aka
04-24 12:12 PM
Congrats Googler, you have given so much to this community. You totally deserve the good news! Have a couple of cold ones on us...
wallpaper Robert e Kristen, amore
ek_bechara
10-15 02:37 PM
I wrote this once before and I will say it one last time. Pulling stunts such as the flower campaign is XYZ. May be not to the extent we feel it should, but USCIS does realize that there are issues with how it is handling cases. It is doing the best it can with the limited resources it is being provided. Please dont embarrass USCIS anymore. Would you keep calling a blind person, blind? Please stop this childish behavior. If anything lets start thinking about CIR and how we can influence changes to favor legal immigrants. We have the time now so start lobbying for changes.
Kindly note that you are dealing with a established government entity. Stop adopting hindi movie ideas when interacting with USCIS. If it were so easy why not arrange "naach-gana" for USCIS everyday. We can invite Malaika Sherawat for half the price we are paying to lobby. Skimpy clothes, raunchy songs, and alcohol may mesmerize the visa officer into stamping 100 K greencards everyday.
I bet there were a good number of closed door meetings, lobbying, and lets throw a bone to keep them quiet for sometime- discussions that translated into the July fiasco.
I believe we are educated and sane people, so lets start doing the right thing.
Enough said.
Kindly note that you are dealing with a established government entity. Stop adopting hindi movie ideas when interacting with USCIS. If it were so easy why not arrange "naach-gana" for USCIS everyday. We can invite Malaika Sherawat for half the price we are paying to lobby. Skimpy clothes, raunchy songs, and alcohol may mesmerize the visa officer into stamping 100 K greencards everyday.
I bet there were a good number of closed door meetings, lobbying, and lets throw a bone to keep them quiet for sometime- discussions that translated into the July fiasco.
I believe we are educated and sane people, so lets start doing the right thing.
Enough said.
saiimmi
03-21 11:13 PM
Optimystic!
Did you see any LUDs on your 485 over the past few months?
Thanks,
Yes, I should have !! Its been a loooong Journey.
I was stuck in backlog till Dec 06.
Got I-140 approved in Jan 07.
Then due to the lazy As*****s at the immigration firm that our company hires, who should have applied my I-485 in June 07 itself when my PD became current, but kept on procrastinating until got hit by July 2 fiasco. They didn't even were prepared to file on July 2nd nor on July 17 (though they had all papers from my end).
Finally they applied I-485 on July 29th. (recpt dt: July 30th 07)
Now my PD is current again in March and April...so finally I am getting somewhere near (hopefully)
So first the backlog screwed me , then the attorneys, then the July 2 fiasco (making everything 'U' and then making everthing 'c' thus causing this whole another backlog again! )
Anyway no hard feelings towards people benifitted by July 2 fiasco and who atleast got EADs. I hope I dont have to wait much longer :)
Did you see any LUDs on your 485 over the past few months?
Thanks,
Yes, I should have !! Its been a loooong Journey.
I was stuck in backlog till Dec 06.
Got I-140 approved in Jan 07.
Then due to the lazy As*****s at the immigration firm that our company hires, who should have applied my I-485 in June 07 itself when my PD became current, but kept on procrastinating until got hit by July 2 fiasco. They didn't even were prepared to file on July 2nd nor on July 17 (though they had all papers from my end).
Finally they applied I-485 on July 29th. (recpt dt: July 30th 07)
Now my PD is current again in March and April...so finally I am getting somewhere near (hopefully)
So first the backlog screwed me , then the attorneys, then the July 2 fiasco (making everything 'U' and then making everthing 'c' thus causing this whole another backlog again! )
Anyway no hard feelings towards people benifitted by July 2 fiasco and who atleast got EADs. I hope I dont have to wait much longer :)
2011 Robert Pattinson e Kristen
gsc999
07-01 10:45 PM
When prominent business houses like Microsoft, Google, Cisco, Oracle and organizations like AILA seem powerless when it comes to influencing senators, lawmakers and government organizations like USCIS and DOS, what can IV team do to change the policies. Sorry I did not mean to criticize, but that's the truth, unfortunately!
--
Mandeep:
Welcome to IV. Yes, the odds are overwhelming but not impossible. A small glimmer of hope is enough to bring thousands of like minded people stuck in retrogression and backlog to IV. I use to share your skepticism. Not anymore, IV has achieved a lot. I won't go down the list but lot more needs to be done, for that we need more members, to become more influential and effective.
Hope to see you become more active here.
