SunnySurya
08-07 10:01 AM
I am no Gandhi and don't want to be one. I am just a common man trying to make my ends meet. Only thing I know is that if you come before me in the line I am affected. It is not a DMV line where every one will get their License, it is a ration line where the items are limited.
Call it selfish call it any thing else but these are the facts after being in the USA for last 12 years and two different labors.
Think about Aman, he is still working for the benefit of EB community even though he got his greencard, I have US Masters degree but I don't support this.
Call it selfish call it any thing else but these are the facts after being in the USA for last 12 years and two different labors.
Think about Aman, he is still working for the benefit of EB community even though he got his greencard, I have US Masters degree but I don't support this.
wallpaper via Official Google Blog
pappu
08-21 12:38 PM
The law unambiguously states that for employment based categories - EB1 spillover should first go to EB2 and whatever is not required by both EB1 and EB2 will spillover to EB3. If the USCIS has been doing something different previously they were actually not following the letter of the law.
Here are the relevant sections of the INA which unambiguosly states the above.
Here is what Section 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act states -
EB1 -
(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),...............
EB2 -
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall 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 paragraph (1) ...............
EB3 -
(3) Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers.-
(A) In general. - Visas shall 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 (1) and (2), .........
If all these years they were misinterpreting the law, where were lawyers and AILA raising their voice to correct this mistake? This error was deeply affecting the clients of lawyers.
We need to see more proactive activism of lawyers in matters such as these that are very important for the community. If not, members need to learn the law and do such research themselves. IV core team has been trying its best to read the law and create presentations and research documents whenever we have an important action item or bill on the floor. I would urge the community to read the law on their own as and when needed and raise their awareness.
Here are the relevant sections of the INA which unambiguosly states the above.
Here is what Section 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act states -
EB1 -
(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),...............
EB2 -
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall 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 paragraph (1) ...............
EB3 -
(3) Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers.-
(A) In general. - Visas shall 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 (1) and (2), .........
If all these years they were misinterpreting the law, where were lawyers and AILA raising their voice to correct this mistake? This error was deeply affecting the clients of lawyers.
We need to see more proactive activism of lawyers in matters such as these that are very important for the community. If not, members need to learn the law and do such research themselves. IV core team has been trying its best to read the law and create presentations and research documents whenever we have an important action item or bill on the floor. I would urge the community to read the law on their own as and when needed and raise their awareness.
apb
10-02 02:06 PM
To all who are getting green. Good to see many approvals in the first few days itself.
Best wishes to all others.
Best wishes to all others.
2011 Google#39;s blog search
Keeme
09-11 12:44 PM
3 more co-sponsors added, the total is now 31.:)
Also noticed only 8 Republicans v/s/ 23 Dems.
Although number of republicans so-sponsoring is lower, it's still 25% of the total so there is hope that more will support it when it comes to voting. ;)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5882
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2008-09-10]
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D-TX]
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL]
Rep. Thomas Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D-TX]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D-AZ]
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest [R-MD]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Michael Honda [D-CA]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D-CA]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R-TX]
Rep. James Moran [D-VA]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY]
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Rep. Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Linda S�nchez [D-CA]
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. John Shadegg [R-AZ]
Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA]
Rep. Fortney Stark [D-CA]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
Rep. David Wu [D-OR]
Have you noticed that NOT many co-sponsors from MI/OH/IA/IL/OH/PA/MO/MN/CT/NJ/MA....etc states ? Does it mean something ? Many of them are the hardest hit states...or they are 'FULL' of immigrants....
Also noticed only 8 Republicans v/s/ 23 Dems.
Although number of republicans so-sponsoring is lower, it's still 25% of the total so there is hope that more will support it when it comes to voting. ;)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5882
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2008-09-10]
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D-TX]
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL]
Rep. Thomas Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D-TX]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D-AZ]
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest [R-MD]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Michael Honda [D-CA]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D-CA]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R-TX]
Rep. James Moran [D-VA]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY]
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Rep. Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Linda S�nchez [D-CA]
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. John Shadegg [R-AZ]
Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA]
Rep. Fortney Stark [D-CA]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
Rep. David Wu [D-OR]
Have you noticed that NOT many co-sponsors from MI/OH/IA/IL/OH/PA/MO/MN/CT/NJ/MA....etc states ? Does it mean something ? Many of them are the hardest hit states...or they are 'FULL' of immigrants....
more...
desi3933
06-17 02:23 PM
Good job slumdogs. You are becoming a puppet of anti-immigrants. Today they are using you to throw your L1 brothers out. Tomorrow they will throw you out. There is fraud in H1 too. No visa is perfect. Just like no American citizen is perfect. 1 in 10 citizen has gone to jail.
