anurakt
12-30 07:49 PM
Updated wikipedia for immigration definition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration#External_links
Please see the external links section.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration#External_links
Please see the external links section.
wallpaper call of duty wallpaper.
ganguteli
03-09 11:32 PM
I like your idea.
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
buehler
06-13 11:13 AM
I have seen this same footage months ago and to it don't look real, its cooked. Some facts there are just un-digestible like the gora guy will take job of a waiter immediately after working as senior exec. cmon market is not that bad unless he don't know anything else and don't have ability to get other similar job, then he should be fired anyways. and then that carlos guy, his dress up don't seems convincing that other execs will give me good response after presentation. its all cooked... showing 600k+ numbers are all bogus.
I thought that the video was quite funny. Now for some one to think that it is true is even more funny. :D
I thought that the video was quite funny. Now for some one to think that it is true is even more funny. :D
2011 Call of Duty Wallpaper 3
champu
03-09 04:37 PM
looks like that is Plan B :D:D
the way eb3 is , I may get it faster if my US born kids sponsor me. He is 8 right now.;)
the way eb3 is , I may get it faster if my US born kids sponsor me. He is 8 right now.;)
more...
unitednations
12-22 02:42 PM
I know many of my friends who were not paid in bench. All of them received green card without any problem. But only difference is they were in unpaid bench anywhere between 2 to 6 months. I do not know anyone who was in unpaid bench for 1 year or more. Most INS officiers are sympathic towards many violations. Recently one of my friend's wife forgot to renew H4 and she was Visa overstay for about 8 months. She applied change of status explainig the situation her H4 was extended with validity date from original expiry date.
I do know a decent number of people who were on bench for a year or more.
the problem is that people put in too much information when they file their cases. If you have small w2's or very little paystubs and you put it as part of your filing (either 140 or 485) then you are giving uscis a chance to examine them and raise a query because of it.
usually uscis does want to examine whether a person maintained status. However; if the recent entry into usa was shortly before filing 485 then they very rarely bother asking for w2's. If it has come to their attention that you may have left the 140 employer (h1 transfer, sending in ac21 letter) or it has been a long time then they will ask for these things to assess your intention.
Sometimes when people have very agregious cases/situations they are usually being protected in other ways such as 245k without knowing about it and their case gets approved.
I do know a decent number of people who were on bench for a year or more.
the problem is that people put in too much information when they file their cases. If you have small w2's or very little paystubs and you put it as part of your filing (either 140 or 485) then you are giving uscis a chance to examine them and raise a query because of it.
usually uscis does want to examine whether a person maintained status. However; if the recent entry into usa was shortly before filing 485 then they very rarely bother asking for w2's. If it has come to their attention that you may have left the 140 employer (h1 transfer, sending in ac21 letter) or it has been a long time then they will ask for these things to assess your intention.
Sometimes when people have very agregious cases/situations they are usually being protected in other ways such as 245k without knowing about it and their case gets approved.
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.
more...
GCchakravyuh
09-19 11:13 AM
First, I would like to congratulate everyone who contributed to the success of the DC rally on Sep 18, 2007...
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
yes this is what has been worrying me, ever since i became member of this esteemed organization. With the illegal immigrants also fighting in the same era, I fear IV is not misunderstood & hence misjudged. Lets really really change the name to LEGAL IMMIGRATION VOICE. That way these desperate, justified efforts will get more coverage. Hope it makes sense to the managers of the IV
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
yes this is what has been worrying me, ever since i became member of this esteemed organization. With the illegal immigrants also fighting in the same era, I fear IV is not misunderstood & hence misjudged. Lets really really change the name to LEGAL IMMIGRATION VOICE. That way these desperate, justified efforts will get more coverage. Hope it makes sense to the managers of the IV
2010 Call of Duty 6 Wallpaper
vin13
11-13 09:29 AM
If you do not have the time to meet the lawmakers or their aides, call them over the phone explain the situation and email the letter.
If 100s' of us try and 1 succeeds, we all succeed.
