described in subsection (c)(2) , or an organization described in subsection (c)(6) ) who is not an individual,
(C) have a nonresident alien as a shareholder, and
(D) have more than 1 class of stock.
(2) Ineligible corporation defined.
For purposes of paragraph (1) , the term �ineligible corporation� means any corporation which is�
(A) a financial institution which uses the reserve method of accounting for bad debts described in section 585 ,
(B) an insurance company subject to tax under subchapter L,
(C) a corporation to which an election under section 936 applies, or
(D) a DISC or former DISC.
There is no mention here that the "resident" must be a permanent resident.
Here is an excerpt of the Federal Regulation that defines who is a "resident alien" for taxation purposes:
Reg �1.871-2. Determining residence of alien individuals.
Caution: The Treasury has not yet amended Reg � 1.871-2 to reflect changes made by P.L. 108-357
(a) General. The term �nonresident alien individual� means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term �fiduciary� shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in Part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of �1.871-4.
(b) Residence defined. An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien make his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Here is the relevant Federal Regulation on Proof of Residence for determining status for tax purposes:
Reg �1.871-4. Proof of residence of aliens.
(a) Rules of evidence. The following rules of evidence shall govern in determining whether or not an alien within the United States has acquired residence therein for purposes of the income tax.
(b) Nonresidence presumed. An alien, by reason of his alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.
(c) Presumption rebutted.
(1) Departing alien. In the case of an alien who presents himself for determination of tax liability before departure from the United States, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(2) Other aliens. In the case of other aliens, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(d) Certificate. If, in the application of paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) or (2)(iii) of this section, the internal revenue officer or employee who examines the alien is in doubt as to the facts, such officer or employee may, to assist him in determining the facts, require a certificate or certificates setting forth the facts relied upon by the alien seeking to overcome the presumption. Each such certificate, which shall contain, or be verified by, a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, shall be executed by some credible person or persons, other than the alien and members of his family, who have known the alien at least six months before the date of execution of the certificate or certificates.
(c) Application and effective dates. Unless the context indicates otherwise, ��1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and ��301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of ��1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see �20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and � 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
In summary, I submit to you that if you work in the US for more than 6 months out of a given year, you are a resident alien, and therefore are eligible to set up an S-Corp.
Since I am still learning about this, any input/feedback/logical arguments with relevant proof/citations would be appreciated!
Very good info, thanks for the posting. BUt its still not clear whether the spouse who is on EAD and does not work at all or for that matter 6 months in a given year, will she/he be eligible for setting up a S -corp??
Thanks
sree
I am excerpting Internal Revenue Code Section 1361 below:
Internal Revenue Code
� 1361 S corporation defined.
(a) S corporation defined.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this title, the term �S corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect for such year.
(2) C corporation.
For purposes of this title, the term �C corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a corporation which is not an S corporation for such year.
(b) Small business corporation.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this subchapter, the term �small business corporation� means a domestic corporation which is not an ineligible corporation and which does not�
(A) have more than 100 shareholders,
(B) have as a shareholder a person (other than an estate, a trust described in subsection (c)(2) , or an organization described in subsection (c)(6) ) who is not an individual,
(C) have a nonresident alien as a shareholder, and
(D) have more than 1 class of stock.
(2) Ineligible corporation defined.
For purposes of paragraph (1) , the term �ineligible corporation� means any corporation which is�
(A) a financial institution which uses the reserve method of accounting for bad debts described in section 585 ,
(B) an insurance company subject to tax under subchapter L,
(C) a corporation to which an election under section 936 applies, or
(D) a DISC or former DISC.
There is no mention here that the "resident" must be a permanent resident.
Here is an excerpt of the Federal Regulation that defines who is a "resident alien" for taxation purposes:
Reg �1.871-2. Determining residence of alien individuals.
Caution: The Treasury has not yet amended Reg � 1.871-2 to reflect changes made by P.L. 108-357
(a) General. The term �nonresident alien individual� means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term �fiduciary� shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in Part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of �1.871-4.
(b) Residence defined. An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien make his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Here is the relevant Federal Regulation on Proof of Residence for determining status for tax purposes:
Reg �1.871-4. Proof of residence of aliens.