If you have so much energy and motivation, why don't you go after anti-immigrants and expose their evil.
Educated idiots!
Are you suggesting that no fraud should be reported?
I would say, any fraud, whether H1/L1/F1, employee related, employer related should be reported? Why should law abiding immigrants/workers pay for those who are committing fraud?
>> 1 in 10 citizen has gone to jail.
Not correct. There are about 260 jail inmates per 100,000 US residents.
Link: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/jails.htm
>> Educated idiots!
Now, tell me, who is educated idiot?
.
If you have so much energy and motivation, why don't you go after anti-immigrants and expose their evil.
Educated idiots!
Are you suggesting that no fraud should be reported?
I would say, any fraud, whether H1/L1/F1, employee related, employer related should be reported? Why should law abiding immigrants/workers pay for those who are committing fraud?
>> 1 in 10 citizen has gone to jail.
Not correct. There are about 260 jail inmates per 100,000 US residents.
Link: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/jails.htm
>> Educated idiots!
Now, tell me, who is educated idiot?
.
radhay
06-29 04:08 PM
same thing from my law firrm..
"I have received the following update from the American Immigration
Lawyers Assoc. regarding the July quota:
Update on July Visa Availability
We are hearing from multiple sources that, on Monday or Tuesday of next
week, State Department plans to issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July
2007. This revised Bulletin would retrogress some or all of the
employment-based categories, very likely to the point of unavailable.
Reports from AILA members about unusual levels and types of activities
by USCIS indicate a particular push to adjudicate employment-based
adjustments currently in the pipeline so as to exhaust visa numbers for
fiscal year 2007.
This follows the actions of USCIS in June, when it began rejecting EB-3
"Other Worker" adjustment applications even though the Visa Bulletin
showed an October 2001 cut-off date, on the basis that the "Other
Worker" numbers for the year had been exhausted."
What the heck?????
"I have received the following update from the American Immigration
Lawyers Assoc. regarding the July quota:
Update on July Visa Availability
We are hearing from multiple sources that, on Monday or Tuesday of next
week, State Department plans to issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July
2007. This revised Bulletin would retrogress some or all of the
employment-based categories, very likely to the point of unavailable.
Reports from AILA members about unusual levels and types of activities
by USCIS indicate a particular push to adjudicate employment-based
adjustments currently in the pipeline so as to exhaust visa numbers for
fiscal year 2007.
This follows the actions of USCIS in June, when it began rejecting EB-3
"Other Worker" adjustment applications even though the Visa Bulletin
showed an October 2001 cut-off date, on the basis that the "Other
Worker" numbers for the year had been exhausted."
What the heck?????
more...
arunmohan
01-07 02:32 PM
Group:
I am ready for anything GC, conditional GC or Citizenship which ever comes first. If it is required funding we can start a new funding drive. But we need to start actively. Still I beleive that we should ask for conditional GC first because USCIS itself can make a rule to give a conditional GC for people who are waiting for GC more than 5 years and staying legally in this country last 10 years.
We need to collect friends who are in same situation.
We should take advise from attorney if they can give some kind of help.
I am ready for anything GC, conditional GC or Citizenship which ever comes first. If it is required funding we can start a new funding drive. But we need to start actively. Still I beleive that we should ask for conditional GC first because USCIS itself can make a rule to give a conditional GC for people who are waiting for GC more than 5 years and staying legally in this country last 10 years.
We need to collect friends who are in same situation.
We should take advise from attorney if they can give some kind of help.
2010 Google-log: April fools quot;+1
gc_check
06-29 07:13 PM
I dont know why everybody started to spit on ohio law firm. They just pointed out some news that they got from AILA, right? Lets hope its just a rumor and USCIS doesn't proceed with this revised thing. I am pretty sure that wont happen. Dont worry guys, but dont blame everything on ohio firm. I saw this on several other law firms too.
