sanju
02-13 09:08 PM
This is ridiculous; no one asked you to come to this country.
Nor are you entitled to anything besides what they chose to bestow.
Remember that.
No one asked anyone to come to this country. But when we came here few years back, we were told that there are set of procedures in place to get green card. Congress never intended to make people for 10 years to get their green cards. So no one asked us that wait for 10 years either. But we paid taxes for all those 10 years. And my tax $$$, government has decided to bailout banks telling them not to hire me. Again, no one asked me how they will spend my tax $$$ just like no one asked me to come to this country.
Sense of entitlement comes from sense of connection and sense of what we deserve. I am entitled to permanent residency because my wife and I have paid around 1/2 million in taxes in last 10 years, more than 99% of "ALL AMERICAN" FAMILIES. So don't tell us what we are entitled and what we are not entitled for, because that's ridiculous.
.
Nor are you entitled to anything besides what they chose to bestow.
Remember that.
No one asked anyone to come to this country. But when we came here few years back, we were told that there are set of procedures in place to get green card. Congress never intended to make people for 10 years to get their green cards. So no one asked us that wait for 10 years either. But we paid taxes for all those 10 years. And my tax $$$, government has decided to bailout banks telling them not to hire me. Again, no one asked me how they will spend my tax $$$ just like no one asked me to come to this country.
Sense of entitlement comes from sense of connection and sense of what we deserve. I am entitled to permanent residency because my wife and I have paid around 1/2 million in taxes in last 10 years, more than 99% of "ALL AMERICAN" FAMILIES. So don't tell us what we are entitled and what we are not entitled for, because that's ridiculous.
.
wallpaper day when Michelle Wie goes
Kodi
04-01 11:36 AM
Does anyone have the format of the employment letter? My attorney didn't request one even when I emailed him few time.
Form I-140 has an area to write the wages per week? The amount my attorney wrote is wages for the year. Is this ok?
Thank you.
Form I-140 has an area to write the wages per week? The amount my attorney wrote is wages for the year. Is this ok?
Thank you.
eager_immi
01-18 12:13 PM
Please email a core member directly and get some chinese people to create a updated chinese version of the same website.
Thanks IV core group. Signed up for $20/month. Please continue your efforts.
I am from Chinese community and registered IV just a couple of week ago. There was no email message to me regarding this movement, and some other registerd users may encounter the same situation. You may need to resend them. Only when I opened IV website yesterday did I know this recurring program and current situation. I am assuming IV is the only group who are pushing to get the I-485 relief for high skilled workers with advanced degree. There are MANY MANY Chinese in the same situation but I guess there might not have so many Chinese in IV. IV core group may think of some better way to reach more Chinese or other people. Basically, we are on the same boat for the same direction. Better to concentrate all resources to reach one goal. I would suggest IV to setup a seperate Chinese (and Hispanic) contribution page to diverse the culture background of IV members.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2PX91085T34540611)
In reference to:S-19881018DS353430X
Thanks IV core group. Signed up for $20/month. Please continue your efforts.
I am from Chinese community and registered IV just a couple of week ago. There was no email message to me regarding this movement, and some other registerd users may encounter the same situation. You may need to resend them. Only when I opened IV website yesterday did I know this recurring program and current situation. I am assuming IV is the only group who are pushing to get the I-485 relief for high skilled workers with advanced degree. There are MANY MANY Chinese in the same situation but I guess there might not have so many Chinese in IV. IV core group may think of some better way to reach more Chinese or other people. Basically, we are on the same boat for the same direction. Better to concentrate all resources to reach one goal. I would suggest IV to setup a seperate Chinese (and Hispanic) contribution page to diverse the culture background of IV members.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2PX91085T34540611)
In reference to:S-19881018DS353430X
2011 michelle wie photo 19
chanduv23
09-28 11:25 AM
People are always prejudiced against something. If it is not race or ethnicity, it's country of origin, province of origin, class, gender, faith, or whether you are poor or rich. Even poor people have prejudices against rich people. And people tend to group with people who share their prejudice to fight against those who they are prejudiced against. It just makes life miserable for everybody.