(a) Rules of evidence. The following rules of evidence shall govern in determining whether or not an alien within the United States has acquired residence therein for purposes of the income tax.
(b) Nonresidence presumed. An alien, by reason of his alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.
(c) Presumption rebutted.
(1) Departing alien. In the case of an alien who presents himself for determination of tax liability before departure from the United States, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(2) Other aliens. In the case of other aliens, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(d) Certificate. If, in the application of paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) or (2)(iii) of this section, the internal revenue officer or employee who examines the alien is in doubt as to the facts, such officer or employee may, to assist him in determining the facts, require a certificate or certificates setting forth the facts relied upon by the alien seeking to overcome the presumption. Each such certificate, which shall contain, or be verified by, a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, shall be executed by some credible person or persons, other than the alien and members of his family, who have known the alien at least six months before the date of execution of the certificate or certificates.
(c) Application and effective dates. Unless the context indicates otherwise, ��1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and ��301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of ��1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see �20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and � 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
In summary, I submit to you that if you work in the US for more than 6 months out of a given year, you are a resident alien, and therefore are eligible to set up an S-Corp.
Since I am still learning about this, any input/feedback/logical arguments with relevant proof/citations would be appreciated!
Very good info, thanks for the posting. BUt its still not clear whether the spouse who is on EAD and does not work at all or for that matter 6 months in a given year, will she/he be eligible for setting up a S -corp??
Thanks
sree
hair up quotes from everyone#39;s
jungalee43
03-05 10:05 PM
My application was cleared before the BEC were started.
My PD is March-2003 and I didn't get the labor cleared till Late 2006
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
My PD is March-2003 and I didn't get the labor cleared till Late 2006
I just can't help wondering how did you get your labor in 2004 with the PD of May-2003? How come snake of BEC didn't bite you? :)
more...
texanguy
09-10 10:43 AM
you still have till end of this month...
I don't what how you define "most" but I am EB2 with US masters with PD 2006 and I am still waiting. Many of my friends with US masters are still waiting.
I don't what how you define "most" but I am EB2 with US masters with PD 2006 and I am still waiting. Many of my friends with US masters are still waiting.
hot quotes that everyone
Suva
07-19 02:14 PM
This is the way it is going to work
I-485 Processing would start depending on RD (Receipt Date). But at the time of approval PD should be current and if it is current then the applicant whose RD (Receipt Date) is oldest would get the approval first.
I-485 Processing would start depending on RD (Receipt Date). But at the time of approval PD should be current and if it is current then the applicant whose RD (Receipt Date) is oldest would get the approval first.
more...
house quot;Love Everyonequot; Quote Picture
Libra
07-06 01:26 PM
rumor always starts at one place may be it started right here in this thread
I never saw this roumer any where..
I never saw this roumer any where..
tattoo cheerleading quotes from
murali3000
08-25 08:44 PM
It is not a good idea to buy property in India now ( at high prices )
You can see a 30 to 40% decline in prices in coming months/ years.
Wait and buy.
As far as loan , go with SBI or LIC home loans - slow in processing , but you can save lot .
No ICICI
You can see a 30 to 40% decline in prices in coming months/ years.
Wait and buy.
As far as loan , go with SBI or LIC home loans - slow in processing , but you can save lot .
No ICICI
more...
pictures quotes everyone sure To
tikka
06-03 02:57 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4730
People are asking for IV's position on various issues that affect them personally or asking IV to push A, B, C and D ...provisons. Everything depends on how much resources we can put to bare and collectively make an effort. This means, contributions from everyone , Phonecalls to Senators tomorrow onwards from everyone , Webfaxes from everyone , emails to all senators (from all IV members) and of course get as many members as you can to join this effort. We need overwhelming participation from each and every member if we really want to accomplish something big for everyone that takes care of all our interests.
People are asking for IV's position on various issues that affect them personally or asking IV to push A, B, C and D ...provisons. Everything depends on how much resources we can put to bare and collectively make an effort. This means, contributions from everyone , Phonecalls to Senators tomorrow onwards from everyone , Webfaxes from everyone , emails to all senators (from all IV members) and of course get as many members as you can to join this effort. We need overwhelming participation from each and every member if we really want to accomplish something big for everyone that takes care of all our interests.
dresses happy easter day quotes.
ho_gaya_kaya_?