Before IV, immigration-law used to be the website to get consolidated information related to immigration news, Also most of the updates posted are based on the AILA updates/alerts. It is not fair to get mad at this site, just because he has posts/news that are not liked by vast majority of folks like us. I wish to see the VB dates current, but ��. we all know now, what is real... Retrogression and waiting...
Before IV, immigration-law used to be the website to get consolidated information related to immigration news, Also most of the updates posted are based on the AILA updates/alerts. It is not fair to get mad at this site, just because he has posts/news that are not liked by vast majority of folks like us. I wish to see the VB dates current, but ��. we all know now, what is real... Retrogression and waiting...
more...
apb
10-06 05:46 PM
Hi apb..
Good to see that there is some activity going on our cases..i got the response form USCIS saying that "the case is pending at the USCIS office" dose this means they transfered the case to local office? or still at NBC..dose your message says that the your case has been transfered to "local USCIS office" or just "USCIS office"?..
My online status says transferred to USCIS office, BUT the mail I got in response to my lost application inquiry stated LOCAL uscis office and that you will be called for interview whenever they are ready.
Good to see that there is some activity going on our cases..i got the response form USCIS saying that "the case is pending at the USCIS office" dose this means they transfered the case to local office? or still at NBC..dose your message says that the your case has been transfered to "local USCIS office" or just "USCIS office"?..
My online status says transferred to USCIS office, BUT the mail I got in response to my lost application inquiry stated LOCAL uscis office and that you will be called for interview whenever they are ready.
hair google-log-search-new-queries
unseenguy
06-15 06:49 PM
The competitive angle did occur to me. There is no reason a business should not look for ways to cut costs. However, this is a question of fairness & legitimacy. A L1 visa person living in a low cost country and coming here temporarily on short-term assignments can make do with lower wages because he likely does not have to support a family here at the US cost of living, and L1 spouses can work. This is not fair to a H1 with same skills whose H4 spouse cannot work, and for the same reasons it is not fair to USC/GC folks. Isn't that why we currently have all this labor certification processes and DOL laws? Those laws are designed to level the playing field. It is not easy for the company to outsource entirely, so they break the law by abusing the visa. Why should we not act to stop this illegitimate corporate action?
If that does not sound reasonable, let me ask you this: Why should USCIS and law-makers even consider taking steps to address green-card backlogs, adding resources to process more cases more quickly when they can just sit there and collect fees from you for visa / EAD renewals?
Agreed on your point. But there are other discriminations at workplace such as , age, race, sex and sexual harrassment. Those who complain about it effectively terminate their careers. If you want to go , complain against this L1 misuse fine, but you are not going to get mileage, maybe some bad breath and bad publicity and eventual loss of reference & job. If your company / client has decided they do not want to persist with you, there are 101 ways they can get rid of you, legal or illegal, my suggestion is, if you were exposed,
can L1fraud hold his head high in front of his client and still ask for reference with no sense of guilt in future? If not, he has lost half the game but now wants to lose the other half in a self destructive manner.
If that does not sound reasonable, let me ask you this: Why should USCIS and law-makers even consider taking steps to address green-card backlogs, adding resources to process more cases more quickly when they can just sit there and collect fees from you for visa / EAD renewals?
Agreed on your point. But there are other discriminations at workplace such as , age, race, sex and sexual harrassment. Those who complain about it effectively terminate their careers. If you want to go , complain against this L1 misuse fine, but you are not going to get mileage, maybe some bad breath and bad publicity and eventual loss of reference & job. If your company / client has decided they do not want to persist with you, there are 101 ways they can get rid of you, legal or illegal, my suggestion is, if you were exposed,
can L1fraud hold his head high in front of his client and still ask for reference with no sense of guilt in future? If not, he has lost half the game but now wants to lose the other half in a self destructive manner.
more...
danu2007
07-09 07:44 PM
For those who interested in sending email to media:-
mcuban@hd.net,
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
mcuban@hd.net,
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
hot Google Blog Search Sidebar
gg_ny
08-09 02:30 PM
Once again the petition protesting against namecheck delays misses the point. It is unreasonable to ask the FBI to "speed up" the process, they should be allowed to take as much time as they want.
