bank_king2003
04-22 02:04 PM
So basically you are saying you cannot sue the people responsible for greencard problem.
I think the only option left is to either sue God or sue yourself for your bad luck.
Sorry if i was not clear. i meant to say that for visa recapture one cant file a lawsuit against USCIS but one can definately file a lawsuit on USCIS for following things if at all we can prove it
1) if quarterly soillover is a law and USCIS not doing it they are doing something against the law so we can file a lawsuit against it but again how can we prove that they are not doing quarterly spillover.
2) If USCIS doesnt use full numbers assigned for Green Cards and waste them you can again sue them for that but will it be succesfull or not that has to be researched.
3) That H1b employee - employer relation memo is a best example to file a lawsuit against them as there interpratation of the law was completely wrong but noone did it.
I think the only option left is to either sue God or sue yourself for your bad luck.
Sorry if i was not clear. i meant to say that for visa recapture one cant file a lawsuit against USCIS but one can definately file a lawsuit on USCIS for following things if at all we can prove it
1) if quarterly soillover is a law and USCIS not doing it they are doing something against the law so we can file a lawsuit against it but again how can we prove that they are not doing quarterly spillover.
2) If USCIS doesnt use full numbers assigned for Green Cards and waste them you can again sue them for that but will it be succesfull or not that has to be researched.
3) That H1b employee - employer relation memo is a best example to file a lawsuit against them as there interpratation of the law was completely wrong but noone did it.
wallpaper half sleeve tattoo cross
mbartosik
11-09 05:42 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7087846.stm
Actually there were two issues.
1) UK gov changed qualifying period for "indefinite leave to stay" from 4 years to 5 years. Without a grand father clause. UK gov won this.
2) NHS (state heath system) discriminated against those with UK work visa without "indefinite leave to say". That is called a Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.
For comparison with US system
indefinite leave to say == green card. Much easier to get in UK, wait time fixed at 5 years (up from 4).
Highly Skilled Migrant Programme == H1B H4 and L1 L2 but I think like having an EAD also.
I wonder given this ruling if those affected can now sue the NHS (National Health Service) over this for compensatory damages.
Actually there were two issues.
1) UK gov changed qualifying period for "indefinite leave to stay" from 4 years to 5 years. Without a grand father clause. UK gov won this.
2) NHS (state heath system) discriminated against those with UK work visa without "indefinite leave to say". That is called a Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.
For comparison with US system
indefinite leave to say == green card. Much easier to get in UK, wait time fixed at 5 years (up from 4).
Highly Skilled Migrant Programme == H1B H4 and L1 L2 but I think like having an EAD also.
I wonder given this ruling if those affected can now sue the NHS (National Health Service) over this for compensatory damages.
krishna_brc
08-04 01:54 PM
She applied for second AP before travelling. My question is does she have to return before first AP expires OR can I mail her the second AP when it gets approved?
I think it is safer to come back on old AP.
I think it is safer to come back on old AP.
2011 Full Sleeve Dragon Tattoo
continuedProgress
04-19 02:21 PM
Since its rare for a denial to automatically turn into an approval. :)
Do you care to share what you had to do?
Do you care to share what you had to do?
more...
pappu
04-10 11:52 AM
Friends,
I am working for company A and I have offer from Company B, I thinking of my options, Here is my situation
1. I have approved I140 > 180 days in actually 300 days
2. I have approved EAD
3. mine is labor transfer case and I used an existing labor that matched my job profile
4. Company B is ready to hire me in the same/similar role and are ready to give AC21 employment letter with same details as in my labor.
5. I have approved copy of my labor that was transferred and all other copies related to my case like I140, I485 application and Advance parole etc,....
Please give me some guidance on if I should be accepting the offer from Company B, I am concerned because my labor was transferred from another employee. I have worked for company A for nearly 4 years now and my GC is in process for almost 4 years, labor switch was done like 2 years ago.
Based on this explanation do you see any risk and am I missing anything here, in terms of getting specific documentation from company A application..
please help
Please update your profile with details so that it can be helpful to everyone tracking the success
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/profile.php?do=editprofile
on IV tracker
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_tracker&Itemid=63
IV members are requested to update their profile with valid dates so that we can make IV tracker helpful for everyone.
I have personally decided to make this request to everyone who does not have their details completed and only then respond to the member. If a member has bogus data in their profile for tracking purposes I would not be replying to that post. This might help encourage members wanting replies from IV core team for their questions.
