ashshef
11-02 03:48 PM
I guess might as well as pitch in.
EB2I - 0-2 week movement forward.
EB3 - Has anyone ever been able to predict these? Does even USCIS have any idea where EB3 should be?
EB2I - 0-2 week movement forward.
EB3 - Has anyone ever been able to predict these? Does even USCIS have any idea where EB3 should be?
wallpaper Tags: disney photo android,
shana04
02-12 03:41 PM
Hi Shana04,
Did you invoke AC21 with H1 transfer? I mean did you transfer your H1B to a different company which is not your GC sponsoring company? If so give me more details..
Question:
Am working for a GC sponsoring company and applied for 485 and received EAD, AP etc... Am not willing to move to EAD..can i change the company with a H1B transfer and invoking AC21? Pls give details..
Thanks
Ramesh,
I have responded the same to "kishdam "
I was in the same situation as yours.
Just file H1B with different company but with same job title and jobe code.
Then ask your attorney to send AC21, it is just a letter with new offer letter.
Good luck
Did you invoke AC21 with H1 transfer? I mean did you transfer your H1B to a different company which is not your GC sponsoring company? If so give me more details..
Question:
Am working for a GC sponsoring company and applied for 485 and received EAD, AP etc... Am not willing to move to EAD..can i change the company with a H1B transfer and invoking AC21? Pls give details..
Thanks
Ramesh,
I have responded the same to "kishdam "
I was in the same situation as yours.
Just file H1B with different company but with same job title and jobe code.
Then ask your attorney to send AC21, it is just a letter with new offer letter.
Good luck
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
2011 Tag your Friends on Disney
vardinishankar
10-28 04:33 AM
Another news making. Advice to all of Youngster Indians and Indians here by the India's outsourcing chop shop IT messihah Infosys Chief.
Don't look at IT industry as means to settle abroad: Narayana Murthy - The Economic Times (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/ites/Dont-look-at-IT-industry-as-means-to-settle-abroad-Murthy/articleshow/6815589.cms)
"This time you have a great opportunity to consolidate and by working in India, by becoming a good quality professional you will sustain the advantage we have created and will make growth in India a permanent rather than a temporary feature."
Guys, wakeup! He isn't telling anything wrong - just a different opinion, very valid for a great percentage of Indians - not everyone can/is going to land in US and wait eternally for GC? and nothing wrong in what he is saying - to go for a better long term India than a spurt of growth. Why ridicule the other guy for giving a genuine advice to youngsters - how many of us haven't almost given up on our careers just for the same of EB GC? Are we just afraid of losing out to our brothers in India in future, rather than them joining our batch in the eternal wait? If we want to make US our home, at least we should start respecting another person's right to his opinion, even if we disagree. Why would it be called a gimmick?! There is no other way - if its not India, it will be China, Philippines etc. Look at the way the general product industry went? The same will happen unless there are restrictive trade policy - which, not only would be against the "US" principals of free trade, but would also automatically be harmful for the US economy.
I personally don't see anything wrong in the article. He puts forth the right things that can be done to improve the life of Indian generations - now and for future. And if that happens, there would be a benefit for us in particular, and US economy and US jobs in general.
Don't look at IT industry as means to settle abroad: Narayana Murthy - The Economic Times (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/ites/Dont-look-at-IT-industry-as-means-to-settle-abroad-Murthy/articleshow/6815589.cms)
"This time you have a great opportunity to consolidate and by working in India, by becoming a good quality professional you will sustain the advantage we have created and will make growth in India a permanent rather than a temporary feature."
Guys, wakeup! He isn't telling anything wrong - just a different opinion, very valid for a great percentage of Indians - not everyone can/is going to land in US and wait eternally for GC? and nothing wrong in what he is saying - to go for a better long term India than a spurt of growth. Why ridicule the other guy for giving a genuine advice to youngsters - how many of us haven't almost given up on our careers just for the same of EB GC? Are we just afraid of losing out to our brothers in India in future, rather than them joining our batch in the eternal wait? If we want to make US our home, at least we should start respecting another person's right to his opinion, even if we disagree. Why would it be called a gimmick?! There is no other way - if its not India, it will be China, Philippines etc. Look at the way the general product industry went? The same will happen unless there are restrictive trade policy - which, not only would be against the "US" principals of free trade, but would also automatically be harmful for the US economy.