But at least when the two groups who are against each other are about the same is size, you will feel less pressure. If there are very few foreign professionals working among a largely native population, they will feel a lot of pressure.
And thats exactly what is happening to us here. All these politicians are providing mere lip service to us and play their vote bank politics.
This is very much a reason that we need to unite and rise. Our own people have prejudiced opinions among us, like fulltime jobs versus consulting companies. MS degree vs under grad, US educated vs non US educated, and it goes on - the more divided we are, the more issues we face because the community opposing us is higher in number and are voting public.
If we do not unite and still continue to do things in small numbers, things will not change easily.
But at least when the two groups who are against each other are about the same is size, you will feel less pressure. If there are very few foreign professionals working among a largely native population, they will feel a lot of pressure.
And thats exactly what is happening to us here. All these politicians are providing mere lip service to us and play their vote bank politics.
This is very much a reason that we need to unite and rise. Our own people have prejudiced opinions among us, like fulltime jobs versus consulting companies. MS degree vs under grad, US educated vs non US educated, and it goes on - the more divided we are, the more issues we face because the community opposing us is higher in number and are voting public.
If we do not unite and still continue to do things in small numbers, things will not change easily.
more...
jungalee43
06-11 09:45 AM
Done.
WillIWin?
07-23 02:24 PM
My lawyer is going to submit the 485 WITHOUT a letter from my current employer. This is going to be a concurrent I-140 and I-485 application (140 and 485 applied together).
I looked at the 485 application form and see that it clearly mentions - page 5, that a letter from the employer is required (mentioning job title, job description and salary). My lawyer still says it is NOT required.
- Are there people who have submitted 485 applications OR who are going to submit the 485 WITHOUT an Employment letter ? Replies/advice greatly appreciated.
Thanks in Advance!
I looked at the 485 application form and see that it clearly mentions - page 5, that a letter from the employer is required (mentioning job title, job description and salary). My lawyer still says it is NOT required.
- Are there people who have submitted 485 applications OR who are going to submit the 485 WITHOUT an Employment letter ? Replies/advice greatly appreciated.
Thanks in Advance!
more...
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:05 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
2010 Michelle Wie wins her first
feedfront
09-20 01:45 PM
No, I've not heard anything from attorney's office.
more...
cdeneo
03-07 02:28 PM
Can someone please shed light on this - I was looking for the same information.
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
hair Re: Michelle Wie Appreciation
indyanguy
02-20 03:47 PM
looks like there no hope for EB3 India to move further :(
Ya, no hope for EB3-India :(
Ya, no hope for EB3-India :(
more...
WeShallOvercome
08-17 05:47 PM
I don't get it.
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
Well, First let me tell you that nothing in USCIS makes any sense.
Cominig to the reasoning behind it, it could be that they did not have enough 'approvable' cases with PDs before Aug'02 to exhaust the annual quota(stuck in name check FP check etc), so they moved the dates forward. They approved some cases that felll within the new dates.
Now after approving some newly current cases, only a few visas are left with them. Also, by this time, some of the older cases, which were stuck earlier got out of whatever check they were stuck in...
As a result, now they don't have enough visas available to approve any cases after the PD of Aug'02.
Anything is possible here dear !
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
Well, First let me tell you that nothing in USCIS makes any sense.
Cominig to the reasoning behind it, it could be that they did not have enough 'approvable' cases with PDs before Aug'02 to exhaust the annual quota(stuck in name check FP check etc), so they moved the dates forward. They approved some cases that felll within the new dates.
Now after approving some newly current cases, only a few visas are left with them. Also, by this time, some of the older cases, which were stuck earlier got out of whatever check they were stuck in...
As a result, now they don't have enough visas available to approve any cases after the PD of Aug'02.
Anything is possible here dear !
hot Golfer Michelle Wie Tops
srkamath
07-13 02:31 PM
It is just a temporary movement to capture as many visa number as possible. Dates will move back in Oct and surge forward in June 09.