I am working for company A and I have offer from Company B, I thinking of my options, Here is my situation
1. I have approved I140 > 180 days in actually 300 days
2. I have approved EAD
3. mine is labor transfer case and I used an existing labor that matched my job profile
4. Company B is ready to hire me in the same/similar role and are ready to give AC21 employment letter with same details as in my labor.
5. I have approved copy of my labor that was transferred and all other copies related to my case like I140, I485 application and Advance parole etc,....
Please give me some guidance on if I should be accepting the offer from Company B, I am concerned because my labor was transferred from another employee. I have worked for company A for nearly 4 years now and my GC is in process for almost 4 years, labor switch was done like 2 years ago.
Based on this explanation do you see any risk and am I missing anything here, in terms of getting specific documentation from company A application..
please help
Please update your profile with details so that it can be helpful to everyone tracking the success
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/profile.php?do=editprofile
on IV tracker
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_tracker&Itemid=63
IV members are requested to update their profile with valid dates so that we can make IV tracker helpful for everyone.
I have personally decided to make this request to everyone who does not have their details completed and only then respond to the member. If a member has bogus data in their profile for tracking purposes I would not be replying to that post. This might help encourage members wanting replies from IV core team for their questions.
abhi_022001
01-10 06:08 PM
I lost my job in november end ...I was working with one of the top most company in IT consulting in US(EDS/HP/CSC) like....in SAP field .Company was loosing pojects and bench was getting bigger...
I was lucky enough though to get another job within a month in somewhat stable industry in oil & gas..
I was lucky enough though to get another job within a month in somewhat stable industry in oil & gas..
more...
gcdreamer05
08-05 05:11 PM
Guys n Girls,
I would like to listen to your views or experience in this matter. As we know, the employer is now required to pay for all fees associated with filing a labor certification (first step in the GC application). Is it legit for the employer to engage the employee in a contract that requires the employee to reimburse all immigration related fees (including the labor cert fee) to the employer if the employee quits the company when the GC petition is pending?
I guess DOL wants the employer to pay for the labor cert fee. Is it ok for the employer to get it back, say a year later, when the employee quits the company, which in sense would mean that the employee ended up paying for the labor cert.
Comments please.
Thanks!
that is totally illegal and if it happens and if someone complains to DOL then the employer will be in "Lake Soup"
I would like to listen to your views or experience in this matter. As we know, the employer is now required to pay for all fees associated with filing a labor certification (first step in the GC application). Is it legit for the employer to engage the employee in a contract that requires the employee to reimburse all immigration related fees (including the labor cert fee) to the employer if the employee quits the company when the GC petition is pending?
I guess DOL wants the employer to pay for the labor cert fee. Is it ok for the employer to get it back, say a year later, when the employee quits the company, which in sense would mean that the employee ended up paying for the labor cert.
Comments please.
Thanks!
that is totally illegal and if it happens and if someone complains to DOL then the employer will be in "Lake Soup"
2010 It#39;s part of a full sleeve
arunmohan
05-07 02:39 PM
Yes I have same questions as coolduggar asked. I know lots of people are using AC21 right now and I am on same boat too.
more...
krishna.ahd
10-15 03:58 PM
Considering the lowered cost of stock I am planning to gets my hands dirty in stock. But I don't have much knwoeldge about it. Also, by the time I find resouces to learn more about stock, the prices might ahve gone up.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
Start with this - much simpler
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson4/
or this
http://www.fool.com/investing/basics/index.aspx?source=ifltnvpnv0000001
Good Luck
BTW , there are supposed to be lot of police around here , looks like all are set with GC
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
Start with this - much simpler
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson4/
or this
http://www.fool.com/investing/basics/index.aspx?source=ifltnvpnv0000001
Good Luck
BTW , there are supposed to be lot of police around here , looks like all are set with GC
hair blue dragon tattoo. japanese
senthil
08-21 09:46 AM
have fun
more...
santb1975
02-14 05:12 PM
and we can.
Great to see this thread... gotta keep it on top!
TOGETHER, WE SHALL BRING HOME THE TROPHY!
Great to see this thread... gotta keep it on top!
TOGETHER, WE SHALL BRING HOME THE TROPHY!
hot dragon full sleeve tattoo
eager_immi
07-18 10:57 AM
Let us all pledge to give atleast a $20, $50 monthly payments.
more...
house Jeff Gogue - Dragon - full
cdeneo
04-02 10:31 PM
The new employer does need to support you thru the GC process, again unclear if this is something that is needed in the AC21 letter or not.
