delax
07-19 03:07 PM
In the signature
wallpaper BlackBerry Torch 9800 Review
pappu
08-22 02:16 PM
Hi Diptam,
You spoiled Aadimanav's day already :D:D
No Diptam spoiled several years of his .... :D:D:D
You spoiled Aadimanav's day already :D:D
No Diptam spoiled several years of his .... :D:D:D
wahwah
09-14 05:13 PM
give 2 or 3 months and ROW EB2 will go back to Jan. 2007 or March 2007.
we'll revisit this thread later again.
Total number of application will have no impact on ROW (number of application from ROW will have impact on that category), which i think will be very limited.
we'll revisit this thread later again.
Total number of application will have no impact on ROW (number of application from ROW will have impact on that category), which i think will be very limited.
2011 BlackBerry Torch 9800 (Red
Dipika
02-24 05:57 PM
i agree. how about sending flowers to precident with message that if half million legal immigrant waiting in EB get GC, will definitely buy home, so it will help to improve US Housing crisis.
more...
la6470
03-10 09:31 AM
Because I guess most of us dont mind going back to our native country anymore..either we are too old now or US is doing far worse than ever before and our native countries are doing far better.....
shimul99
10-26 03:40 PM
I'm sorry too man. I wish all of us go through this tough time. I know how are you feeling...i really do. But don't worry time will resolve everything.
I am sorry and i am taking back comments.
My hearty congratulations, take a break and enjoy few days.
I am sorry and i am taking back comments.
My hearty congratulations, take a break and enjoy few days.
more...
walking_dude
03-17 05:13 PM
Bernanke's predecessor Alan Greenspan has written a book (check it on Amazon) where he makes a case for increased high-skilled immigration. He makes a forceful case that its good for the greater economy (and not just limited to housing sector). And yet, we don't see any action on the Capitol (do we?!).
If Bernanke gives a media statement about the benefits of increased high-skilled immigration to media, it will create a few articles, a few heated discussions. It will peter out after that ( like Bill Gates testimonies to US Congress). Ultimately its the guys sitting in the Capitol and WH who control what becomes the law. And they aren't going to decide on immigration based on what Bernanke states in a brainstorming session.
Here's the complex process - Someone has to write a bill, work on getting sponsors and co-sponsors, network with other Congressmen to support the bill. Get it through the bureacracy of the Sub-committee on Immigration in the Senate, get a filibuster proof majority of 60 senators to get it passed. Same has to be done in the House. Get it out of House immigration sub-committee. Get a majority vote in the House. In doing all this they shouldn't create a reason for Pres. Bush to veto it. In case he does veto it (for any reason) it will go back to Congress and 2/3rd majority is required to override the veto.
If it was so easy to get a bill passed [by getting Mr. Bernanke to support it] lobbying business would've been long dead. Companies wouldn't be spending millions of dollars every year to safeguard their interests.
Point is - getting Bernanke/media support may create a traction for our issue and get it some coverage. I'm not saying the effort is completely useless. It has it's place. But it will not fix the issue by itself. We still need to meet the lawmakers and convince them, we still need to send those letters, make those phone calls, send those faxes and so on. Getting Bernanke/media support will never be an alternative to IV efforts. They will, at best, complement it.
Bernanke gets called often to talk about the economy and that gets Media attention (so even if he says everything should be done to increase demand and if he mentions immigration ..that would help) ..that is commonsense 101. it is definitely worth trying.
ofcourse Ben may not read our letters but hopefully someone in his staff would (Approaching Ben or the realtors has more chance of success than sending mails to VP or to Bush) ...and maybe suggest the same during their brainstorming ..ofcourse all of this is hopes ..and with ifs and buts ..but I dont see lot of other options ..
If Bernanke gives a media statement about the benefits of increased high-skilled immigration to media, it will create a few articles, a few heated discussions. It will peter out after that ( like Bill Gates testimonies to US Congress). Ultimately its the guys sitting in the Capitol and WH who control what becomes the law. And they aren't going to decide on immigration based on what Bernanke states in a brainstorming session.
Here's the complex process - Someone has to write a bill, work on getting sponsors and co-sponsors, network with other Congressmen to support the bill. Get it through the bureacracy of the Sub-committee on Immigration in the Senate, get a filibuster proof majority of 60 senators to get it passed. Same has to be done in the House. Get it out of House immigration sub-committee. Get a majority vote in the House. In doing all this they shouldn't create a reason for Pres. Bush to veto it. In case he does veto it (for any reason) it will go back to Congress and 2/3rd majority is required to override the veto.