I personally don't see anything wrong in the article. He puts forth the right things that can be done to improve the life of Indian generations - now and for future. And if that happens, there would be a benefit for us in particular, and US economy and US jobs in general.
more...
24fps
02-27 04:59 PM
It's really strange the surge in non-legal issues threads..
If the poster had any genuine hope of getting help she wouldn�t be posting it on a forum for foreigners who obviously have no lobbying power and if we did we will be using it for ourselves first.
Somebody is trying to establish an association between us and drug and other law breaking criminals..
Time to put these red dots to a good use.. Get�er boys :)
Lets get over with all the "conspiracy theories", times are tough and people are getting knocked down faster than 10 pins in a bowling ally, IV's brand value is way more than what it use to be, hence traffic/people come in here for redress-els, in no way does the name Immigration Voice directly tell anyone its for Legal based Green Card issues, so people come in here for all and any immigration based issues.
If the poster had any genuine hope of getting help she wouldn�t be posting it on a forum for foreigners who obviously have no lobbying power and if we did we will be using it for ourselves first.
Somebody is trying to establish an association between us and drug and other law breaking criminals..
Time to put these red dots to a good use.. Get�er boys :)
Lets get over with all the "conspiracy theories", times are tough and people are getting knocked down faster than 10 pins in a bowling ally, IV's brand value is way more than what it use to be, hence traffic/people come in here for redress-els, in no way does the name Immigration Voice directly tell anyone its for Legal based Green Card issues, so people come in here for all and any immigration based issues.
lskreddy
06-13 12:26 PM
Every one has his own vantage point. Mark K has his own and the others who represented for legal immigration has their own. Mark K's argument to only allow the so called 'Einstein caliber" people speaks volumes about how he has simplified the problem.
Sitting on a high position in an immigration research facility does not necessarily mean that he is abreast with the technological needs. From his arguments, he certainly has proven that he has very little or no idea of where the resource needs are.
Everyone of us are here because there is room for us to work. If his research shows that there are more US people who will fill our shoes, then I am sure the market needs would govern the numbers. For all the anti's who cite articles about how low paid we are, how less qualified we are, they should research to complete the full circle. They leave it half-hearted, its not as if they don't know, they just want to stick on to the rhetoric.
Even to entertain Mark K's idea about bringing the so called cream of the crop, there has to be proven ways to identify who these people are. One way of doing it is to allow people to come here on F1, prove their worth in research, work for a few years. One does not become an EB1 qualified before he steps into the country, he probably climbs his way up to that qualification. Some may succeed, some may fail. To selectively choose the best and expel the rest would mean disaster for the country. These are human lives we are talking about, not parts in a process control factory where you can chuck as and when you need as it does not meet 'specifications'.
He has blinders on, and that will never change. You can't debate a person who has already decided on what the outcome. The most amusing part personally for me is that most of the anti-legal folks accuse the entire industry of conspiring to screw their own. I can see how one or two companies to do that, but to underline that the entire system is geared towards raping their own is blasphemous to say the least.
Sitting on a high position in an immigration research facility does not necessarily mean that he is abreast with the technological needs. From his arguments, he certainly has proven that he has very little or no idea of where the resource needs are.
Everyone of us are here because there is room for us to work. If his research shows that there are more US people who will fill our shoes, then I am sure the market needs would govern the numbers. For all the anti's who cite articles about how low paid we are, how less qualified we are, they should research to complete the full circle. They leave it half-hearted, its not as if they don't know, they just want to stick on to the rhetoric.
Even to entertain Mark K's idea about bringing the so called cream of the crop, there has to be proven ways to identify who these people are. One way of doing it is to allow people to come here on F1, prove their worth in research, work for a few years. One does not become an EB1 qualified before he steps into the country, he probably climbs his way up to that qualification. Some may succeed, some may fail. To selectively choose the best and expel the rest would mean disaster for the country. These are human lives we are talking about, not parts in a process control factory where you can chuck as and when you need as it does not meet 'specifications'.
He has blinders on, and that will never change. You can't debate a person who has already decided on what the outcome. The most amusing part personally for me is that most of the anti-legal folks accuse the entire industry of conspiring to screw their own. I can see how one or two companies to do that, but to underline that the entire system is geared towards raping their own is blasphemous to say the least.
more...
rockstart
05-15 08:32 AM
Yes and any one who feels bad can take admission and complete MS. It takes 3-4 semesters any ways.