I want to recycle all the negative adjectives you have used in your mail on your statements ;-). Please read about NNCP, FBI and related congressional hearings and statements; about the GC for a muslim known to have Hezbollah connections but missed by FBI background checks and the kind of reactions in evoked in 2002; subsequent modifications in the name check process. Also, try to understand (!) that name checks are done for ALL APPLICANTS including for Soccer Spicegirl and her hubby Bechkam when they would apply under extraordinarily talented category. FBI does not look for visa category the applicant comes under; it is not their job. CIS is mandated to have the "background" check (of which namecheck is just one of the processes) cleared for ALL gc applicants. Then how can this be independent of gc process? What if the uncleared person gets gc and then becomes persona non granta (unavailable) for deportation if the checks fail? how about the benefits (SSN etc) and immi benefits (sponsorship etc.)? what if that person becomes an elected offcier (state governor?) and then the name check fails?
The request to speed up the name checks is truly ridiculous. Stupidity like this is what harms legal H1-B immigrants the most.
Do you understand the reasons for the delay? Read Pappu's postings carefully: the delay is not because of namechecks not cleared; delay is mainly because the FBI analysts DO NOT GET TO YOUR FILE for many years! They claim they could not keep up with demand for name checks from gc applicatns, naturalization applicants, sometimes other visa applicants, whitehouse visitors, political appointees to less prominent positions, would-be employees of coast guard and other sensitive defense establishments etc. etc. If that is the case what is wrong in asking FBI (I dont know who is doing it though) to speed up the process for legal immigratns? $100 X 500,000 = $50M; Even if one analyst costs ~100K per year (with benefits), then do the math!
Stupidity in any form is harmful to H1Bs. Asking for expediting namecheck (even with a fat fee) is not one of them. But putting the mouths first where the minds should have been really harms anyone!
I want to recycle all the negative adjectives you have used in your mail on your statements ;-). Please read about NNCP, FBI and related congressional hearings and statements; about the GC for a muslim known to have Hezbollah connections but missed by FBI background checks and the kind of reactions in evoked in 2002; subsequent modifications in the name check process. Also, try to understand (!) that name checks are done for ALL APPLICANTS including for Soccer Spicegirl and her hubby Bechkam when they would apply under extraordinarily talented category. FBI does not look for visa category the applicant comes under; it is not their job. CIS is mandated to have the "background" check (of which namecheck is just one of the processes) cleared for ALL gc applicants. Then how can this be independent of gc process? What if the uncleared person gets gc and then becomes persona non granta (unavailable) for deportation if the checks fail? how about the benefits (SSN etc) and immi benefits (sponsorship etc.)? what if that person becomes an elected offcier (state governor?) and then the name check fails?
The request to speed up the name checks is truly ridiculous. Stupidity like this is what harms legal H1-B immigrants the most.
Do you understand the reasons for the delay? Read Pappu's postings carefully: the delay is not because of namechecks not cleared; delay is mainly because the FBI analysts DO NOT GET TO YOUR FILE for many years! They claim they could not keep up with demand for name checks from gc applicatns, naturalization applicants, sometimes other visa applicants, whitehouse visitors, political appointees to less prominent positions, would-be employees of coast guard and other sensitive defense establishments etc. etc. If that is the case what is wrong in asking FBI (I dont know who is doing it though) to speed up the process for legal immigratns? $100 X 500,000 = $50M; Even if one analyst costs ~100K per year (with benefits), then do the math!
Stupidity in any form is harmful to H1Bs. Asking for expediting namecheck (even with a fat fee) is not one of them. But putting the mouths first where the minds should have been really harms anyone!
more...
house According to the Google blog,
nrk
10-22 09:53 AM
Thanks,
Two of my friends still waiting for GC, they have PD August 2004 and Nov 2004, i will pass this information to them (They were not on this forum)
Yeah, I believe we still have people from 2004 waiting (and that includes me!!)
Here are some ways of contacting USCIS - Immigration: 12 Ways to Contact USCIS and FBI to Check Case Status (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/contact-uscis-fbi.php#)
Good luck to all!
Two of my friends still waiting for GC, they have PD August 2004 and Nov 2004, i will pass this information to them (They were not on this forum)
Yeah, I believe we still have people from 2004 waiting (and that includes me!!)