If it was so easy to get a bill passed [by getting Mr. Bernanke to support it] lobbying business would've been long dead. Companies wouldn't be spending millions of dollars every year to safeguard their interests.
Point is - getting Bernanke/media support may create a traction for our issue and get it some coverage. I'm not saying the effort is completely useless. It has it's place. But it will not fix the issue by itself. We still need to meet the lawmakers and convince them, we still need to send those letters, make those phone calls, send those faxes and so on. Getting Bernanke/media support will never be an alternative to IV efforts. They will, at best, complement it.
Bernanke gets called often to talk about the economy and that gets Media attention (so even if he says everything should be done to increase demand and if he mentions immigration ..that would help) ..that is commonsense 101. it is definitely worth trying.
ofcourse Ben may not read our letters but hopefully someone in his staff would (Approaching Ben or the realtors has more chance of success than sending mails to VP or to Bush) ...and maybe suggest the same during their brainstorming ..ofcourse all of this is hopes ..and with ifs and buts ..but I dont see lot of other options ..
2010 BlackBerry Torch 9800
funny
09-22 02:49 PM
BUMP... Lets start calling folks...Don't put this away....Take 20 minutesof your time and call...Your are only helping yourslef by calling those law makers....They don't care if the bill doesn't pass
more...
sachuin23
04-20 10:13 AM
Another key Republican calls for H-1B cap hike - Computerworld (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9215970/Another_key_Republican_calls_for_H_1B_cap_hike)
I think there is a need to educate politicians that the problem is not H1B but GC backlogs. As per USCIS only 7100 H1B's have been utilized so far for FY 2012. Unless they provide clear and time bound path to Permanent Residence, positive economic contributions from high skilled immigrants would be minimal.
I think there is a need to educate politicians that the problem is not H1B but GC backlogs. As per USCIS only 7100 H1B's have been utilized so far for FY 2012. Unless they provide clear and time bound path to Permanent Residence, positive economic contributions from high skilled immigrants would be minimal.
hair Blackberry torch 9800 original
sertasheep
06-24 03:21 PM
desi3933 is right.
- While on a H1 or a L1 visa, one is expected to maintain a continous period of employment. If one is on a H1 visa and does not get paid, that individual automatically falls "out of status".
- It does not matter if the person has other seemingly valid visa stamps on his/her passport.
- The only highly-skilled dual intent visas that allow one to work, are the H1 and the L1, as far as I am aware of. Dependent visas do not allow one to work, such as H4 or L2. The only way one can work while being a dependent is if one has an EAD based on a pending AOS(I-485).
- If one is on a H1/L1 and wants to switch to say a dependent visa (H4 or L2), one has to submit a change of status form (I-539?). The person is assumed to be in "authorized status" until the change of status (or even an extension) occurs. If the COS or extension gets denied, the person is retroactively "out of status" from the original date of expiration on the previous visa.
- Accruing over 180 days will entail a bar of 3 years for re-entry after the person leaves the US.
- Accruing over 365 days will entail a bar of 10 years for re-entry after the person leaves the US.
Also see the last paragraph on Rajiv's website here: http://www.immigration.com/faq/status.html
Under the current system, unfortunately, there is limited employee protection or even whistle-blowing, so seek a competent attorney's advice right away.
- Remember, the affected individual(in this case your wife) has a lot to lose if she leaves the US(ie cross the official border), even to visit Canada. Competent attorneys can help arrange for waivers from typically the home consulate(ie consulate in home country). Consulates in third countries do not entertain applicants for visa stamping or visa renewals if they have not maintained status.
- If the home consulate approves the said individual's visa renewal or new visa stamping, that individual can enter the US, however, there is lack of clarity on whether such a person will be finally able to "adjust status" to become a lawful permanent resident.
This is a SERIOUS matter requiring legal competent advice.
email me at "sertasheep at immigrationvoice dot org" if you have any followup questions.