The main thing per my understanding is that AC21 does not apply to contract positions - one would hope that the previous employer does not revoke the I-140 petition causing a NOID/RFE.
My question still stands - if the sponsoring employer revokes the approved I-140 petition post 180 days of 485 filing - this would cause problems if the person has taken up a contract position on EAD unless one can respond to the NOID/RFE stating a full time offer in hand for future employment, etc.
It is not very clear if the new employer needs to explicitly state that they would like to continue your GC. I understand that a major chunk of employers will have reservation stating this in an offer letter.
My understanding is that to invoke AC21, employer needs to provide an offer letter for a full time position. Please clarify.
The main thing per my understanding is that AC21 does not apply to contract positions - one would hope that the previous employer does not revoke the I-140 petition causing a NOID/RFE.
My question still stands - if the sponsoring employer revokes the approved I-140 petition post 180 days of 485 filing - this would cause problems if the person has taken up a contract position on EAD unless one can respond to the NOID/RFE stating a full time offer in hand for future employment, etc.
It is not very clear if the new employer needs to explicitly state that they would like to continue your GC. I understand that a major chunk of employers will have reservation stating this in an offer letter.
My understanding is that to invoke AC21, employer needs to provide an offer letter for a full time position. Please clarify.
tattoo Sleeve Tattoos Design for
Madhuri
05-04 03:51 PM
The info I got is I can not apply for 7th year based on the approved LC I have. But I can apply for 7th year based on the LC pending with PBEC. My problem is that LC applied in Marc 2005, is thr some other employer and I do not have any details of this application. I sent 3 emails to PBEC for screenshot which can be used as proof od pending LC and I can then apply for 7th year extension. But unfortunately I did not get any response from PBEC, I know some people get the response within 2-3 hrs from them????
Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.
So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.
Hope this helps.
Hi Madhuri,
Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.
So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.
Hope this helps.
Hi Madhuri,
Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
more...
pictures Full Sleeve Tattoos For Men.
Blog Feeds
09-29 08:10 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRnncc3GffiIUgLQIcjyF2lrAtWzhywdRSTv7M3vmkeWm-tEmMfOpc01su8Tpj39-kW3UHA2z7WXykQQ-yVwtVMC-gKAUHtIfO5JjK0T0vyyfV8-8fn4u88JlrJJa4-4eZcHz9OPFM6QQ/s320/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRnncc3GffiIUgLQIcjyF2lrAtWzhywdRSTv7M3vmkeWm-tEmMfOpc01su8Tpj39-kW3UHA2z7WXykQQ-yVwtVMC-gKAUHtIfO5JjK0T0vyyfV8-8fn4u88JlrJJa4-4eZcHz9OPFM6QQ/s1600-h/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG)
Dear Director Mayorkas:
Last week in a speech you broached the subject of the possible need to increase filing fees because of a decrease in the number of applications received by USCIS this fiscal year. You also noted that there was over $100 million shortfall in your budget because of these decreased filings. I have some suggestions to meet your budget.
First, look at your budget projections from this last year. Last October, who didn't see the recession? Why weren't reductions in force made at that time? On April 1 when only 33% of the H-1B applications were filed as compared to the year before, why didn't USCIS staff get pared down? A monumental increase in naturalization applications occurred before the Presidential elections (as they do every 4 years), who did not not see a decrease in naturalization applications for 2009! My heck, every business in America was laying off employees, but not USCIS!
Second, have a heart to heart talk with anyone who issues an RFE that requires more than 5 pages to respond to. This last week we submitted a 3,000 page (30 lb.) response to an RFE (see the picture above), which alleged that an Accountant was not a professional position! Director, what is the deal with your Service Centers? Is there simply too little to do and too many employees? The "service" we are receiving as your customers is not doing the American Economy any good.
Third, why are the local adjudications officers interviewing non-current priority date visa applicants, including on Saturdays in September! You are paying OVERTIME to examiners to interview people who cannot be approved for their green cards. What sense does that make?
I have many other ideas as well if you would like to chat. The bottom line is this. The agency you have just taken over is in serious need of a top to bottom review. You have a monstrous challenge ahead of you to bring this agency in line with the priorities it should have. Priorities that not only include national security, but also ensuring our own economic well being and competitiveness by promoting job growth and allowing companies to hire qualified workers, keeping families together through reunification, and bringing new citizens into the fold.
