laborchic
09-19 01:12 PM
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
RNGC: I just realised this morning that it was you with whom I was discussing all these issues last morning. Great going Sir.... I totally agree with you..
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
RNGC: I just realised this morning that it was you with whom I was discussing all these issues last morning. Great going Sir.... I totally agree with you..
wallpaper wallpaper bleach 8
_1024x768_63645.jpg "wallpapers bleach.")
logiclife
01-30 03:14 PM
1. Pay H1 costs (including petition and attorney fees)
2. Pay payroll taxes for my wife from Oct 1, 2007 if she manages to get an H1 but is not able to begin working on a project.
3. Refund of H1 costs after completing 6 months on project.
1. Asking employees to pay for H1 costs is not legal. It would be in violations of CFR.
2. That is also illegal. Employer cannot ask employee to pay for payroll taxes that the employer owes IRS, and too, when you are not even working. It would be an attempt to cover-up the violation of immigration law: Not paying on bench. The only alternative to all that is cancelling her H1 if she cannot find project and if they cannot pay her, but that again would cost money. Damn its too expensive to operate a business legally obeying every friggin law.
3. If you are paying for H1 (which is really not legal) what would you refund them?
So whether you want to tell them "Go to hell" depends on how much you want the job and how much bending/breaking of law can you do.
2. Pay payroll taxes for my wife from Oct 1, 2007 if she manages to get an H1 but is not able to begin working on a project.
3. Refund of H1 costs after completing 6 months on project.
1. Asking employees to pay for H1 costs is not legal. It would be in violations of CFR.
2. That is also illegal. Employer cannot ask employee to pay for payroll taxes that the employer owes IRS, and too, when you are not even working. It would be an attempt to cover-up the violation of immigration law: Not paying on bench. The only alternative to all that is cancelling her H1 if she cannot find project and if they cannot pay her, but that again would cost money. Damn its too expensive to operate a business legally obeying every friggin law.
3. If you are paying for H1 (which is really not legal) what would you refund them?
So whether you want to tell them "Go to hell" depends on how much you want the job and how much bending/breaking of law can you do.
ajju
03-18 10:26 PM
I think Nixtor should explain why he even bothered to call Mr. Foggs' number. There are many many people in this forum with incorrect phone numbers. Why nixtor is not banning all of them. There is even a member with handle 'taliban'.
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
RED DOTS: Looks like lots of people are in excuse of getting offended.. and spreading RED DOTS... Good Luck...
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
RED DOTS: Looks like lots of people are in excuse of getting offended.. and spreading RED DOTS... Good Luck...
2011 wallpapers bleach.
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
more...
eager_immi
01-18 12:13 PM
Please email a core member directly and get some chinese people to create a updated chinese version of the same website.
Thanks IV core group. Signed up for $20/month. Please continue your efforts.
I am from Chinese community and registered IV just a couple of week ago. There was no email message to me regarding this movement, and some other registerd users may encounter the same situation. You may need to resend them. Only when I opened IV website yesterday did I know this recurring program and current situation. I am assuming IV is the only group who are pushing to get the I-485 relief for high skilled workers with advanced degree. There are MANY MANY Chinese in the same situation but I guess there might not have so many Chinese in IV. IV core group may think of some better way to reach more Chinese or other people. Basically, we are on the same boat for the same direction. Better to concentrate all resources to reach one goal. I would suggest IV to setup a seperate Chinese (and Hispanic) contribution page to diverse the culture background of IV members.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2PX91085T34540611)
In reference to:S-19881018DS353430X
Thanks IV core group. Signed up for $20/month. Please continue your efforts.
I am from Chinese community and registered IV just a couple of week ago. There was no email message to me regarding this movement, and some other registerd users may encounter the same situation. You may need to resend them. Only when I opened IV website yesterday did I know this recurring program and current situation. I am assuming IV is the only group who are pushing to get the I-485 relief for high skilled workers with advanced degree. There are MANY MANY Chinese in the same situation but I guess there might not have so many Chinese in IV. IV core group may think of some better way to reach more Chinese or other people. Basically, we are on the same boat for the same direction. Better to concentrate all resources to reach one goal. I would suggest IV to setup a seperate Chinese (and Hispanic) contribution page to diverse the culture background of IV members.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2PX91085T34540611)
In reference to:S-19881018DS353430X
srkamath
07-12 08:18 PM
i believe the argument that this sudden jump was made to help eb2 china is pure hogwash.........
Good point, i agree............
Good point, i agree............
more...