--
Mandeep:
Welcome to IV. Yes, the odds are overwhelming but not impossible. A small glimmer of hope is enough to bring thousands of like minded people stuck in retrogression and backlog to IV. I use to share your skepticism. Not anymore, IV has achieved a lot. I won't go down the list but lot more needs to be done, for that we need more members, to become more influential and effective.
Hope to see you become more active here.
more...
justAnotherFile
07-24 05:57 PM
.. there should definitely be some policy interpretation at the discretion of the USCIS
1) The law does not explicitly state that the visa number availability is a pre-requisite for filing the application
2) If you are interpreting it based on the words ....
"an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed"
Then according to 245(a)(2)....
"the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and "
....concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 should also be illegal because at the time of filing I-140 there is no determination of whether the alien is eligible to recieve the EB visa. If so how can USCIS allow filing of I-485 at that time.
1) The law does not explicitly state that the visa number availability is a pre-requisite for filing the application
2) If you are interpreting it based on the words ....
"an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed"
Then according to 245(a)(2)....
"the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and "
....concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 should also be illegal because at the time of filing I-140 there is no determination of whether the alien is eligible to recieve the EB visa. If so how can USCIS allow filing of I-485 at that time.
andycool
07-12 04:56 PM
E. APPLICABILITY OF INA SECTION 202(a)(5)(A)AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF �OTHERWISE UNUSED� NUMBERS
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
more...
pa_arora
10-20 01:20 PM
Faxed.
2010 th S..
sc3
10-16 04:45 PM
Read your above sentence, then read your below sentence. If I try to find a relation between these two sentences I do not know what you are talking.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
more...
another one
02-15 05:46 PM
I agree.
What's the use of merit or supply/demand in capitalism. Everything should be by quota, college admission, immigration .. use of toilet paper etc
I don\'t think it\'s fare to allow natives of one country to consume more then a half of the world\'s quota. The Congress has the same view on this problem :)
What's the use of merit or supply/demand in capitalism. Everything should be by quota, college admission, immigration .. use of toilet paper etc
I don\'t think it\'s fare to allow natives of one country to consume more then a half of the world\'s quota. The Congress has the same view on this problem :)
hair Robert Pattinson and Kristen
laborchic
09-19 10:47 AM
The reason there were so many placards was - we were expecting atleast 10000 people to show up and with the kind of poor response we got, we were expecting atleast 5000 and thats why there was 700 banners ordered.
If we had the magic figure 10000, the impact could have been marvellous. The banner count would have been appropriate
With 1500 to 2000 - every individual had a banner or a placard or a flag.
Mark's speech was hillarious - but had very strong messages - THESE ARE THINGS THAT NEED SPECIAL SKILLS - AND MARK PULLED IT THROUGH EXTREMELY WELL. Mark is a pround member of the Tri State Chapter and his contributions towards the cause are amazing
Robert Sun (LIA) - was good. Well he was praising Indians and CHinese. Nothing wrong - but yes can be more comprehensive in nature.
We had people from all nationalities - and a lot of people seem to be silent supporters of IV - very passionate about this organization.
Jay was at his best - He took on Lou Dobbs - Which was the best part.
The only lesson I would say that we must learn is - low numbers - YES. The turnout should have been atleast 10000 - though 2000 is good. Just proves how selfish those free riders are who can let down your own community who are helping you.
I was part of the rally... I am proud of IV and everyone who attended it..WHAT tri-state chapter are you talking about ?? How many people are enrolled in it and how many showed up for the rally???
If we had the magic figure 10000, the impact could have been marvellous. The banner count would have been appropriate
With 1500 to 2000 - every individual had a banner or a placard or a flag.
Mark's speech was hillarious - but had very strong messages - THESE ARE THINGS THAT NEED SPECIAL SKILLS - AND MARK PULLED IT THROUGH EXTREMELY WELL. Mark is a pround member of the Tri State Chapter and his contributions towards the cause are amazing
Robert Sun (LIA) - was good. Well he was praising Indians and CHinese. Nothing wrong - but yes can be more comprehensive in nature.
We had people from all nationalities - and a lot of people seem to be silent supporters of IV - very passionate about this organization.
Jay was at his best - He took on Lou Dobbs - Which was the best part.
The only lesson I would say that we must learn is - low numbers - YES. The turnout should have been atleast 10000 - though 2000 is good. Just proves how selfish those free riders are who can let down your own community who are helping you.