NOTE: Immigration Voice does not purport this to be legal advice, and you are strongly advised to seek legal opinion. Employers, as a rule, must not ask for payment in any shape or form to produce paystubs. Immigration Voice always advocates abiding by the law, no matter how archaic they may be. As the applicant, the burden is on the individual to maintain status. Please do your research
- While on a H1 or a L1 visa, one is expected to maintain a continous period of employment. If one is on a H1 visa and does not get paid, that individual automatically falls "out of status".
- It does not matter if the person has other seemingly valid visa stamps on his/her passport.
- The only highly-skilled dual intent visas that allow one to work, are the H1 and the L1, as far as I am aware of. Dependent visas do not allow one to work, such as H4 or L2. The only way one can work while being a dependent is if one has an EAD based on a pending AOS(I-485).
- If one is on a H1/L1 and wants to switch to say a dependent visa (H4 or L2), one has to submit a change of status form (I-539?). The person is assumed to be in "authorized status" until the change of status (or even an extension) occurs. If the COS or extension gets denied, the person is retroactively "out of status" from the original date of expiration on the previous visa.
- Accruing over 180 days will entail a bar of 3 years for re-entry after the person leaves the US.
- Accruing over 365 days will entail a bar of 10 years for re-entry after the person leaves the US.
Also see the last paragraph on Rajiv's website here: http://www.immigration.com/faq/status.html
Under the current system, unfortunately, there is limited employee protection or even whistle-blowing, so seek a competent attorney's advice right away.
- Remember, the affected individual(in this case your wife) has a lot to lose if she leaves the US(ie cross the official border), even to visit Canada. Competent attorneys can help arrange for waivers from typically the home consulate(ie consulate in home country). Consulates in third countries do not entertain applicants for visa stamping or visa renewals if they have not maintained status.
- If the home consulate approves the said individual's visa renewal or new visa stamping, that individual can enter the US, however, there is lack of clarity on whether such a person will be finally able to "adjust status" to become a lawful permanent resident.
This is a SERIOUS matter requiring legal competent advice.
email me at "sertasheep at immigrationvoice dot org" if you have any followup questions.
NOTE: Immigration Voice does not purport this to be legal advice, and you are strongly advised to seek legal opinion. Employers, as a rule, must not ask for payment in any shape or form to produce paystubs. Immigration Voice always advocates abiding by the law, no matter how archaic they may be. As the applicant, the burden is on the individual to maintain status. Please do your research
more...
gcdreamer05
02-02 01:50 PM
Hi Diptam and others, few questions about FOIA,
1) My employer does not want to share the original I-140 either, so i too want to apply via FOIA, do you know what is the cost of applying ?
2) If we apply, will the employer get to know ? does uscis send some notification to the employer that the employee requested a copy of I-140 approval notice?
Thanks, has anyone successfully got it back ?
1) My employer does not want to share the original I-140 either, so i too want to apply via FOIA, do you know what is the cost of applying ?
2) If we apply, will the employer get to know ? does uscis send some notification to the employer that the employee requested a copy of I-140 approval notice?
Thanks, has anyone successfully got it back ?
hot 9800white and red ATamp;T
GooblyWoobly
09-14 07:10 PM
here's my explanation why i think retrogression will get worse -
1) USCIS still has not entered all the july and aug. filers. USCIS will have a good idea by Oct or Nov. how many applications are in the pipeline, how many they can approve and what the PD cut off date needs to be?
You are just repeating yourself. Show me the logic why entering all apps will retrogress the PD?
Let me give a concrete example. For India EB2, why would the PD not move from, say, April 2004 to January 2005, even if, say, 20 million people with priority date at 2006 apply for I485?
Understand the procedure first. With a better idea of applications in pipeline, you will see the PD movement to be better predicted, not retrogression.
2) with the number of applications that were filed this it is obvious that ROW will see retrogression in both EB2 and EB3 categories.
Why is it obvious? Show me the logic man!! Instead of just stating it. If ROW was current till now on some category, everybody who were supposed to file would have filed. Why would it get retrogressed. You understand that only the unused ROW numbers trickle over ot India/China etc.
So, you are saying you don't have a logic. You are speculating and saying only time will prove you right? Eh?
1) USCIS still has not entered all the july and aug. filers. USCIS will have a good idea by Oct or Nov. how many applications are in the pipeline, how many they can approve and what the PD cut off date needs to be?
You are just repeating yourself. Show me the logic why entering all apps will retrogress the PD?
Let me give a concrete example. For India EB2, why would the PD not move from, say, April 2004 to January 2005, even if, say, 20 million people with priority date at 2006 apply for I485?
Understand the procedure first. With a better idea of applications in pipeline, you will see the PD movement to be better predicted, not retrogression.
2) with the number of applications that were filed this it is obvious that ROW will see retrogression in both EB2 and EB3 categories.
Why is it obvious? Show me the logic man!! Instead of just stating it. If ROW was current till now on some category, everybody who were supposed to file would have filed. Why would it get retrogressed. You understand that only the unused ROW numbers trickle over ot India/China etc.
So, you are saying you don't have a logic. You are speculating and saying only time will prove you right? Eh?
more...
house BlackBerry Torch 9800 Red and
priderock
07-06 02:34 PM
Are they even filing a lawsuit ?? If they are SO READY, where is the big press release saying USCIS SUED !!!!!!! :cool:
Looks like they are preparing. The class action suite requires a lot of preparation.
Looks like they are preparing. The class action suite requires a lot of preparation.
tattoo Blackberry Torch 9800 LCD
mpadapa
08-22 03:29 PM
What franklin guesstimated is about right..
Also there are lots of folks who jumped ahead by switching to EB2 from EB3 and ported their PD's. Those ppl will get GC before U man.
With out legislative help EB3 (india) will be stuck at 01 of quite a while. I heard on another thread the AILA predicts the oct bulletin would be the same as Jan 07!! Go figure how long you have to wait..
I too am in the same boat:D:D
Also there are lots of folks who jumped ahead by switching to EB2 from EB3 and ported their PD's. Those ppl will get GC before U man.
With out legislative help EB3 (india) will be stuck at 01 of quite a while. I heard on another thread the AILA predicts the oct bulletin would be the same as Jan 07!! Go figure how long you have to wait..
I too am in the same boat:D:D
more...
pictures Blackberry Torch 9800 Back
vparam
09-20 02:02 AM
I wonder why the bulletine prediction has not started....it used to be fun...
dresses ATamp;T BlackBerry Torch 9800 for
snathan
03-15 11:29 PM
Don't jump without understanding my comments.
what makes you come to conclusion that i am supporting him?
we shouldnot judge others without understanding circumstances. Even if he has intentionally comitted crime, he is going to answer to God for this sooner for later.
some "shoplifters" are not theives.
I already answered you. If it�s an accident I apologies.
By the way what you call them?
what makes you come to conclusion that i am supporting him?
we shouldnot judge others without understanding circumstances. Even if he has intentionally comitted crime, he is going to answer to God for this sooner for later.
some "shoplifters" are not theives.
I already answered you. If it�s an accident I apologies.
By the way what you call them?
more...
makeup red colour BlackBerry
eb3_nepa
06-28 01:05 PM
I had anticipated this and actually converted my I-140 which was filed regular in Feb 2007 to Premium a few days after the June Bulletin and the fact that they terminated I-140 premium processing altogether for Labor Substitutions.
We immediately converted our I-140 (in which we were recapturing our older PD), to premium to avoid any such future USCIS Bolts from the blue.
We immediately converted our I-140 (in which we were recapturing our older PD), to premium to avoid any such future USCIS Bolts from the blue.
girlfriend (BlackBerry Torch 9800 in Red)
gcappl
04-19 12:49 PM
Obama - YOU LIE
hairstyles local pick up. BNIB
gc_chahiye
09-20 12:06 PM
GooblyWoobly seems to have 'disapproved' gc_chahiye and my post. We both have lost One GREEN each from our reputation :)
yup, with a *** for the comment (atleast in my case). Did not even have the decency to explain what part of the post he disagreed with, or discuss it on the forum... hide like a coward and shoot in the back...
Anyway thanks to all who 'rescued' my reputation :)
yup, with a *** for the comment (atleast in my case). Did not even have the decency to explain what part of the post he disagreed with, or discuss it on the forum... hide like a coward and shoot in the back...
Anyway thanks to all who 'rescued' my reputation :)
pbojja
05-22 01:24 PM
Are they processing based on received date or notice date???
If your lucky no date matters it will be approved any time , Techinically it should be receipt date , but who knows whatz going on ..
Recepit Date and Notice Date are like project requirements which some team members get it right and some dont ..
I think it will take few more years before they finish working on July 2007 cases and stream lining the process , so I guess for next year or so it will all be luck
If your lucky no date matters it will be approved any time , Techinically it should be receipt date , but who knows whatz going on ..
Recepit Date and Notice Date are like project requirements which some team members get it right and some dont ..
I think it will take few more years before they finish working on July 2007 cases and stream lining the process , so I guess for next year or so it will all be luck
roseball
02-12 02:05 AM
**************
- Labor was filed with a minimum requirement as Masters degree. No alternate degree requirement or equivalency was mentioned. --> just found out that it did say BS+ 5 exp is ok - USCIS mistakenly approved the I-140 (I am assuming OP does not have a US Masters and only has masters equivalent or BS + 5 yrs)
- Sponsoring employer revoked approved I-140
- USCIS checked the I-140 and realized it made a mistake in initial I-140 approval
- USCIS denied the pending I-485 based on incorrect I-140 approval
If all of the above is correct, then I doubt if anything can be done. I dont see any grounds to file MTR based on the fact that beneficiary does not have a US Masters degree which is the requirement as indicated in LC filing. I dont think you can do anything with respect to USCIS's mistake in approving I-140 earlier and now denying it. Got to wait and see what the attorney's view is in this regard.
**********
Since the application do say BS+5 years and I have copy of the Edu evaluation which says Master equivalent , I do see a good chance now to re-open the case .
Mine is not a labor substitute. ( just to clarify)
Thanks
-vinod
That one phrase in your LC requirement could turn out to be a life saver for you. Can you further clarify the educational/experience requirements mentioned in LC. Was it Masters or equivalent with zero experience OR Bachelors with 5 yrs of progressive experience? Your educational evaluation should meet atleast one of the requirements mentioned in the LC. Either Masters or Bachelors + 5 yrs exp. I think for your educational background (non 4 yr BS degree), I feel more comfortable with getting the evaluation done to satisfy the BS + 5 yrs requirement rather than going for Masters equivalent. NSC is known to be strict w.r.t 3 yr BS degree when it comes to EB-2 cases. However, since your initial evaluation showed you as holding a masters equivalent, I am not sure if its a good idea now to try to defend your case with BS + 5 yrs equivalence. A good attorney would be able to guide you through with this. I also suggest you to consult any reputed attorney regarding this and get feedback on your company attorney's plans and not just blindly follow what your company attorney says.
- Labor was filed with a minimum requirement as Masters degree. No alternate degree requirement or equivalency was mentioned. --> just found out that it did say BS+ 5 exp is ok - USCIS mistakenly approved the I-140 (I am assuming OP does not have a US Masters and only has masters equivalent or BS + 5 yrs)
- Sponsoring employer revoked approved I-140
- USCIS checked the I-140 and realized it made a mistake in initial I-140 approval
- USCIS denied the pending I-485 based on incorrect I-140 approval
If all of the above is correct, then I doubt if anything can be done. I dont see any grounds to file MTR based on the fact that beneficiary does not have a US Masters degree which is the requirement as indicated in LC filing. I dont think you can do anything with respect to USCIS's mistake in approving I-140 earlier and now denying it. Got to wait and see what the attorney's view is in this regard.
**********
Since the application do say BS+5 years and I have copy of the Edu evaluation which says Master equivalent , I do see a good chance now to re-open the case .
Mine is not a labor substitute. ( just to clarify)
Thanks
-vinod
That one phrase in your LC requirement could turn out to be a life saver for you. Can you further clarify the educational/experience requirements mentioned in LC. Was it Masters or equivalent with zero experience OR Bachelors with 5 yrs of progressive experience? Your educational evaluation should meet atleast one of the requirements mentioned in the LC. Either Masters or Bachelors + 5 yrs exp. I think for your educational background (non 4 yr BS degree), I feel more comfortable with getting the evaluation done to satisfy the BS + 5 yrs requirement rather than going for Masters equivalent. NSC is known to be strict w.r.t 3 yr BS degree when it comes to EB-2 cases. However, since your initial evaluation showed you as holding a masters equivalent, I am not sure if its a good idea now to try to defend your case with BS + 5 yrs equivalence. A good attorney would be able to guide you through with this. I also suggest you to consult any reputed attorney regarding this and get feedback on your company attorney's plans and not just blindly follow what your company attorney says.
No comments:
Post a Comment