Here are some ways of contacting USCIS - Immigration: 12 Ways to Contact USCIS and FBI to Check Case Status (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/contact-uscis-fbi.php#)
Good luck to all!
tattoo Official Google Blog: Google,
boldm28
09-24 06:48 PM
Your attorney HAS to reply to your inquiries. It is stated in every State's BAR website. Otherwise, you have right to make a complaint that stays with the BAR records forever. BAR has to publish it to anyone who asks for information about that attorney. Attorneys do not want that.
We were in a similar situation. We sent an e-mail and left a voicemail saying something like: "In our point of view, a reasonable time for you to reply to our inquiries is 3 business days. If you do not call us and let us know another reasonable period of time for a reply period immediately, we will assume that you will reply to our inquiries and/or let us know the information about our case coming from USCIS in three days".
I guess we are learning this country's ways.
This worked very well ;
Our case:
i99 - I140/485 concurrent/NSC/July@d/R.Williams/No CC/No RN
TRUE
I got my fedex/DHL info from my attorney when i told them i would complain about her to the state BAR association and by the way She/He is already being investigated by the BAR association .. i wont want to give her/his name out but she answers questions on a popular website which starts with state language
We were in a similar situation. We sent an e-mail and left a voicemail saying something like: "In our point of view, a reasonable time for you to reply to our inquiries is 3 business days. If you do not call us and let us know another reasonable period of time for a reply period immediately, we will assume that you will reply to our inquiries and/or let us know the information about our case coming from USCIS in three days".
I guess we are learning this country's ways.
This worked very well ;
Our case:
i99 - I140/485 concurrent/NSC/July@d/R.Williams/No CC/No RN
TRUE
I got my fedex/DHL info from my attorney when i told them i would complain about her to the state BAR association and by the way She/He is already being investigated by the BAR association .. i wont want to give her/his name out but she answers questions on a popular website which starts with state language
more...
pictures Google Adds Blog Filter For
The7zen
08-07 11:46 AM
The moment I get sufficient number of people I am going all out.
But as a compromise, I have got a very simple and easy way out...I can tell you one thing, I do have a case which does not require any law change but just the interpretation of it.
Make sure that 5882 is successful. If it proceeds, I will back down. It is a shame that among 25K members raising 5K becomes a challenge.
This goes on to show there is no community. If there is not community then I have to look after my interest.
Stupid is as stupid does
How about going after EAD's, because of the 2007 july fiasco many people were fortunate enough to get an EAD, now they are competing with you in the job market....how about filing a law suit against that ? to cut the competion ....looks like you have plenty of time.
But as a compromise, I have got a very simple and easy way out...I can tell you one thing, I do have a case which does not require any law change but just the interpretation of it.
Make sure that 5882 is successful. If it proceeds, I will back down. It is a shame that among 25K members raising 5K becomes a challenge.
This goes on to show there is no community. If there is not community then I have to look after my interest.
Stupid is as stupid does
How about going after EAD's, because of the 2007 july fiasco many people were fortunate enough to get an EAD, now they are competing with you in the job market....how about filing a law suit against that ? to cut the competion ....looks like you have plenty of time.
dresses You will see your logger
gcwonder
11-02 07:55 PM
I have send all 4 letters.
more...
makeup In summary, the Google blog is
soni7007
08-07 01:14 PM
Yes, I agree that not filing GC earlier is not an excuse for MBA. The point is he still would have been in the same situation (EB3, 2003 is not too different from EB2, 2005) in terms of how fast he will get his GC.
What stopped (from legal stand point) MBA guy to file for eb3 based GC in 2003? Remember both have BS in Engineering at that time. No employer was ready to file GC for the MBA guy (in 2003) is not a valid legal argument.
Remember, one does not need to be employed to file for GC and GC is for the future job.
It is not what you or I think is fair. From legal point of view, both had equal opportunity to file for GC in 2003 for eb3 job. Just because, the MBA person didn't go for it is not a valid argument. Don't you agree?
What stopped (from legal stand point) MBA guy to file for eb3 based GC in 2003? Remember both have BS in Engineering at that time. No employer was ready to file GC for the MBA guy (in 2003) is not a valid legal argument.
Remember, one does not need to be employed to file for GC and GC is for the future job.
