h1-b forever
01-24 09:16 AM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
GK,
I think you do have a point. Let me do some research and contact some attorneys as well on this. Will also check with the IV leadership on their thoughts on this point.
Cheers,
Rayoflight
Did anything come of this plan? Is this doable?
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
GK,
I think you do have a point. Let me do some research and contact some attorneys as well on this. Will also check with the IV leadership on their thoughts on this point.
Cheers,
Rayoflight
Did anything come of this plan? Is this doable?
wallpaper angeles de amor.
GCard_Dream
12-12 05:48 PM
nomi,
I am very surprised that there is not as much interest in this thread as I had expected but you are doing great in trying to explore this avenue. I wish I had some of the answers. Keep up the good work.
I am very surprised that there is not as much interest in this thread as I had expected but you are doing great in trying to explore this avenue. I wish I had some of the answers. Keep up the good work.
sandiboy
07-23 05:22 PM
So does my lawyer per the FAQ she sent earlier:
Q9: My adjustment was already filed. Do I have to re-file now?
A: No. If the adjustment was already filed, USCIS will retain and formally accept the filing.
Q9: My adjustment was already filed. Do I have to re-file now?
A: No. If the adjustment was already filed, USCIS will retain and formally accept the filing.
2011 imagenes de angeles de amor.
Indirant
01-27 12:20 PM
Hi varsha,
I think sanjay or Rajeev was suppose to work with Ajay in metropark
Sekar
I think sanjay or Rajeev was suppose to work with Ajay in metropark
Sekar
more...
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
k94
11-22 02:41 PM
It is my understanding that when applying for a GC, until you have your LC approved (and possibly I-140), you cannot change your title or salary, beyond what was submitted in the LC application. Technically, the DOL is verifying a 'job' (and the salary related to that job), so in theory, that can't change, not because the employer doesn't want to, but because the law doesn't allow it.
Now, an employer may unofficially get around this (by increasing your bonus payout, or giving you stock, or changing the internal level of your job), but these are 'handouts' that you may get if your employer is fair.
With the backlogs that are in effect for pre-PERM LC approvals, employees can go from 1-3 years without a salary or promotion/job title change, and that is the law! Go figure.
Now, an employer may unofficially get around this (by increasing your bonus payout, or giving you stock, or changing the internal level of your job), but these are 'handouts' that you may get if your employer is fair.
With the backlogs that are in effect for pre-PERM LC approvals, employees can go from 1-3 years without a salary or promotion/job title change, and that is the law! Go figure.
more...
GCBatman
01-09 08:54 AM
Here is the answer would you hire me now :D
When several operations occur in an expression, each part is evaluated and resolved in a predetermined order called operator precedence. Parentheses can be used to override the order of precedence and force some parts of an expression to be evaluated before other parts. Operations within parentheses are always performed before those outside. Within parentheses, however, normal operator precedence is maintained.
When expressions contain operators from more than one category, arithmetic operators are evaluated first, comparison operators are evaluated next, and logical operators are evaluated last. Comparison operators all have equal precedence; that is, they are evaluated in the left-to-right order in which they appear. Arithmetic and logical operators are evaluated in the following order of precedence:
Arithmetic (Exponentiation (^),Negation (-),Multiplication and division (*, /),Integer division (\),Modulus arithmetic (Mod),Addition and subtraction (+, -),String concatenation (&))
Comparison (Equality (=),Inequality (<>),Less than (<),Greater than (>), Less than or equal to (<=),Greater than or equal to (>=),Is)
Logical (Not,And,Or,Xor,Eqv,Imp,&)
When multiplication and division occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated as it occurs from left to right. Likewise, when addition and subtraction occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated in order of appearance from left to right.
The string concatenation operator (&) is not an arithmetic operator, but in precedence it does fall after all arithmetic operators and before all comparison operators. The Is operator is an object reference comparison operator. It does not compare objects or their values; it checks only to determine if two object references refer to the same object.
....An experience guy might find it difficult to answer questions like �what is operator precedence?� ....
When several operations occur in an expression, each part is evaluated and resolved in a predetermined order called operator precedence. Parentheses can be used to override the order of precedence and force some parts of an expression to be evaluated before other parts. Operations within parentheses are always performed before those outside. Within parentheses, however, normal operator precedence is maintained.