You need to get control of service centers, where officers are issuing, at increasingly frequent rates, Requests for Evidence that are not only unnecessary, but which are onerous and burdensome, and appear to be designed to make the employer give up his request for the visa application. You have local offices finding marriage "fraud" where no such fraud exists. You have CIS doing 25,000 random walk ins of legitimate U.S. employers of H-1B workers, disrupting the workplace asking questions about the H-1B employer, without regard to a lawyers appearance in the case in clear violation of the 6th Amendment. The list could go on about what your agency is doing wrong. And, while there are things USCIS does right, the reality is that rather than serving immigrants and their employers, you are punishing them.
So, before you raise your fees, I think you MUST first get your own house in order. You should not and cannot honestly balance your budgetary disaster on the backs of the employers and immigrants you are committed to serving.
With all sincerity, I wish you the best of luck in your new position.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2662713464097056944?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/rfe-hell-and-increased-uscis-filing.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRnncc3GffiIUgLQIcjyF2lrAtWzhywdRSTv7M3vmkeWm-tEmMfOpc01su8Tpj39-kW3UHA2z7WXykQQ-yVwtVMC-gKAUHtIfO5JjK0T0vyyfV8-8fn4u88JlrJJa4-4eZcHz9OPFM6QQ/s320/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRnncc3GffiIUgLQIcjyF2lrAtWzhywdRSTv7M3vmkeWm-tEmMfOpc01su8Tpj39-kW3UHA2z7WXykQQ-yVwtVMC-gKAUHtIfO5JjK0T0vyyfV8-8fn4u88JlrJJa4-4eZcHz9OPFM6QQ/s1600-h/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG)
Dear Director Mayorkas:
Last week in a speech you broached the subject of the possible need to increase filing fees because of a decrease in the number of applications received by USCIS this fiscal year. You also noted that there was over $100 million shortfall in your budget because of these decreased filings. I have some suggestions to meet your budget.
First, look at your budget projections from this last year. Last October, who didn't see the recession? Why weren't reductions in force made at that time? On April 1 when only 33% of the H-1B applications were filed as compared to the year before, why didn't USCIS staff get pared down? A monumental increase in naturalization applications occurred before the Presidential elections (as they do every 4 years), who did not not see a decrease in naturalization applications for 2009! My heck, every business in America was laying off employees, but not USCIS!
Second, have a heart to heart talk with anyone who issues an RFE that requires more than 5 pages to respond to. This last week we submitted a 3,000 page (30 lb.) response to an RFE (see the picture above), which alleged that an Accountant was not a professional position! Director, what is the deal with your Service Centers? Is there simply too little to do and too many employees? The "service" we are receiving as your customers is not doing the American Economy any good.
Third, why are the local adjudications officers interviewing non-current priority date visa applicants, including on Saturdays in September! You are paying OVERTIME to examiners to interview people who cannot be approved for their green cards. What sense does that make?
I have many other ideas as well if you would like to chat. The bottom line is this. The agency you have just taken over is in serious need of a top to bottom review. You have a monstrous challenge ahead of you to bring this agency in line with the priorities it should have. Priorities that not only include national security, but also ensuring our own economic well being and competitiveness by promoting job growth and allowing companies to hire qualified workers, keeping families together through reunification, and bringing new citizens into the fold.
You need to get control of service centers, where officers are issuing, at increasingly frequent rates, Requests for Evidence that are not only unnecessary, but which are onerous and burdensome, and appear to be designed to make the employer give up his request for the visa application. You have local offices finding marriage "fraud" where no such fraud exists. You have CIS doing 25,000 random walk ins of legitimate U.S. employers of H-1B workers, disrupting the workplace asking questions about the H-1B employer, without regard to a lawyers appearance in the case in clear violation of the 6th Amendment. The list could go on about what your agency is doing wrong. And, while there are things USCIS does right, the reality is that rather than serving immigrants and their employers, you are punishing them.
So, before you raise your fees, I think you MUST first get your own house in order. You should not and cannot honestly balance your budgetary disaster on the backs of the employers and immigrants you are committed to serving.
With all sincerity, I wish you the best of luck in your new position.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2662713464097056944?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/rfe-hell-and-increased-uscis-filing.html)
dresses Arm Japanese Dragon Tattoo
needhelp!
08-31 12:38 AM
Just like there can be no rally without IV members,
There can be no (hypothetical) country without IV members
There can be no (hypothetical) country without IV members
more...
makeup japanese dragon tattoo sleeve.