It is not what you or I think is fair. From legal point of view, both had equal opportunity to file for GC in 2003 for eb3 job. Just because, the MBA person didn't go for it is not a valid argument. Don't you agree?
girlfriend wish that the google blog
thakurrajiv
09-25 08:52 AM
I concluded the same ( Though never posted that analysis :)) But It looks like we are missing a very critical point - we are assuming that " these pending numbers are the total 485 workload USCIS has" but I referred a different chart on USCIS board and it looks like there is a separte hoard of "preadjudicated" applications already sitting in a queue apart from these numbers. Please check on following link.
USCIS: National Processing Volumes and Trends (http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=9&office=4&charttype=1)
I saw this link Murthy's email too. The total pre-adjudicated cases in the chart is matching with the total in the document. Well now there are more un-answered questions:
1. Does all other pending 485 include employment based ? If yes what % are employment based ? Obviously we do not have any country specific data on these.
2. Is there any way to know whether individual case is pre-adjudicated or not ?
USCIS has fooled us again. No good statistical analysis can be done on incomplete/inaccurate data. I am going from hopeful to hopeless again. I am EB2-I Feb 2006.
Thanks a lot for staying on top of this and posting your analysis.
USCIS: National Processing Volumes and Trends (http://dashboard.uscis.gov/index.cfm?formtype=9&office=4&charttype=1)
I saw this link Murthy's email too. The total pre-adjudicated cases in the chart is matching with the total in the document. Well now there are more un-answered questions:
1. Does all other pending 485 include employment based ? If yes what % are employment based ? Obviously we do not have any country specific data on these.
2. Is there any way to know whether individual case is pre-adjudicated or not ?
USCIS has fooled us again. No good statistical analysis can be done on incomplete/inaccurate data. I am going from hopeful to hopeless again. I am EB2-I Feb 2006.
Thanks a lot for staying on top of this and posting your analysis.
hairstyles In the official Google Blog,
Nil
03-11 12:32 PM
i guess some of the folks who are in the same GC boat do not approve of a few getting into citizenship while the rest are left behind.
This is fully understandable.
All what we are aiming for, finally, is citizenship.
All what a few red dotted folks here are talking about is to set a fair timeline for it.
Say if one gets the GC after 4 yrs of application, s/he will get a citizenship roughly 10 yrs from that start. What is wrong if someone who is waiting in queue for 10 years can finally apply for citizenship?
We need to find a plan to propose that will speed up the GC process as well as deliver citizenship after a foreseeable period of time.
There is no discrimination here.
Please feel free to reason out instead of pouring in red dots.
This is fully understandable.
All what we are aiming for, finally, is citizenship.
All what a few red dotted folks here are talking about is to set a fair timeline for it.
Say if one gets the GC after 4 yrs of application, s/he will get a citizenship roughly 10 yrs from that start. What is wrong if someone who is waiting in queue for 10 years can finally apply for citizenship?
We need to find a plan to propose that will speed up the GC process as well as deliver citizenship after a foreseeable period of time.
There is no discrimination here.
Please feel free to reason out instead of pouring in red dots.
addsf345
08-26 07:48 PM
You probably chatted with a person sitting in a cubicle in India or some other inexpensive country. That person would be the customer rep of this company and other company as a contractor (not even an employee). So telling the chat lady will not do anything. She will just log her time and bill the company for chatting with you. You need to contact the senior executives of the company
what you said is quite possible; though the person seem to be aware of vonage deal and was little worried of possible impact on teleblend's business. (They have $49.99 unlimited India plan - simply doesn't make any sense now...) I am calling them now, Again. Usually teleblend offers good quality services at lower price than vonage or lingo. If they don't come up with a good solution, I will move to vonage by this weekend.
Here is teleblend number if anyone else also interested to call.
Phone: 1-877-415-5635 or dial 611 from your Teleblend Phone
what you said is quite possible; though the person seem to be aware of vonage deal and was little worried of possible impact on teleblend's business. (They have $49.99 unlimited India plan - simply doesn't make any sense now...) I am calling them now, Again. Usually teleblend offers good quality services at lower price than vonage or lingo. If they don't come up with a good solution, I will move to vonage by this weekend.
Here is teleblend number if anyone else also interested to call.
Phone: 1-877-415-5635 or dial 611 from your Teleblend Phone
gtg506p
01-08 02:24 PM
I will participate in this wholeheartedly. One suggestion to the admin: perhaps we can post this in other websites also like ? I know a lot of people use that site for posting problems etc and whoever is not in IV might also get to know about it.