NO it won't !:);)
NO it won't !:);)
more...
house Michelle Wie Michelle Wie
conundrum
11-10 02:05 PM
Bump
tattoo Michelle Wie Michelle Wie of
angelfire76
02-14 09:25 PM
The pint is well made....
See the history... all big things ( godd or evil ) started small....
How can one bring US out of recession by firing 65000 H1-B when FOUR MILLION jobs are lost in a year ?????
85000 x 6 = 410k. Of which let's assume that around 30-35k are taken by Indian companies who generally don't use the H1B time to the same extent as local companies or desi consultancies. It still leaves around 300k jobs that could be vacated by force.
Even 30k jobs added "back" to the available pool for American workers is a PR victory for the administration. Besides nobody likes us anyway, which is another PR coup for the antis.
See the history... all big things ( godd or evil ) started small....
How can one bring US out of recession by firing 65000 H1-B when FOUR MILLION jobs are lost in a year ?????
85000 x 6 = 410k. Of which let's assume that around 30-35k are taken by Indian companies who generally don't use the H1B time to the same extent as local companies or desi consultancies. It still leaves around 300k jobs that could be vacated by force.
Even 30k jobs added "back" to the available pool for American workers is a PR victory for the administration. Besides nobody likes us anyway, which is another PR coup for the antis.
more...
pictures Hottie Michelle Wie
frostrated
06-11 03:55 PM
Done. Sent to senators in Texas. Also sent to house members just so that they are aware.
Sent to all friends : Citizens, GC holders and those in the same boat as us. Even sent to native born Americans to help us to help their country.
Sent to all friends : Citizens, GC holders and those in the same boat as us. Even sent to native born Americans to help us to help their country.
dresses Michelle Wie has not broken
masouds
02-15 04:52 PM
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps.
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
:mad:
Well, US government thinks otherwise about my (or USCIS') logic. If you think it is unfair, you can sue them. I won't stop you.
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
:mad:
Well, US government thinks otherwise about my (or USCIS') logic. If you think it is unfair, you can sue them. I won't stop you.
more...
makeup Michelle Wie Michelle Wie of
gauravsh
03-09 06:45 PM
Quick question guys :- My PD is feb 2008 and I140 was approved in july 08.
I also want to call my congessman, can you please tell what are the things you talk to them?
A brief guidance will help many others like me to make a call.
~
I also want to call my congessman, can you please tell what are the things you talk to them?
A brief guidance will help many others like me to make a call.
~
girlfriend too easily to Michelle Wie
Canadian_Dream
04-04 02:18 PM
The Durbin-Grassley bill would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B employees who are then outsourced to other companies. This is a method that some companies use to evade restrictions on hiring H-1Bs.
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
hairstyles Michelle Wie at US open 2005
reddymjm
06-03 05:06 PM
Hi friends,
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
As soon as the H1B gets approved your L1 b goes invalid. The options you have is if you have ur L1 validity after oct go out of the country and come back on L1. Or if it is expiring in Oct or close to Oct your company can file extension if it gets approved you may be ok but the period you work during that might be illlegal. But as USCIS has no way of tracking all these last issued status is a valid status making ur H1b invalid. But I suggest to do the other way.
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
As soon as the H1B gets approved your L1 b goes invalid. The options you have is if you have ur L1 validity after oct go out of the country and come back on L1. Or if it is expiring in Oct or close to Oct your company can file extension if it gets approved you may be ok but the period you work during that might be illlegal. But as USCIS has no way of tracking all these last issued status is a valid status making ur H1b invalid. But I suggest to do the other way.
nervous-wreck
03-15 05:08 PM
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
sumansk
04-04 11:52 AM
Hello Guys..
Here is the summary of the H-1 B reform bill introduced last week in Senate..
God Bless All of 'US' !!
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
Here is the summary of the H-1 B reform bill introduced last week in Senate..
God Bless All of 'US' !!
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
0 comments:
Post a Comment