07-14 08:22 PM
Silly question but I need an answer :)...How can I use Bill pay here? I bank with BOA and it asks for a company name if I choose bill pay...
Login to your bank account (This is for BoA)
Go to Bill Pay>>Payees>>Add a Payee
You will see two options
1)Pay a company
2) Pay an Individual
Click the GO button next to Pay an Individual (without entering any information)
In the next page
You will see a small form
Payee- is the name- in whose favor the check will be made
Nickname is for your reference
In Identifying information- you can put your handle
Rest is obvious
Payee creation is one time setup
Once you have created a payee
Go to Bill Pay>>Overview
and here you will see an option to make a payment
Login to your bank account (This is for BoA)
Go to Bill Pay>>Payees>>Add a Payee
You will see two options
1)Pay a company
2) Pay an Individual
Click the GO button next to Pay an Individual (without entering any information)
In the next page
You will see a small form
Payee- is the name- in whose favor the check will be made
Nickname is for your reference
In Identifying information- you can put your handle
Rest is obvious
Payee creation is one time setup
Once you have created a payee
Go to Bill Pay>>Overview
and here you will see an option to make a payment
more...
makeup iQuote 4 - Cool Quotes
delhirocks
07-28 06:55 PM
Are you sure it was Atlanta and not Chicago?. Your timeline suggests it was applied in Chicago.
My company applied for PERM ALC EB-2 category at Atlanta on 18th June 2007, got it approved on 20th June. Received hard copy on 26th June.
My company applied for PERM ALC EB-2 category at Atlanta on 18th June 2007, got it approved on 20th June. Received hard copy on 26th June.
girlfriend quotes from everyone who#39;s
eb3_nepa
03-09 01:21 PM
Black_logs are you ABSOLUTELY sure that they eat into the EB3 numbers? On the Visa Bulletin, they have a seperate entry below the EB3. Just curious if we are getting this Schedule A thing correctly
hairstyles everyone. Cute quotes
ajay
03-22 12:23 AM
I am in a bind now, appreciate any advice,
I am planning on using my EAD to switch to another job in a couple of months. Meanwhile I have booked tickets for May 26th to send my son to India for the summer. He has H4 stamped in his passport valid till 2010.
My question is
**Can my son come back on H4 even though I use my EAD to change jobs ?
**Does he need to have advance parole ? Even if I apply for AP tomorrow, chances are very slim that he will get it before he leaves on May 26th.
Thanks in Advance
I am planning on using my EAD to switch to another job in a couple of months. Meanwhile I have booked tickets for May 26th to send my son to India for the summer. He has H4 stamped in his passport valid till 2010.
My question is
**Can my son come back on H4 even though I use my EAD to change jobs ?
**Does he need to have advance parole ? Even if I apply for AP tomorrow, chances are very slim that he will get it before he leaves on May 26th.
Thanks in Advance
eb3_nepa
07-05 10:44 AM
Excellent Job GLUS
icedgin
07-27 09:38 AM
Hi Angel,
I think I am in a similar situation with you.Me and my kids are also separated from my wife for almost a year now. It was really a big mistake on my part not to join her on her Embassy interview thinking visas were plentiful.BIG MISTAKE. I was at that time not well informed about visa availability.Our PD is Nov 05 and I am from the Philippines. I do feel what you feel. It is an emotional roller coaster ride. Are you derivative beneficiaries of your wife's Sched A petition and what country are you from? If you dont mind me asking.
I think I am in a similar situation with you.Me and my kids are also separated from my wife for almost a year now. It was really a big mistake on my part not to join her on her Embassy interview thinking visas were plentiful.BIG MISTAKE. I was at that time not well informed about visa availability.Our PD is Nov 05 and I am from the Philippines. I do feel what you feel. It is an emotional roller coaster ride. Are you derivative beneficiaries of your wife's Sched A petition and what country are you from? If you dont mind me asking.
No comments:
Post a Comment