eb3_nepa
11-21 04:27 PM
I dont mean to sound uncaring here (our prayers and support is with Mehul too), but almost no one has answered his original question.
wallpaper Selena Gomez Hairstyles
amsgc
03-09 11:53 PM
Sayantan,
It ironic that you, of all people who got a GC through EB1, are questioning the importance of intellect over physical labor. It is no secret that human civilization has progressed and prospered only because some people have thought hard and attempted to invent new things. And the current EB preference system clearly reflects that importance of intellectual advancement to any society.
The cabbie or the waiter, with due respect their profession, is a mere cog in the wheel; a facilitator. But you my friend, the high skilled immigrant, have the ability to innovate and help your society progress. You have the education and understanding that can be passed on to future generations.
It is not to say that the waiter cannot invent, but the fact of the matter is five years on and he is still waiting tables.
I wonder if you were waiting in limbo for five-six-seven years, would you have still made this callous remark?
what makes you think you are more important to american society than the waiter or the cabbies? we all come to US under full disclosure but a hope that by the time our turn at GC (and Citizenship for those who care) comes - the queues would have shortened or the rules would have changed in our favor and we wont have to wait for so long......
It ironic that you, of all people who got a GC through EB1, are questioning the importance of intellect over physical labor. It is no secret that human civilization has progressed and prospered only because some people have thought hard and attempted to invent new things. And the current EB preference system clearly reflects that importance of intellectual advancement to any society.
The cabbie or the waiter, with due respect their profession, is a mere cog in the wheel; a facilitator. But you my friend, the high skilled immigrant, have the ability to innovate and help your society progress. You have the education and understanding that can be passed on to future generations.
It is not to say that the waiter cannot invent, but the fact of the matter is five years on and he is still waiting tables.
I wonder if you were waiting in limbo for five-six-seven years, would you have still made this callous remark?
what makes you think you are more important to american society than the waiter or the cabbies? we all come to US under full disclosure but a hope that by the time our turn at GC (and Citizenship for those who care) comes - the queues would have shortened or the rules would have changed in our favor and we wont have to wait for so long......
vinabath
04-24 01:50 PM
Quite right, I know you meant that managing relationships has to be from both the sides, but with most desi employers it has become a one way street. Even with all the effort to manage relationship, the employee still gets scr*** and this needs to stop.
Do you have any suggestions?
Do you have any suggestions?
2011 selena gomez hairstyles 2011
new2gc
09-03 11:48 AM
Yes, u r lawyer is right. It is fine to skip.
Thanks Chantu for the quick response.
Thanks Chantu for the quick response.
more...
bombay
02-05 01:05 PM
Last week i received a letter from my canadian lawyer to send my passport to buffalo for stamping. The last date mentioned is March,08
Regarding me, I got through canadian immigration with mine and my wife's points. My wife is a Permanent resident for last 3 years 10 months in US. I am in EB3 category. PD Oct 06.
When checked the rules for maintaining PR in US for my wife, She cannot apply for PR in any other country till the time she is a PR in this country. As per the lawyers she will have a difficulty in applying for citizenship.
Now, I cannot myself apply for canadian immigration. because its a joint filing. What should i do?
Regarding me, I got through canadian immigration with mine and my wife's points. My wife is a Permanent resident for last 3 years 10 months in US. I am in EB3 category. PD Oct 06.
When checked the rules for maintaining PR in US for my wife, She cannot apply for PR in any other country till the time she is a PR in this country. As per the lawyers she will have a difficulty in applying for citizenship.
Now, I cannot myself apply for canadian immigration. because its a joint filing. What should i do?