If 100s' of us try and 1 succeeds, we all succeed.
more...
sc09876
08-10 02:42 PM
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Let me just say I am not here to start a EB2 vs EB3 fight. I think the beef is that EB3 is still in 2002 while EB2 is now peeking into 2007.
However, IMHO, if you extend that logic, since EB3 has much more filings than EB2, EB2 wait time would be unrealistically high. Just my opinion that it defeats the purpose of classification, since in the end, it will be PD based and not classification based.
Instead the focus should be in "automatic" progression to higher classification if the PD has certain # of years. For example: If the job requirement had 3 years at the time of labor and 3 more years have passes since, 140 should automatically be allowed to re-classify to EB2 (filed or yet to file)
This way, working for the same employer and adding experience will be an advantage and would not need to change jobs just to re-classify or port.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Let me just say I am not here to start a EB2 vs EB3 fight. I think the beef is that EB3 is still in 2002 while EB2 is now peeking into 2007.
However, IMHO, if you extend that logic, since EB3 has much more filings than EB2, EB2 wait time would be unrealistically high. Just my opinion that it defeats the purpose of classification, since in the end, it will be PD based and not classification based.
Instead the focus should be in "automatic" progression to higher classification if the PD has certain # of years. For example: If the job requirement had 3 years at the time of labor and 3 more years have passes since, 140 should automatically be allowed to re-classify to EB2 (filed or yet to file)
This way, working for the same employer and adding experience will be an advantage and would not need to change jobs just to re-classify or port.
hair call of duty modern warfare 2
belmontboy
02-14 02:49 AM
Donot abuse the word "Ethnic cleansing". Our situation is nowhere close to being called that.
Whatever is happening right now is Darwin's theory at work - "Survival of the fittest".
Boom in financials, jobs that were spawned by housing, all needs to be corrected.
Its going to be one helluva ride, buckle to your seats folks. I hope we emerge strong from all these.
Good luck and may god bless us all.
Whatever is happening right now is Darwin's theory at work - "Survival of the fittest".
Boom in financials, jobs that were spawned by housing, all needs to be corrected.
Its going to be one helluva ride, buckle to your seats folks. I hope we emerge strong from all these.
Good luck and may god bless us all.
more...
anurakt
01-16 04:14 PM
283 members online and look at what we got from a monthly contributions. This forum doesn't even have members who can contributr 20$ monthly and call themeselves High Skilled Immigrants !
hot Call of Duty Wallpaper 2
alex99
11-05 03:58 PM
Bump
more...
house Call of Duty - United
GCOP
10-15 01:36 PM
We can send PM to pappu or Administrator2
How do we discuss with core team? ItIsNotFunny or GCOP are you chapter or something?
How do we discuss with core team? ItIsNotFunny or GCOP are you chapter or something?
tattoo Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
vbkris77
04-10 12:28 PM
What you said is absolutely true. EB1 Last year and the year before saw lot more approvals than usual. My reasoning is that even though EB1 was current for all along, they never really approved I140s to give them GC. So In the overall clearing of I140s, CIS cleared lot more EB1 cases and became approved during last 2 years. If you look at the I140 completion in the dash board, it will be very much clear that the completions came down to 4 digits for each month from 5 digits. Receipts continued to be less than 5K per month.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
more...
pictures call of duty 4 wallpaper.
rajuram
01-25 01:26 AM
For my part, I send an email everyday to the white house and the state dept. This is probably not enough.....but may be some day it will work.
BTW, my apologies if the members thought that this thread was accusatory. Still the question remains, what next?
Ok, I understand, no use bringing it up again, sorry, let me go back and read other interesting threads on "investments" and "buying houses"...
How about we start writing letters to the WhiteHouse/President on
(i) Eliminate per country quota limits
(ii) Recapture the lost visas
(iii) Porcessing dates cannot go back
for administrative fixes ?
BTW, my apologies if the members thought that this thread was accusatory. Still the question remains, what next?
Ok, I understand, no use bringing it up again, sorry, let me go back and read other interesting threads on "investments" and "buying houses"...
How about we start writing letters to the WhiteHouse/President on
(i) Eliminate per country quota limits
(ii) Recapture the lost visas
(iii) Porcessing dates cannot go back
for administrative fixes ?
dresses wallpaper Call of Duty Modern
GCKaIntezar
02-09 07:36 PM
optimist578 optimist578 is offline
Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 43
optimist578 is on a distinguished road
Default Want to join
I want to join the effort. I live in Union City (near Hoboken) but donot drive. Do you have any events planned in New York City or near Journal Sq or any place accessible by train?
email kamla345@yahoo.com
Varsha,
Please can you add Optimist to the list and send him/her email for the telecon?
Thanks!
Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 43
optimist578 is on a distinguished road
Default Want to join
I want to join the effort. I live in Union City (near Hoboken) but donot drive. Do you have any events planned in New York City or near Journal Sq or any place accessible by train?
email kamla345@yahoo.com
Varsha,
Please can you add Optimist to the list and send him/her email for the telecon?
Thanks!
more...
makeup Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
gcisadawg
02-13 01:49 PM
Ash, I agree with the message but you need to work on the choice of words. This not ethnic cleansing or lynching or systematic targetting. I'd say America is going into a protectionist mode. When you are in that mode, the first step is to keep aliens at a distance.
girlfriend call of duty black ops
pray
08-18 08:56 AM
Pray, just an fyi - what I meant as nonsense is "not we talking abt predicting priority dates"..but you saying EB2s are clever than EB3s. Do you have any idea of what you are saying? The very fact that you are not able to understand what we are discussing here shows how much clever you are..
Alright retro I'm sorry I upset you so much,it was not a remark which was meant to be taken seriously.I know there is no difference in intelligence between the two.Hope you will get cheered now and maybe drop in for a beer sometime.And I hope you get you green card soon too.
Alright retro I'm sorry I upset you so much,it was not a remark which was meant to be taken seriously.I know there is no difference in intelligence between the two.Hope you will get cheered now and maybe drop in for a beer sometime.And I hope you get you green card soon too.
hairstyles Call of Duty: Black Ops
Sandeep
02-08 09:16 AM
Admin,
I beg to differ. As far as USCIS is concerned, it just forwards the security clearance request to FBI/Homeland security. It does not follow up unless you sue USCIS. As far as they are concerned, the "ball is in FBI's court" ( exact words of the representative). So NameCheck need to be a separate issue.
So what you are saying is that since this goes to FBI it is an interagency problem. Or that is what USCIS makes it out to be. So what is it that we are requesting
-FBI speeds up its operation?
-USCIS has some follow up system to check with FBI if the number of days elapsed are more than ____ days?
Since you are more knowledgable on this issue, please post
1. Description of the process and the reasons for the delay
2. Solutions that you think we can propose
Remember that none of us are working on this full time and we depend on such info from you. In the end there is no such thing as a "separate issue" - these are all stepping stones to our objective of getting a GC.
I beg to differ. As far as USCIS is concerned, it just forwards the security clearance request to FBI/Homeland security. It does not follow up unless you sue USCIS. As far as they are concerned, the "ball is in FBI's court" ( exact words of the representative). So NameCheck need to be a separate issue.
So what you are saying is that since this goes to FBI it is an interagency problem. Or that is what USCIS makes it out to be. So what is it that we are requesting
-FBI speeds up its operation?
-USCIS has some follow up system to check with FBI if the number of days elapsed are more than ____ days?
Since you are more knowledgable on this issue, please post
1. Description of the process and the reasons for the delay
2. Solutions that you think we can propose
Remember that none of us are working on this full time and we depend on such info from you. In the end there is no such thing as a "separate issue" - these are all stepping stones to our objective of getting a GC.
rustum
08-21 12:03 AM
Hi,
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
alex99
07-11 07:35 PM
EB3 PERM
Labor Filed: August 27th 2006
I-140 filed at NSC on 12th November
Still waiting for approval
Sent 485 App to NSC on July 2nd....
Regards,
Alex
Labor Filed: August 27th 2006
I-140 filed at NSC on 12th November
Still waiting for approval
Sent 485 App to NSC on July 2nd....
Regards,
Alex
0 comments:
Post a Comment