I was part of the rally... I am proud of IV and everyone who attended it..WHAT tri-state chapter are you talking about ?? How many people are enrolled in it and how many showed up for the rally???
more...
carbon
07-24 12:39 PM
If USCIS could interpret the law to their advantage we can use our resources
to fight their interpretation and force them to change their policy.
I also think we can even file a law suite in relation to "incorrect" interpretation
by USCIS.
to fight their interpretation and force them to change their policy.
I also think we can even file a law suite in relation to "incorrect" interpretation
by USCIS.
hot Robert Pattinson e Kristen
sunitharay
08-09 12:20 AM
I am spending sleepless nights worrying...and regarding resubmitting, is it not a waste submitting it twice - will they encash the checks twice?
OR
it seems to be a better idea to just enclose the RN # and submit the EVL separately...
OR
it seems to be a better idea to just enclose the RN # and submit the EVL separately...
more...
house is maybe Robert Pattinson
Tito_ortiz
11-19 12:09 PM
Please do not take any precipitated steps that harm yours status ! Calm down. This is still the strongest economy in the world. You don't want to miss this unique opportunity !
tattoo Pattinson, Kristen hot kissing
paskal
07-03 01:56 PM
AFAIK, this does not work for people who are already in the US. One has to work in their native or different county to be eligible for the EB1 managerial position here. Some one might have sneaked away this way at some time. But this is definitely not happening on a large scale as EB1 is current for all countries for quite some time. If a lot of folks are getting away, EB1 cannot be current for long time.
this does happen- for people in the US already. larger companies find it convenient to simply send the employee out for exactly 365 days and then transfer them back. and Voila! you are in the front of the line!
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
this does happen- for people in the US already. larger companies find it convenient to simply send the employee out for exactly 365 days and then transfer them back. and Voila! you are in the front of the line!
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
more...
pictures Robert Pattinson y Kristen
k_ek
11-22 12:36 PM
Hi guys
my question is same as in the previous post of Arun.
I wanted to know if the I 140 was approoved from previous employer and if u change the job and restart the gc again can u stiil use the old I 140 prority dates(even if the previous employer revoked the old I140).
thanx
kek
my question is same as in the previous post of Arun.
I wanted to know if the I 140 was approoved from previous employer and if u change the job and restart the gc again can u stiil use the old I 140 prority dates(even if the previous employer revoked the old I140).
thanx
kek
dresses Kristen Stewart amp;amp; Robert
rpulipati
09-26 09:44 AM
If you guyz like it, please use it.
===========================
Dear Editor,
I'm a skilled worker and attended the rally mentioned in the article. But as per the article, our intention was NOT to get attention to H1-B visas, instead
---------
the rally is for the skilled legal immigrants already present in United States, requesting Congress to speed up the permanent resident applications by re-suing the previous years unused visas and/or increasing the annual cap.
---------
There is a lot of difference between these two agenda's and this article really sends a wrong message to the entire American community.
So, I request you to please act immediately and correct the article. Also, please do sufficient investigation before you post things that are important to community (such as immigration).
Thanks
===========================
===========================
Dear Editor,
I'm a skilled worker and attended the rally mentioned in the article. But as per the article, our intention was NOT to get attention to H1-B visas, instead
---------
the rally is for the skilled legal immigrants already present in United States, requesting Congress to speed up the permanent resident applications by re-suing the previous years unused visas and/or increasing the annual cap.
---------
There is a lot of difference between these two agenda's and this article really sends a wrong message to the entire American community.
So, I request you to please act immediately and correct the article. Also, please do sufficient investigation before you post things that are important to community (such as immigration).
Thanks
===========================
more...
makeup robert pattinson e kristen
sledge_hammer
06-19 06:12 PM
What is the "period of stay form"?
girlfriend kristen stewart and robert
gbarquero
09-11 04:38 PM
Once for all, let's get this thing over NOW!!!
LET'S GO TO DC NOW, OR WAIT FOREVER TO BE FREE!!!!!
LET'S GO TO DC NOW, OR WAIT FOREVER TO BE FREE!!!!!
hairstyles Kristen Stewart recently
paskal
12-28 12:18 PM
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
GreenLantern
02-15 06:51 AM
Look at my post count. Does it look like I have a life? :lol:
delhiguy
07-09 02:22 PM
http://www.ahslaw.com/documents/AHSLawsuit.pdf
This document gives lot of legal details, states what the lawsuits exactly is..
P.S : I Think its just filed, not accepted by the court as of now
This document gives lot of legal details, states what the lawsuits exactly is..
P.S : I Think its just filed, not accepted by the court as of now
0 comments:
Post a Comment