Desertfox
05-23 04:34 PM
Sent email to 2+10 senators.
more...
chanduy9
07-05 01:59 PM
If this guy from USCIS (Emilio T. Gonzalez) is an anti immigrant then he might think this is an appreciation from anti immigrants. dont you want to convey to him that these flowers are actually from people who got screwed by him and uscis
Pls my post very carefully...it is
Select Occasion: "Sympathy".....and you can write some msg in the card too...it explains from where it is coming and what it means...
guys think +ve.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Pls my post very carefully...it is
Select Occasion: "Sympathy".....and you can write some msg in the card too...it explains from where it is coming and what it means...
guys think +ve.
Thanks,
Chandra.
2010 Selena Gomez Hairstyles
kondur_007
07-28 02:08 PM
As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I am now posting information that explains why this "horizontal" spill occurred and no amount of campaign will reverse it (other than change in law).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(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 (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(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 (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
more...
DallasBlue
08-25 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
hair 2010 Selena Gomez Dress 2011.
jindhal
09-27 04:39 PM
Sorry for my French guys...I generally dont like to use bad words, but this Charles Oppenheim boils my blood...
Look at all his previous statements...I dont know under what kind of influence he makes his statements...
He has BSed us in the past (look at his prior statement that he made in VEGAS) ....
Now he is BSing us again....
And we take his words seriously and start another set of arguments....
God bless every one; I need to calm down now. If possible please ignore this Oppehemi guy; he is just another joker.
CO's words have been mostly pessimistic..and upsetting so far...
Look at all his previous statements...I dont know under what kind of influence he makes his statements...
He has BSed us in the past (look at his prior statement that he made in VEGAS) ....
Now he is BSing us again....
And we take his words seriously and start another set of arguments....
God bless every one; I need to calm down now. If possible please ignore this Oppehemi guy; he is just another joker.
CO's words have been mostly pessimistic..and upsetting so far...
more...
kannan
02-03 07:49 PM
Count me too. I am from NSC to CSC, my case is still in CA only.I don't know what is happening. I have opned 2 SR's also. I am a july 2 nd filer.
hot selena gomez hairstyles 2011.
gc_aug_2010
08-24 05:48 PM
Hi guys,
Did anyone here get this RFE (quoted below)? I have been working for the sponsoring company for the past 5+ years at various client locations. The current location is a different state from the employer state. I always had all LCA's etc..So any tips on how to respond is highly appreciated.
Is just an EVL stating "same terms as in I-140 apply and still continue to offer" be good enough? Or do u guys suggest sending current LCA and pay stubs? I really dont want to send too much or too less..
I know people have different things to say and my lawyer will have his own opinion, but i wanted to see if anyone got this and how their lawyers responded and what response got their approval. Thanks in advance
"The documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of Service records indicates that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying Form I-140 immigrant visa petitioner and/or the job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
Therefore, submit a currently dated letter from your original Form I-140 employer which addresses this discrepancy. The letter should also indicate whether the terms and conditions of your employment-based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist."
Did anyone here get this RFE (quoted below)? I have been working for the sponsoring company for the past 5+ years at various client locations. The current location is a different state from the employer state. I always had all LCA's etc..So any tips on how to respond is highly appreciated.
Is just an EVL stating "same terms as in I-140 apply and still continue to offer" be good enough? Or do u guys suggest sending current LCA and pay stubs? I really dont want to send too much or too less..
I know people have different things to say and my lawyer will have his own opinion, but i wanted to see if anyone got this and how their lawyers responded and what response got their approval. Thanks in advance
"The documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of Service records indicates that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying Form I-140 immigrant visa petitioner and/or the job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
Therefore, submit a currently dated letter from your original Form I-140 employer which addresses this discrepancy. The letter should also indicate whether the terms and conditions of your employment-based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist."
more...
house Selena Gomez Long hair styles
Jaime
06-27 02:22 AM
Jamie:
I had decided not to post anyhting about this illegal immigrant/racism thing. But cant help making one comment. You called others racist. But I wonder if you are doing the same by trying to show using numbers etc. how Mexicans are better than Indians. Would that not be racism? Its strange how we are blind to our own biases.