GC_sufferer
07-04 10:58 PM
nixstor,
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Ramba, is that mean they might use less than 140K visas in 2007, because the name check may not be cleared for all 20K applictions in 3 months.
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Ramba, is that mean they might use less than 140K visas in 2007, because the name check may not be cleared for all 20K applictions in 3 months.
2010 Untitled Wallpaper - leach
nonimmi
02-21 01:52 PM
yes, you can unless your eb3 I140 has been revoked for fraud or misrepresentation of facts.
Good info.
My attorney said EB3->EB2 is not possible now. Can you please post some link for this and pm me some attorney you may know have done this before.
Good info.
My attorney said EB3->EB2 is not possible now. Can you please post some link for this and pm me some attorney you may know have done this before.
more...
kartikiran
04-09 03:44 PM
Hey Pappu,
What do you conclude of this? Their has to be some rational reason behind them not moving EB2I, it is hard to grasp that they are still working on 2004-2005 PD's. Is their something we can do bring them in more transparency.
I believe earlier they screwed up and now they are on apposite extreme end, scrutinizing every element.
On the same note, Kumarc123, it is hard to see them working with 2001 EB3-India category for more than 5 years. 245(i) or not...still 5 years...how about that.
Anyway, my point is let us leave predictions. USCIS gave their predictions way back in their Jan 2010 bulletin. Maybe we all should stick with what dates they gave us than we trying to predict.
Now another venting, more calculations, more uproar everything will continue for 1 more week from our members...:rolleyes:
What do you conclude of this? Their has to be some rational reason behind them not moving EB2I, it is hard to grasp that they are still working on 2004-2005 PD's. Is their something we can do bring them in more transparency.
I believe earlier they screwed up and now they are on apposite extreme end, scrutinizing every element.
On the same note, Kumarc123, it is hard to see them working with 2001 EB3-India category for more than 5 years. 245(i) or not...still 5 years...how about that.
Anyway, my point is let us leave predictions. USCIS gave their predictions way back in their Jan 2010 bulletin. Maybe we all should stick with what dates they gave us than we trying to predict.
Now another venting, more calculations, more uproar everything will continue for 1 more week from our members...:rolleyes:
hair Free Bleach Wallpapers
pmb76
03-18 06:47 PM
Now for the rest of this year the EB2 queues for China and India are merged. Visa allocations will be solely based on Priority date. So for example if India has many priority dates that are before China's, India may end up getting more visa allocations. The same holds true if China has earlier priority dates than India does. That's how I inderstood it and I thought I would try to explain it to some who did not. Otherwise sorry for stating the obvious.
more...
InTheMoment
05-26 07:13 PM
Actually entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada and the coast.
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
hot 23-leach-wallpaper
vshar
03-12 09:59 AM
Priyah Dosto,
Visa Bulletin Gaand Mein Ley Lao Ab..... Kuch nahi hone waala.
believe me I laughed for 2-3 minutes after reading your comment. Keep it up.:D
Visa Bulletin Gaand Mein Ley Lao Ab..... Kuch nahi hone waala.
believe me I laughed for 2-3 minutes after reading your comment. Keep it up.:D
more...
house Bleach 800x600 Wallpaper 006
wellwishergc
08-02 02:42 PM
:D :D
Why don't we nominate your name for the post of 'Director' of USCIS?:D
The visa numbers for Indians in EB2 category is 'unavailable' currently. Every month the USCIS estimates (rather guesses :rolleyes:) the demand for visas in each category adds to it their own forecasted work pace and based on some super secretive formula comes up with a cut-off date....as we all have seen this formula is by no means accurate (knowing how it went from being current for all employment based category in sept 05 to unavailable for eb3 indians at begining of they year to the dates moving 5 years for chinese eb2 in a few months..etc ..etc)
Wouldn't it be nice if USCIS gives themselves a break from the stressful guess work ;) every october and instead of giving cut-off dates, just make eb1-3 'available' for all across the board...then all of us waiting with approved i140's can file 485...get EADs..our wives can work...we can change jobs per will and live happily ever after...May be they can use the data gathered from all the petition received to forecast a better cut-off date for the remaining 11 months...And if they repeat this every year....the most one would have to wait with an approved I40 to file I485 is one year....I am sure lot of guys with pending applications at BECs would also jump on this idea and file new perm petitions...effectively reducing the backlog..if not eliminating it.
Mean while I am proposing all this in humour and not advocating IV to adopt it in their agenda :) ...so don't start pounding on me just yet...
Why don't we nominate your name for the post of 'Director' of USCIS?:D
The visa numbers for Indians in EB2 category is 'unavailable' currently. Every month the USCIS estimates (rather guesses :rolleyes:) the demand for visas in each category adds to it their own forecasted work pace and based on some super secretive formula comes up with a cut-off date....as we all have seen this formula is by no means accurate (knowing how it went from being current for all employment based category in sept 05 to unavailable for eb3 indians at begining of they year to the dates moving 5 years for chinese eb2 in a few months..etc ..etc)
Wouldn't it be nice if USCIS gives themselves a break from the stressful guess work ;) every october and instead of giving cut-off dates, just make eb1-3 'available' for all across the board...then all of us waiting with approved i140's can file 485...get EADs..our wives can work...we can change jobs per will and live happily ever after...May be they can use the data gathered from all the petition received to forecast a better cut-off date for the remaining 11 months...And if they repeat this every year....the most one would have to wait with an approved I40 to file I485 is one year....I am sure lot of guys with pending applications at BECs would also jump on this idea and file new perm petitions...effectively reducing the backlog..if not eliminating it.
Mean while I am proposing all this in humour and not advocating IV to adopt it in their agenda :) ...so don't start pounding on me just yet...
tattoo Bleach PSP Wallpaper
coolmanasip
03-10 01:05 PM
Change of employer does not imply your use of the AC21.....the rule does not require you to notify USCIS....so in many cases, if you do not notify them, it is likely that they will never know and approve your GC. But, if they issue an RFE and if your sponsoring employer gives you the offer for future job you should be okay..........you may only have to work for them for at least a little bit after you got your GC....
more...
pictures Bleach 800x600 Wallpaper 028
gc4me
03-19 09:20 AM
This makes no sense to me. 300K LC was pending @backlog centers and all of them have PD 2005 and earlier. Non RIR was processed at the end and 90% of them are EB3. Considering 50% ROW, at least 100K EB3 ROW LCs out there with PD 2005 and earlier. And then comes the PERM LCs. At least another 50K EB3 ROW PERM LCs with PD 2005 out there. With limited EB3 ROW available visa each year (140K total, after retrogressed countries and spill over etc, not more than 40K each year), I see no reason for USCIS to move ROW to current.
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
dresses BLeach Captains Wallpaper
rayoflight
06-15 10:02 AM
I meant can we get a list of all the states the emails have been sent by all the members.
The mail will only be sent to your US Senators from your state.
The mail will only be sent to your US Senators from your state.
more...
makeup Kurosaki Ichigo, Bleach
sanju
06-13 12:03 PM
I think Administrator should put a stop this IDIOT. Every now and then some arrogant idiot shows up from somewhere, and tries to hijack the forum for that day. This guy polky doesn't care if people on this forum are all LEGALS. This maniac is brainwashed and should be banned immediately. Otherwise, he will waste rest of his day preaching about "ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION" even though no one on this forum is ILLEGAL.
hey polky,
will you leave yourself or do you want Administrators to ban you from this forum??? I would suggest that you take easy on yourself.
......WE ARE OPPOSED AROUND THE WORLD BY A MONOLITHIC AND RUTHLESS CONSPIRACY THAT RELIES PRIMARILY ON COVERT MEANS FOR EXPANDING ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE...ON INFILTRATION INSTEAD OF INVASION...ON SUBVERSION INSTEAD OF ELECTIONS...ON INTIMIDATION INSTEAD OF FREE CHOICE...IT IS A SYSTEM WHICH HAS CONSCRIPTED VAST HUMAN AND MATERIAL RESOURCES INTO THEE BUILDING OF A TIGHTLY KNIT HIGHLY EFFICIENT MACHINE THAT COMBINES MILITARY DIPLOMATIC INTELLIGENT ECONOMIC, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL OPERATIONS. ITS PREPARATIONS ARE CONCEALED NOT PUBLISHED. ITS MISTAKES ARE BURIED, NOT HEADLINED. ITS DISSENTERS ARE SILENCED. NOT PRAISED. NO EXPENDITURE IS QUESTIONED. NO SECRET IS REVEALED. THAT IS WHY THE ATHENIAN LAWMAKER SOLO DECREED IT A CRIME FOR ANY CITIZEN TO SHRINK FROM CONTROVERSY. I AM ASKING YOUR HELP IN THE TREMENDOUS TASK OF INFORMING AND ALERTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CONFIDENT THAT WITH YOUR HELP MAN WILL BE WHAT HE WAS BORN TO BE...FREE AND INDEPENDENT" John F Kennedy
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8450558837192717138&hl=en
hey polky,
will you leave yourself or do you want Administrators to ban you from this forum??? I would suggest that you take easy on yourself.
......WE ARE OPPOSED AROUND THE WORLD BY A MONOLITHIC AND RUTHLESS CONSPIRACY THAT RELIES PRIMARILY ON COVERT MEANS FOR EXPANDING ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE...ON INFILTRATION INSTEAD OF INVASION...ON SUBVERSION INSTEAD OF ELECTIONS...ON INTIMIDATION INSTEAD OF FREE CHOICE...IT IS A SYSTEM WHICH HAS CONSCRIPTED VAST HUMAN AND MATERIAL RESOURCES INTO THEE BUILDING OF A TIGHTLY KNIT HIGHLY EFFICIENT MACHINE THAT COMBINES MILITARY DIPLOMATIC INTELLIGENT ECONOMIC, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL OPERATIONS. ITS PREPARATIONS ARE CONCEALED NOT PUBLISHED. ITS MISTAKES ARE BURIED, NOT HEADLINED. ITS DISSENTERS ARE SILENCED. NOT PRAISED. NO EXPENDITURE IS QUESTIONED. NO SECRET IS REVEALED. THAT IS WHY THE ATHENIAN LAWMAKER SOLO DECREED IT A CRIME FOR ANY CITIZEN TO SHRINK FROM CONTROVERSY. I AM ASKING YOUR HELP IN THE TREMENDOUS TASK OF INFORMING AND ALERTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CONFIDENT THAT WITH YOUR HELP MAN WILL BE WHAT HE WAS BORN TO BE...FREE AND INDEPENDENT" John F Kennedy
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8450558837192717138&hl=en
girlfriend Bleach Wallpaper for Computer
krishna.ahd
01-30 01:21 PM
Unpaid bench means you are "Out of Status". Not illegal.
When you are present in the country after your I-94 has expired, then you are illegal.
There are 3 things guaranteed in life: Death, Taxes and unpaid bench when working for a desi company.
Whether you will go on bench or not depends completely on you, your skills, your willingness to find jobs across the country (not just where you live), your willingness to travel and the biggest factor : Market conditions. Right now, the market is good, and if you live in a big city with good opportunities, and if your skills are good, then you may be able to find a project wherever you live.
If the whole thing doesnt work out, then you can always go back on H4.( If you stop working, you have to file for H1 to H4 transfer also, its not automatic, many people have learned this the hard way)
About stamping, well, that's a question I really dont know the answer to. I have not heard of many examples or questions about what happens when a person on valid H4 applies for a H1 stamp. Someone here, if he/she has experience may be able to answer.
Very well said locilife (about the things guaranteed in life)
Double (triple??) check about the desi consulting compnay and their ability to get you the project.
Good Luck.
Krishna
"When the going gets tough, the tough gets going"
When you are present in the country after your I-94 has expired, then you are illegal.
There are 3 things guaranteed in life: Death, Taxes and unpaid bench when working for a desi company.
Whether you will go on bench or not depends completely on you, your skills, your willingness to find jobs across the country (not just where you live), your willingness to travel and the biggest factor : Market conditions. Right now, the market is good, and if you live in a big city with good opportunities, and if your skills are good, then you may be able to find a project wherever you live.
If the whole thing doesnt work out, then you can always go back on H4.( If you stop working, you have to file for H1 to H4 transfer also, its not automatic, many people have learned this the hard way)
About stamping, well, that's a question I really dont know the answer to. I have not heard of many examples or questions about what happens when a person on valid H4 applies for a H1 stamp. Someone here, if he/she has experience may be able to answer.
Very well said locilife (about the things guaranteed in life)
Double (triple??) check about the desi consulting compnay and their ability to get you the project.
Good Luck.
Krishna
"When the going gets tough, the tough gets going"
hairstyles house Bleach 800x600 Wallpaper
gckp
08-14 10:04 PM
I guess nobody is waiting for it now....
brb2
12-28 03:43 PM
http://www.delta.com/planning_reservations/plan_flight/international_travel_information/visa_passport_information/index.jsp
Visa requirements are based on country of passport holder in most cases.
Visa requirements are based on country of passport holder in most cases.
empee99
09-23 03:27 PM
Hi,
I have a EAD L2 Based valid till 2009. I havent worked in US till now after getting EAD. Now I have to travel to India for a Month. What will be the procedure to retain my EAD after I come back to US after 30 day.
Please Guide Me
Mahesh
I have a EAD L2 Based valid till 2009. I havent worked in US till now after getting EAD. Now I have to travel to India for a Month. What will be the procedure to retain my EAD after I come back to US after 30 day.
Please Guide Me
Mahesh
0 comments:
Post a Comment