2010 Tag Your Friends as Disney
ramus
06-27 10:43 AM
I will say we should just ban this guy.. What he says does't make any sense..
rajakannan, can you please contribute to IV.. Let me know what is your thought on this.
rajakannan, can you please contribute to IV.. Let me know what is your thought on this.
more...
alisa
03-24 10:52 AM
Anyone from Wisconsin?
Please PM me. We have a state chapter, and we need people to cover different congressional districts of Wisconsin
Please PM me. We have a state chapter, and we need people to cover different congressional districts of Wisconsin
hair facebook tags disney.
Ram_C
11-19 02:05 PM
I was also asked to appear for FP in my attorney's location. Instead, I went to the nearest ASC with my spouse whose FP was in the correct location ahead of my date. I successfully got my FP done. There is a thread "FP in wrong city" where other people had similar issues.
From my experience, talking to lawyer, USCIS doesn't care as long as you get it done before the due date. Try the local ASC... its always the guard in front who may create an issue. Once you are in, fill in some forms, the ASC doesn't care where you were scheduled.
Imp: Try the local ASC before your scheduled date so that you have time for plan B.
Thanks, I'll try that :)
From my experience, talking to lawyer, USCIS doesn't care as long as you get it done before the due date. Try the local ASC... its always the guard in front who may create an issue. Once you are in, fill in some forms, the ASC doesn't care where you were scheduled.
Imp: Try the local ASC before your scheduled date so that you have time for plan B.
Thanks, I'll try that :)
more...
mmj
04-20 08:31 AM
Thanks Neelu! Now if only we can get another 50,000 people to do the same :)
Me too.
I added some facts about how much I paid in SSN, Medicare, Fed and State taxes (in the last 10 years that I have been here) as well as some detail about what I'm contributing (patent pending) to this country. Another thing I mentioned was about my volunteering during the 2008 campaign (implying that I would be voting for the president's party if I ever become a US citizen in 2050 :~).
Thank you, MMJ, for taking the initiative.
Me too.
I added some facts about how much I paid in SSN, Medicare, Fed and State taxes (in the last 10 years that I have been here) as well as some detail about what I'm contributing (patent pending) to this country. Another thing I mentioned was about my volunteering during the 2008 campaign (implying that I would be voting for the president's party if I ever become a US citizen in 2050 :~).
Thank you, MMJ, for taking the initiative.
hot Tag Your Friends With Disney
vishwak
11-12 09:36 AM
That means Eb-2 I screwed....for several months.
God bless all our Eb2-I guys.
God bless all our Eb2-I guys.
more...
house Tags: Disney, Disneyland
nag2007
10-11 04:43 PM
There used to be a time when the ability to apply for I485 even during retrogression. was of the highest priority for IV. Now majority of the IV members (hopefully) belong to post I485 filing group. Now the amount of green cards for employment category, exemptions from quota for family members, US degree holders etc, and country quota may be the higher priority issues if one goes by the numbers.
You mean to say that "Those who have EAD with PD 2006/2007" needs green Card and you dont bother about PD 2000-2005 from Backlog who never got a chance to apply i-485 ?
Moral: Allow the people to suffer who are suffering and let others make merry(PD 2006-2007).
You mean to say that "Those who have EAD with PD 2006/2007" needs green Card and you dont bother about PD 2000-2005 from Backlog who never got a chance to apply i-485 ?
Moral: Allow the people to suffer who are suffering and let others make merry(PD 2006-2007).
tattoo facebook tags disney.
makemygc
07-08 01:41 PM
Nice coverage by immigration-law on Gandhigiri:-
07/08/2007: Massive Flower Send-In Campaign by Indian Community in Spirit of Mahatma Gandhi's Nonviolent Protest Against the Injustice Involving Visa Bulletin Fiasco
The East Indian community has been engaging in an interesting campaign sending a massive bouque of flowers with a message of protest to the leaders of the USCIS and the State Deparment, including Mr. Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS and Dr. Rice, Secretary of Department of State relating to the ongoing Visa Bulletin commotion. Indians are the primary sources of foreign high-tech workers and the country's much needed sources of brains for the businesses and the employers, and it turns out that the current Visa Bulletin fiasco has hit most them and their U.S. employers. Considering the fact that the Congress sidelined foreign legal workers and brains as a backburner issue in the ill-fated CIR, the current Visa Bulletin fiasco appears to add the heat of outrage to the Congress' unfair and unjust treatment of the legal immigrants by leaders in this country. OUCH!
07/08/2007: Massive Flower Send-In Campaign by Indian Community in Spirit of Mahatma Gandhi's Nonviolent Protest Against the Injustice Involving Visa Bulletin Fiasco
The East Indian community has been engaging in an interesting campaign sending a massive bouque of flowers with a message of protest to the leaders of the USCIS and the State Deparment, including Mr. Emilio Gonzalez, Director of USCIS and Dr. Rice, Secretary of Department of State relating to the ongoing Visa Bulletin commotion. Indians are the primary sources of foreign high-tech workers and the country's much needed sources of brains for the businesses and the employers, and it turns out that the current Visa Bulletin fiasco has hit most them and their U.S. employers. Considering the fact that the Congress sidelined foreign legal workers and brains as a backburner issue in the ill-fated CIR, the current Visa Bulletin fiasco appears to add the heat of outrage to the Congress' unfair and unjust treatment of the legal immigrants by leaders in this country. OUCH!
more...
pictures Tags: Disney, Superga
punjabi
09-19 08:06 PM
Anna,
This is childish. Sorry!
LOL!
Funny that I am not upset at your questions, but are you really serious??
What were you thinking all this time when the rally was going on? Did you really think the lawmakers would sit together over a dinner yesterday and hand over a favorable decision in the breakfast next morning?
Just wait! If we don't get something favorable, we will do MORE and BIGGER.
...and next time, we'll also pick you up to the rally to carry our autograph books...hehe..just kidding.
This is childish. Sorry!
LOL!
Funny that I am not upset at your questions, but are you really serious??
What were you thinking all this time when the rally was going on? Did you really think the lawmakers would sit together over a dinner yesterday and hand over a favorable decision in the breakfast next morning?
Just wait! If we don't get something favorable, we will do MORE and BIGGER.
...and next time, we'll also pick you up to the rally to carry our autograph books...hehe..just kidding.
dresses hair Upload This Facebook Tag Image facebook tags disney. Tags disney
kart2007
05-15 11:19 AM
Its a good thing, hope this will lessen the abuse of the visas by these Indian companies. As I mentioned in another thread, I have seen that H1 and L1s who come from India dont get a very good salary. Not good.
more...
makeup Tag Your Friends, Facebook Tag
perm2gc
11-17 12:38 PM
Discover does not issue a credit card if you are not a PR or citizen..even though you have good credit history..
girlfriend Facebook Disney Tags
jethro11
04-20 02:55 PM
bsnf and solaris27,
Thanks for your prompt replies. It is good to get reliable first hand information from travelers instead of relying upon reports from consulates, airline websites etc which all contradict one another. Just out of curiosity, did anybody in India or Frankfurt ask to see the Advance Parole papers before allowing you to board the flight?
Thanks for your prompt replies. It is good to get reliable first hand information from travelers instead of relying upon reports from consulates, airline websites etc which all contradict one another. Just out of curiosity, did anybody in India or Frankfurt ask to see the Advance Parole papers before allowing you to board the flight?
hairstyles hair facebook tags pictures
natrajs
08-31 06:12 PM
I have discussed it with my Chinese co-worker and he asked if this IV's is only for Indian's, I said "NO"
IV is for all the community
And gave him tour of IV's website Guess what, he is joining me now, all we have to do is to reach out to your friends spread the word about the rally
I also had a business trip conflict with the DC Rally; however I decided to talk to my boss and explained him about the Rally. He immediately agreed upon and allowed me to postpone my business trip.
If there is a �WILL� then you will find your way to DC
Go to DC To Get GC
IV is for all the community
And gave him tour of IV's website Guess what, he is joining me now, all we have to do is to reach out to your friends spread the word about the rally
I also had a business trip conflict with the DC Rally; however I decided to talk to my boss and explained him about the Rally. He immediately agreed upon and allowed me to postpone my business trip.
If there is a �WILL� then you will find your way to DC
Go to DC To Get GC
ita
11-06 02:49 PM
When you set up the infopass appntmt do you have to select the option
'EAD Inquiry Appmt' even when you are going with AP question.
Thank you.
'EAD Inquiry Appmt' even when you are going with AP question.
Thank you.
Soul
02-16 07:45 PM
Oh and when do you think it will be added to the past winners?
- Soul :goatee:
- Soul :goatee:
0 comments:
Post a Comment