Moderator, sorry I broke my promise. But this is the last I will say on this.
Anyway, moving forward...It will be nice to make a list of desirable points in a bill that is independent of any cause for illegal immigrants. I will start with two points. You can add more if you like. If there is enough momentum and support for these points, then in a truly democratic environment, we may want to modify the core IV goals to reflect that (Ideally I would prefer that there be a vote for what should be the core goals...after all most people here have contributed something towards the cause...and only those who have contributed should be allowed to vote...no free lunch).
1. Allow people to file for 485 and get EAD even if visa numbers are not available
2. Allow EAD to be FULLY portable without restrictons (i.e., irrespective of job description or job title or job location or salary).
The above two dont ask for sweeping changes in immigration laws such as increase visa numbers etc. etc. and are easy for the average American person to understand. And so can hopefuly be passed easily.
With the above two passed, I dont think many people will complain if it takes another 5 years to get their GC. Agree?
By the way, I have got my EAD card and my PD is also current. So the above two goals will be redundant for me. My story is that I am stuck in FBI namecheck. But the moderators have already indicated that it cant be one of the core goals. So I would not list that even if I would like that to be one of the core goals.
Santosh
Santosh:
Your post is good and you are focusing on our IV goals. Thank you for your comment. I will just say though that, as everybody knows I just reacted to others' attacks and never implied that anyone is better than anybody. People who have read my posts know my admiration for India and my belief that it will be Americans who will fight to get a job there one day. The numbers I shared are not "blinding me by my own bias" like you say at all. I fact, I used numbers in order not to be biased and rather to be fair. I just responded to some ignorant comments by some people. I have been to India and hope to go back, and have many great friends from there. What discouraged me is that some people will attack my country especially in a forum where that doesn't belong and where we are all trying to help each other. Any divisions among us are a victory for our detractors. I hope you understand. Let's focus on helping each other going forward, and let's all be friends! Thanks.
I had decided not to post anyhting about this illegal immigrant/racism thing. But cant help making one comment. You called others racist. But I wonder if you are doing the same by trying to show using numbers etc. how Mexicans are better than Indians. Would that not be racism? Its strange how we are blind to our own biases.
Moderator, sorry I broke my promise. But this is the last I will say on this.
Anyway, moving forward...It will be nice to make a list of desirable points in a bill that is independent of any cause for illegal immigrants. I will start with two points. You can add more if you like. If there is enough momentum and support for these points, then in a truly democratic environment, we may want to modify the core IV goals to reflect that (Ideally I would prefer that there be a vote for what should be the core goals...after all most people here have contributed something towards the cause...and only those who have contributed should be allowed to vote...no free lunch).
1. Allow people to file for 485 and get EAD even if visa numbers are not available
2. Allow EAD to be FULLY portable without restrictons (i.e., irrespective of job description or job title or job location or salary).
The above two dont ask for sweeping changes in immigration laws such as increase visa numbers etc. etc. and are easy for the average American person to understand. And so can hopefuly be passed easily.
With the above two passed, I dont think many people will complain if it takes another 5 years to get their GC. Agree?
By the way, I have got my EAD card and my PD is also current. So the above two goals will be redundant for me. My story is that I am stuck in FBI namecheck. But the moderators have already indicated that it cant be one of the core goals. So I would not list that even if I would like that to be one of the core goals.
Santosh
Santosh:
Your post is good and you are focusing on our IV goals. Thank you for your comment. I will just say though that, as everybody knows I just reacted to others' attacks and never implied that anyone is better than anybody. People who have read my posts know my admiration for India and my belief that it will be Americans who will fight to get a job there one day. The numbers I shared are not "blinding me by my own bias" like you say at all. I fact, I used numbers in order not to be biased and rather to be fair. I just responded to some ignorant comments by some people. I have been to India and hope to go back, and have many great friends from there. What discouraged me is that some people will attack my country especially in a forum where that doesn't belong and where we are all trying to help each other. Any divisions among us are a victory for our detractors. I hope you understand. Let's focus on helping each other going forward, and let's all be friends! Thanks.
tattoo house selena gomez haircut
delax
07-27 01:48 PM
Under the latest interpretation, EB3-I India will not get benefit until EB3-ROW gets benefit. So EB3-ROW benefiting will eventually benefit Eb3-I. That is the logical background.
The other two issues , which provided temporary relief, would have been redundant If we had recaptured the visas. Most of us, across the EB category/Country, would have been current or near current , rendering these issues redundant.
IV still went ahead with it (I am glad) knowing fully well recapture is difficult issue.
So no harm in EB3-I seeking temporary relief while still joining forces on the recapture issue.
Now you need to explain How EB3-I seeking favorable interpretation of spill over distribution undermines "Recapture effort". How are these related??
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
The other two issues , which provided temporary relief, would have been redundant If we had recaptured the visas. Most of us, across the EB category/Country, would have been current or near current , rendering these issues redundant.
IV still went ahead with it (I am glad) knowing fully well recapture is difficult issue.
So no harm in EB3-I seeking temporary relief while still joining forces on the recapture issue.
Now you need to explain How EB3-I seeking favorable interpretation of spill over distribution undermines "Recapture effort". How are these related??
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
more...
pictures Selena Gomez HairStyle 2011
abhijitp
12-18 05:33 PM
Some of my cousins and friends who are just leaving college (even the prestigious IIT's) are unwilling to come to the US.
If they do come here, they are reluctant to go after the "GC". They want to wait for a few years, and would embark upon the journey only if there are any "fixes" in the EB GC system.
If not, there are several developed countries that take point based immigrant visa applications and give you a decision in a year or two.
Most of these young friends have already made plans to apply to these countries. Those who qualify have already applied. In one case, a friend whose H1B did not go through last year, immigrated to Australia. (Both he and his wife also found a job in less than a month.)
2, I can appreciate your position. You have already spent several years here, and yet no decision in the sight. If possible, you could still create a fall-back option like Canada/UK/Australia. A PR in these countries might give us easier access come back to the USA later (although not permanently).
If they do come here, they are reluctant to go after the "GC". They want to wait for a few years, and would embark upon the journey only if there are any "fixes" in the EB GC system.
If not, there are several developed countries that take point based immigrant visa applications and give you a decision in a year or two.
Most of these young friends have already made plans to apply to these countries. Those who qualify have already applied. In one case, a friend whose H1B did not go through last year, immigrated to Australia. (Both he and his wife also found a job in less than a month.)
2, I can appreciate your position. You have already spent several years here, and yet no decision in the sight. If possible, you could still create a fall-back option like Canada/UK/Australia. A PR in these countries might give us easier access come back to the USA later (although not permanently).
dresses Selena Gomez Hair
abhisam
07-10 02:49 AM
nobody has talked about a rally in LA... maybe infront of the Federal building in Westwood... I can initiate if I have couple of more volunteers to help me. If we have this rally on July 28, we will have ample time to arrange for people, etc...
more...
makeup selena gomez hairstyles 2011.
hiUS
09-19 10:04 AM
I had info pass appointment today in Newark they asked my
Info pass appointment letter
I-485 approval letter
Passports
I told them it�s almost one a month, I didn�t get my card yet. Then they gave me a token number and when my turn came. I met the USCIS officer he wasn�t much help at all. he just gave me 551 stamp for 1yr and when I asked him about biometric he said last year I took in Oct-07 its good till next month and I don�t need it.
I was expecting 551 stamp look like h1 visa stamp, but it�s just an ordinary stamp.
After coming home I called USCIS asked them about the card. She told me that card was sent out for production today and I should get it within 1 week to 30 days. Because it was sent out today that�s the reason I didn�t get the email update
Approved on 8-12-08
As I discussed earlier in this thread, Mine are the same dates as yours and two minutes ago I got the email of Card Production Ordered. It's been more than a month I got the Approval Notice. It seems atlast they uploaded my and my wife's Biometrics from CSC.