Sandeep
03-15 11:54 AM
hi Super_Moderator,
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
There is no question of waiting and watching here - please be assured that IV is doing everything possible to address this issue. This bill is not very straight forward due to the fact that it is entangled in too many complexities which we are not even a part of. So we have to tread very carefully here. IV is getting professional advice in this regard and it would make sense to follow that advice and not jump the gun.
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
There is no question of waiting and watching here - please be assured that IV is doing everything possible to address this issue. This bill is not very straight forward due to the fact that it is entangled in too many complexities which we are not even a part of. So we have to tread very carefully here. IV is getting professional advice in this regard and it would make sense to follow that advice and not jump the gun.
girlfriend Popular Dragon Tattoo – Dragon
DudefromBombay
09-23 01:20 PM
I am eagerly waiting for the Nov Election results. Can't wait to see Democtas losing House and Senate and can't wait to see the Back of "BARRACK"
hairstyles Black amp; Gray Full Sleeve Dragon Tattoo by Steve Looney : Pacific Soul Tattoo
h1techSlave
09-27 09:59 AM
The article says: "After all, if the legal process was more efficient and less daunting, perhaps the illegal immigration problems wouldn't be quite so bad."
I say, it is not perhaps, it is a given. When there is a legal remedy for any issue (not just immigration), then 9 out of 10 people would not go the illegal way.
I say, it is not perhaps, it is a given. When there is a legal remedy for any issue (not just immigration), then 9 out of 10 people would not go the illegal way.
raj2007
02-18 10:32 PM
Unfortunately, we won't be able to do anything in your wife's matter. The people you are referring to as the ones whose cases got accepted are the ones with bounced checks. There is a difference between the manner in which USCIS treats cases with bounced checks and cases where checks are missing, are in an incorrect amount, there is a mismatch between words and figures in the check, check is not dated, check is not signed, etc.
In the first category, there is prima fascie evidecne that the check is in the proper amount, check is dated, signed, made payable to the proper authority. In those cases, the USCIS considers bounced checks as a matter for collection. The reason that there is a difference is that in the first case, the properly signed check IS NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT AND COMPLETELY VALID UNDER LAW.
In your case, the check was deficient because it put the party (the USCIS/Government) on notice of a defect. A party to whom a defective negotiable instrument is given with notice of the defect does not become a HOLDER IN DUE COURSE (VERY IMPORTANT UNDER THE LAW ). IN OTHER WORDS, THE CHECK LOSES ITS POWER OF NEGOTIABILITY UNDER LAW. Even if the Check is deficient that it does not affect its negotiability ( for example, check is not dated, or the check only contains the amount in words), the party to whom it is presented is under no liability to accept the check. For these reasons, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR WIFE'S MATTER AND THE EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE.
For this reason, I advised you to wait until the PD for your category become current again.
I see no harm to take infopass and explain your situation in person.
In the first category, there is prima fascie evidecne that the check is in the proper amount, check is dated, signed, made payable to the proper authority. In those cases, the USCIS considers bounced checks as a matter for collection. The reason that there is a difference is that in the first case, the properly signed check IS NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT AND COMPLETELY VALID UNDER LAW.
In your case, the check was deficient because it put the party (the USCIS/Government) on notice of a defect. A party to whom a defective negotiable instrument is given with notice of the defect does not become a HOLDER IN DUE COURSE (VERY IMPORTANT UNDER THE LAW ). IN OTHER WORDS, THE CHECK LOSES ITS POWER OF NEGOTIABILITY UNDER LAW. Even if the Check is deficient that it does not affect its negotiability ( for example, check is not dated, or the check only contains the amount in words), the party to whom it is presented is under no liability to accept the check. For these reasons, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR WIFE'S MATTER AND THE EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE.
For this reason, I advised you to wait until the PD for your category become current again.
I see no harm to take infopass and explain your situation in person.
jonty_11
01-15 12:07 PM
Problem is it will be another $500 expense (Test plus air Tickets) as the test center is not in my state/city.
I do have a Masters from US and 6 plus years expirience in US.
I had written a detailed letter explaining all that....I am going to try to take it withing 120 days as stipulated in the letter...
I do have a Masters from US and 6 plus years expirience in US.
I had written a detailed letter explaining all that....I am going to try to take it withing 120 days as stipulated in the letter...
No comments:
Post a Comment