When expressions contain operators from more than one category, arithmetic operators are evaluated first, comparison operators are evaluated next, and logical operators are evaluated last. Comparison operators all have equal precedence; that is, they are evaluated in the left-to-right order in which they appear. Arithmetic and logical operators are evaluated in the following order of precedence:
Arithmetic (Exponentiation (^),Negation (-),Multiplication and division (*, /),Integer division (\),Modulus arithmetic (Mod),Addition and subtraction (+, -),String concatenation (&))
Comparison (Equality (=),Inequality (<>),Less than (<),Greater than (>), Less than or equal to (<=),Greater than or equal to (>=),Is)
Logical (Not,And,Or,Xor,Eqv,Imp,&)
When multiplication and division occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated as it occurs from left to right. Likewise, when addition and subtraction occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated in order of appearance from left to right.
The string concatenation operator (&) is not an arithmetic operator, but in precedence it does fall after all arithmetic operators and before all comparison operators. The Is operator is an object reference comparison operator. It does not compare objects or their values; it checks only to determine if two object references refer to the same object.
....An experience guy might find it difficult to answer questions like �what is operator precedence?� ....
2010 Ángeles Amor Divino Ilimitado
pappu
01-18 01:18 PM
we need some more members to keep this effort stay ignited. This effort has helped us get several hundred members in the past few weeks. Pls continue to help. It will only take 15 min of your time.
more...
ajaykk
07-11 09:35 PM
My PD is 06/27/06..should I feel happy or fingers x'd or just lucky....
hair hot angeles de amor anime
vandanaverdia
09-11 06:09 PM
"The difference between the impossible and the possible lies in a person's determination."
Tommy Lasorda
Only YOU can convince yourself to do what is right for you right now. The time now is to march to DC!!!
Help IV help you....
GO IV!!!!
Tommy Lasorda
Only YOU can convince yourself to do what is right for you right now. The time now is to march to DC!!!
Help IV help you....
GO IV!!!!
more...
webm
04-24 01:48 PM
I also got my "Card production ordered" status few days back.
however I also received a mail for biometrics appointment of 05/02?
the biometrics letter date is 4/14 and my "Card production" status change was on 04/21.
why would they send me a biometrics appointment and then approve my 485 and issue me a GC? is this common?
should I still go for the biometrics appointment or just ignore it, I'm assuming that i'd have my physical GC in had before 05/02
---------------------------------------------
PD - JULY 2003 EB2 RIR
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No (I-140 Approved Earlier)
Mailed From State: MA
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Transferred to TSC (state Yes/No): Yes
485 Receipt Date : June 14th 2007
485 Notice Date : July 2nd 2007
MY FP Completed : 08/02
485 LUD - 08/02, 08/02
I would say you better get biometrics done....on a safer side..:)
however I also received a mail for biometrics appointment of 05/02?
the biometrics letter date is 4/14 and my "Card production" status change was on 04/21.
why would they send me a biometrics appointment and then approve my 485 and issue me a GC? is this common?
should I still go for the biometrics appointment or just ignore it, I'm assuming that i'd have my physical GC in had before 05/02
---------------------------------------------
PD - JULY 2003 EB2 RIR
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No (I-140 Approved Earlier)
Mailed From State: MA
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Transferred to TSC (state Yes/No): Yes
485 Receipt Date : June 14th 2007
485 Notice Date : July 2nd 2007
MY FP Completed : 08/02
485 LUD - 08/02, 08/02
I would say you better get biometrics done....on a safer side..:)
hot angeles de amor.
amitps
09-26 01:48 PM
People - Damage control has been done....
This is another win for IV ......
This is another win for IV ......
more...
house pictures house angeles de amor
dealsnet
03-18 07:50 AM
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
tattoo angeles de amor
msp1976
12-13 10:07 AM
Hi
I am Mukund From Edison NJ...
msp1976@yahoo.com
I am Mukund From Edison NJ...
msp1976@yahoo.com
more...
pictures angeles de amor. miembro de
meridiani.planum
03-16 04:32 PM
what i am saying is how and why is it that inspite of the PD having been current as I detailed in my original post for so long during 2000-2005 for EB 2 India, why are there applicants from way back in 2002 and 2003 still waiting?
Honestly, I thought they should have been already processed and gotten their Green cards by now.
All I am trying to figure out is how many applicants from 2004-2005 are still in the proverbial 'PIPELINE' waiting. Unless they are done, the PD is not gonna move.
If we can have it move conclusively to 2005-2006 regions relatively quickly, most problems are solved.
most people who filed LC in 2004/2005 before PERM got approvals in 2006 and 2007 and have only got a chance to apply for 485 in July VB. There are 10s of thousands of such people with that LC and EB2-India. When was the opportunity to get approval?
BTW, what are the chances that the PD may become "Current" again for EB2/EB3 India over the next 40 months?
without an administrative fix, and with the current levels of demand and supply I would say its NIL. It needs to be a mistake...
Also, with H1 quota possibly going up this year or next, expect even more demand, and the dates will probably not be current for atleast a decade. The demand is going to go up (more H1s filing for greencards) and supply remaining the same (140k + country-limits etc)
Honestly, I thought they should have been already processed and gotten their Green cards by now.