I think my call to IO paid off. After trying couple of times I got in touch with a decent IO for 3rd time. She said that Biometrics are missing and she will upload them from CSC. Three days after the call I got this message.
8/12/08 - Approval Notice sent email
8/18/08 - Approval Notice sent mail (post)
Info pass appointment letter
I-485 approval letter
Passports
I told them it�s almost one a month, I didn�t get my card yet. Then they gave me a token number and when my turn came. I met the USCIS officer he wasn�t much help at all. he just gave me 551 stamp for 1yr and when I asked him about biometric he said last year I took in Oct-07 its good till next month and I don�t need it.
I was expecting 551 stamp look like h1 visa stamp, but it�s just an ordinary stamp.
After coming home I called USCIS asked them about the card. She told me that card was sent out for production today and I should get it within 1 week to 30 days. Because it was sent out today that�s the reason I didn�t get the email update
Approved on 8-12-08
As I discussed earlier in this thread, Mine are the same dates as yours and two minutes ago I got the email of Card Production Ordered. It's been more than a month I got the Approval Notice. It seems atlast they uploaded my and my wife's Biometrics from CSC.
I think my call to IO paid off. After trying couple of times I got in touch with a decent IO for 3rd time. She said that Biometrics are missing and she will upload them from CSC. Three days after the call I got this message.
8/12/08 - Approval Notice sent email
8/18/08 - Approval Notice sent mail (post)
girlfriend selena gomez short hair 2011
dkshitij
02-11 09:41 AM
I donated for the first time yesterday. I intend to help out as I can. Could someone please let me know how the access to Donor forum works? Thanks!
hairstyles selena gomez haircut 2011.
sumant18
08-27 04:48 PM
Any updates on your end? I am in the same situation. My wife received hers over a week ago but I am still waiting. Approval notice received more than 2 weeks ago.
I got approval email 3 weeks back. Does anyone know how long it takes to get the physical Card? I have not seen any updates after this. Thanks in advance
Post Decision Activity
On August 3, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS.
I got approval email 3 weeks back. Does anyone know how long it takes to get the physical Card? I have not seen any updates after this. Thanks in advance
Post Decision Activity
On August 3, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS.
h4help
08-24 11:41 PM
Applied EB2 I485+AP+EAD
Delivered on July 5th
no receipts yet ...
Delivered on July 5th
no receipts yet ...
Rohan99
10-12 12:42 PM
Whatever bluesky1 said is true...finally they opened our box. Today I called and rep gave me only I-485 receipt number and told me to wait for mail. USCIS likes everyone to wait for every thing......I have no more information but as soon as I get mail I will post all the info.
3rd july people should call now and I am definite we all were sitting in same box.
What a painful 100 days it was..................hopefully everything is correct on receipt...wait again and see.....
Receipt is from NSC
I got some good news. I called uscis just now and got two receipt numbers, one for 485 and one for EAD. Checks not cashed yet. I don't have the receipt number for AP yet. So it seems that our box is not lost and they're processing them, though so slowly. My application arrived on 7/3 at NSC, received by R. William at 9:03am.
Hope every one of us will receive our receipts, EAD and AP asap.
3rd july people should call now and I am definite we all were sitting in same box.
What a painful 100 days it was..................hopefully everything is correct on receipt...wait again and see.....
Receipt is from NSC
I got some good news. I called uscis just now and got two receipt numbers, one for 485 and one for EAD. Checks not cashed yet. I don't have the receipt number for AP yet. So it seems that our box is not lost and they're processing them, though so slowly. My application arrived on 7/3 at NSC, received by R. William at 9:03am.
Hope every one of us will receive our receipts, EAD and AP asap.
No comments:
Post a Comment