All I am trying to figure out is how many applicants from 2004-2005 are still in the proverbial 'PIPELINE' waiting. Unless they are done, the PD is not gonna move.
If we can have it move conclusively to 2005-2006 regions relatively quickly, most problems are solved.
most people who filed LC in 2004/2005 before PERM got approvals in 2006 and 2007 and have only got a chance to apply for 485 in July VB. There are 10s of thousands of such people with that LC and EB2-India. When was the opportunity to get approval?
BTW, what are the chances that the PD may become "Current" again for EB2/EB3 India over the next 40 months?
without an administrative fix, and with the current levels of demand and supply I would say its NIL. It needs to be a mistake...
Also, with H1 quota possibly going up this year or next, expect even more demand, and the dates will probably not be current for atleast a decade. The demand is going to go up (more H1s filing for greencards) and supply remaining the same (140k + country-limits etc)
dresses dresses angeles de amor.
gccovet
02-19 01:09 PM
That's exactly what I wanted to ask! How on earth are they going to prove a presence?
1. Drivers license (that only shows the date they started)
2. Utility bills (is that possible?)
3. Bank statements (I'm not sure if undocumented ones get accounts)
4. Employment proof (right...)
5. Real estate titles
I'm not saying they can't, but trying to think how...
IRS accepts illegals to file IRS Tax returns. Many of the illegals do that (they use ITIN #'s instead of SS#).
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/nyregion/16immig.html
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/216870/illegal_immigrants_file_tax_returns.html
GCCovet
1. Drivers license (that only shows the date they started)
2. Utility bills (is that possible?)
3. Bank statements (I'm not sure if undocumented ones get accounts)
4. Employment proof (right...)
5. Real estate titles
I'm not saying they can't, but trying to think how...
IRS accepts illegals to file IRS Tax returns. Many of the illegals do that (they use ITIN #'s instead of SS#).
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/nyregion/16immig.html
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/216870/illegal_immigrants_file_tax_returns.html
GCCovet
more...
makeup Dibujos de angeles de amor
neverbefore
07-15 05:27 PM
My case is exactly same as yours except my PD is Feb 27th and I received an RFE for Birth Certificate when the dates went current in 2008 August. Since then I saw LUD's for 3 weeks and then its been all quiet I am hoping that means application was pre adjudicated.
Folks, we had an interview in December of 2008 and the IO said that had the dates been current, she would have approved our 485.
Now that we should get current from August 1, can you hazard a guess as to what might most likely happen? Do you think we might get a biometrics notice once again since fingerprints expire after 1 year (my understanding)? Or do you think we might get a CPO notice? Or some other third thing?
Please enlighten. :confused:
Thanks and best regards.
Folks, we had an interview in December of 2008 and the IO said that had the dates been current, she would have approved our 485.
Now that we should get current from August 1, can you hazard a guess as to what might most likely happen? Do you think we might get a biometrics notice once again since fingerprints expire after 1 year (my understanding)? Or do you think we might get a CPO notice? Or some other third thing?
Please enlighten. :confused:
Thanks and best regards.
girlfriend imagenes de angeles de amor.
spicy_guy
08-11 11:44 AM
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
You put it out well from your side.
BTW, are you really 2007 EB3 I? Do you have a guesstimate on when you would get GC?:rolleyes:
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
You put it out well from your side.
BTW, are you really 2007 EB3 I? Do you have a guesstimate on when you would get GC?:rolleyes:
hairstyles angeles de amor.
vagish
04-04 03:57 PM
If you want a good discussion on a topic stop generalizing things and do not use rants like racist engineers etc. When you make an assumption please be clear about. You have assumed most people work for consulting companies and most people are frustrated with it. Not so. I don't work for them and I am not frustrated with them. My only concern with them is they are exploiting the system to their advantage and at my cost. This has two fold affect not only the take cut from your salary but also put a bad name to H1B visa program in general. Whoever wrote the bill or whatever are the consequences there is definitely some good things in that bill. Let me list out how some provisions are good:
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
completely agree.
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
completely agree.
walking_dude
09-19 01:07 PM
On the flight back I was watching LIES Dobbs on Communist Nativist Network...
Corrected.
On the flight back I was watching Lou Dobbs on CNN and they used a clipping from our rally and did a whole piece on illegal immigration without even mentioning the rally!! That is so typical of the media.
Corrected.
On the flight back I was watching Lou Dobbs on CNN and they used a clipping from our rally and did a whole piece on illegal immigration without even mentioning the rally!! That is so typical of the media.
Ennada
12-10 08:10 AM
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar