Madhuri
11-10 05:24 PM
I received receipt number from USCIS for my letter.
wallpaper Flores
bmoni
04-09 06:43 PM
Thanks Papu !!!! thats great....
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
seahawks
11-17 11:37 PM
Here's mine - NRC2008065496
I just send mine by US mail last week. My wife send hers too, I havent received a receipt no yet.
I just send mine by US mail last week. My wife send hers too, I havent received a receipt no yet.
2011 Diferentes tipos de Flores
nirenjoshi
03-09 12:53 PM
EB3 ROW has been retrogressed as predicted in Oh's website.
All non-India EB3 are at March 03 now....
Will they keep them at March 03 for few months and give a bump to EB3?
Something is cooking...Otherwise they wouldn't retrogress ROW by almost 2 years...
From the bulletin -
E. RETROGRESSON OF THE WORLDWIDE, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATES FOR APRIL
Despite the established cut-off date having been held for the past five months in an effort to keep demand within the average monthly usage targets, the amount of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Offices for adjustment of status cases remains extremely high. Therefore, it has been necessary to retrogress the April cut-off dates in an attempt to hold demand within the FY-2009 annual limit. Since over 60 percent of the Worldwide and Philippines Employment Third preference CIS demand received this year has been for applicants with priority dates prior to January 1, 2004, the cut-off date has been retrogressed to 01MAR03 to help ensure that the amount of future demand is significantly reduced. As indicated in the last sentence of Item A, paragraph 1, of this bulletin, this cut-off date will be applied immediately. It should also be noted that further retrogression or �unavailability� at any time cannot be ruled out.
It has also been necessary to retrogress the Employment Third Preference Other Worker cut-off date for all countries in order to hold the issuance level within the annual limit.
All non-India EB3 are at March 03 now....
Will they keep them at March 03 for few months and give a bump to EB3?
Something is cooking...Otherwise they wouldn't retrogress ROW by almost 2 years...
From the bulletin -
E. RETROGRESSON OF THE WORLDWIDE, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATES FOR APRIL
Despite the established cut-off date having been held for the past five months in an effort to keep demand within the average monthly usage targets, the amount of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Offices for adjustment of status cases remains extremely high. Therefore, it has been necessary to retrogress the April cut-off dates in an attempt to hold demand within the FY-2009 annual limit. Since over 60 percent of the Worldwide and Philippines Employment Third preference CIS demand received this year has been for applicants with priority dates prior to January 1, 2004, the cut-off date has been retrogressed to 01MAR03 to help ensure that the amount of future demand is significantly reduced. As indicated in the last sentence of Item A, paragraph 1, of this bulletin, this cut-off date will be applied immediately. It should also be noted that further retrogression or �unavailability� at any time cannot be ruled out.
It has also been necessary to retrogress the Employment Third Preference Other Worker cut-off date for all countries in order to hold the issuance level within the annual limit.
more...
bang
10-16 10:42 AM
Please participate in EB3 PollSee my details in Signature
GCard_Dream
11-17 05:44 PM
What do you mean by "Most people have run out of H1B and will have to change jobs on the extensions"? I thought that as long as you have a approved I-140, you could continue to extend your H1-B beyond the 6 years while you are waiting for your PD to be current. Isn't this true? Please explain.
That's probably the path most people with (EB3 2003 onwards/EB2 2004 onwards) will take from now on. The only hurdle is there is no clarity about the law regarding H1B extensions granted on an approved I-140. Most people have run out of H1B and will have to change jobs on the extensions. I hope USCIS issues a clear guidance on this issue. Also you might not have to let go of the priority date if your company is kind enough.
That's probably the path most people with (EB3 2003 onwards/EB2 2004 onwards) will take from now on. The only hurdle is there is no clarity about the law regarding H1B extensions granted on an approved I-140. Most people have run out of H1B and will have to change jobs on the extensions. I hope USCIS issues a clear guidance on this issue. Also you might not have to let go of the priority date if your company is kind enough.
more...
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
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.
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.
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.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
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.
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.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
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.
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.
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.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
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.
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.
2010 NURIA TIPOS DE FLORES
senthil1
02-19 12:28 AM
What do you wish? You need gc the moment you enter the country? If anyone who stays 5 years get green card.That is excellent if legal or illegal immigrant. This is apart from 140K regular quota. This will reduce backlog substantially.
If you are lazy enough to contact your representative and Obama, you should not complain for not getting your voice heard. Each and every email matter. Also contact Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] on her website. contact all. It wont take 5 minutes.
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
If you are lazy enough to contact your representative and Obama, you should not complain for not getting your voice heard. Each and every email matter. Also contact Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] on her website. contact all. It wont take 5 minutes.
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
more...
go_guy123
09-09 02:33 PM
Sadly true. Our hope is STEM exemption and Visa recapture and both of them will get little political help till elections. After the elections, the political arena will definitely be different with some Republicans replacing the Democrats in the House and any immigration related bill will result in a much tougher battle.
SKIL will NEVER see light of day so long there is the "pandering to illegals" democratic party is there in control of agenda. Under GOP there is atleast some better chance
of piecemeal and therefore SKIL bill has some chance.
SKIL will NEVER see light of day so long there is the "pandering to illegals" democratic party is there in control of agenda. Under GOP there is atleast some better chance
of piecemeal and therefore SKIL bill has some chance.
hair o tipos de flores,
kumar1
07-31 03:18 PM
x
more...
spicy_guy
07-28 11:36 AM
But I do understand your point though, FYI. I already left them last summer in good terms and I still have good relationship with them. I also referred few of my friends (who had bad experience with their employers and wanted to come out) to ECG and never heard any issues from them yet :)
Other than the above, I really do NOT have anything else with them, TRUST ME dude!!!
Cool. Hard to find such Desi companies.
Other than the above, I really do NOT have anything else with them, TRUST ME dude!!!
Cool. Hard to find such Desi companies.
hot tipos de flor en jarrón.
desi3933
01-31 06:00 PM
desi3933,
Please correct me if I'm wrong but after reading this thread and from what I know ,what I understand is:
From the time one applies 485 we should have W2 amount close to what is mentioned in LC.
There is nothing like out of status thing from the time we apply for 485.
But from the last entry to US on non-immigrant visa to the date of applying 485 once should be in status and if they are out of status for less than 180 days it is considered ok.
My question is how do we show we were in status from the last entry to U.S on non-immigrant visa to the date 485 was filed ?
Will the W2 be sufficient or do we have to show our monthly pay stubs.
You mentioned in your 'Pandit' example about the H1 LC amount...how do we know what our H1 LCA amount is?
I would highly appreciate response.Thank you.
>> how do we know what our H1 LCA amount is?
Your employer should provide you a copy of LCA for H1. In addition, your employment letter should mention salary, along with employment terms, and job profile.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Please correct me if I'm wrong but after reading this thread and from what I know ,what I understand is:
From the time one applies 485 we should have W2 amount close to what is mentioned in LC.
There is nothing like out of status thing from the time we apply for 485.
But from the last entry to US on non-immigrant visa to the date of applying 485 once should be in status and if they are out of status for less than 180 days it is considered ok.
My question is how do we show we were in status from the last entry to U.S on non-immigrant visa to the date 485 was filed ?
Will the W2 be sufficient or do we have to show our monthly pay stubs.
You mentioned in your 'Pandit' example about the H1 LC amount...how do we know what our H1 LCA amount is?
I would highly appreciate response.Thank you.
>> how do we know what our H1 LCA amount is?
Your employer should provide you a copy of LCA for H1. In addition, your employment letter should mention salary, along with employment terms, and job profile.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
house Flores para presente
hmehta
11-20 12:50 AM
Probably, at this moment it might still be true but the reality is that it is soon going to be demoted from this position......so there is nothing like missing the opportunity....!!!!
Please do not take any precipitated steps that harm yours status ! Calm down. This is still the strongest economy in the world. You don't want to miss this unique opportunity !
Please do not take any precipitated steps that harm yours status ! Calm down. This is still the strongest economy in the world. You don't want to miss this unique opportunity !
tattoo About Flowers
feedfront
09-14 02:03 PM
Well, I have not received RFE mail yet. I have changed my employer because our division was sold to Canadian firm and they moved everything to Montreal.
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
more...
pictures Flores ornamental
arupkumarsaha
07-28 10:54 AM
its amrit..drink of the gods...so its befitting.
What is next ?
Lord Ganesha on the ad of a cathouse called "Apsaras" , that also befits the taste of gods !
Let me also add that am so fat that people had nicknamed me "ganesh" and I raise objections at every possible reasons whenever the "ganesh" sysmbol is propley misused (like my nickname :-) .
cheers,
Arup
What is next ?
Lord Ganesha on the ad of a cathouse called "Apsaras" , that also befits the taste of gods !
Let me also add that am so fat that people had nicknamed me "ganesh" and I raise objections at every possible reasons whenever the "ganesh" sysmbol is propley misused (like my nickname :-) .
cheers,
Arup
dresses colores y tipos de flores
hpandey
07-11 01:59 PM
Thanks. Any input in this tough time is really appreciated. All I am trying to get is , any clue , any information to see the light at the end of this Long Dark Tunnel of EB-3.
Currently the tunnel is closed at the end for EB-3 :mad: and the only way out I see is for us EB-3 folks to dig through. No one cares about EB-3 I folks. That's the way I see it.
Currently the tunnel is closed at the end for EB-3 :mad: and the only way out I see is for us EB-3 folks to dig through. No one cares about EB-3 I folks. That's the way I see it.
more...
makeup distintos tipos de flores.
db_greencard
09-26 09:46 AM
This article is totally messed up.
girlfriend Flores para presente
Caliber
01-16 07:37 PM
Date of sign up: Jan. 16, 2007
Subscription Name: Secure $50 Per Month Recurring Contribution Subscription Number: S-09A85447SH728390F
Contributed till now: 300 + 50 = 350
Even my October 2002, NJ EB3 labor was not yet approved. Not that some thing good will happen soon, but by seeing the selfless efforts of the core team especially Aman, I feel sad and hence contributing. I know if some one asks me to spend even one hour time for some social life, I may not do so. But this core team has been tirelessly working and I feel ashamed of myself.
This 485 eligibility to apply will not even benefit me as my labor is stuck with PBEC and I hope all the people waiting with 140 approvals will get benefit.
Thank you Team IV.
Subscription Name: Secure $50 Per Month Recurring Contribution Subscription Number: S-09A85447SH728390F
Contributed till now: 300 + 50 = 350
Even my October 2002, NJ EB3 labor was not yet approved. Not that some thing good will happen soon, but by seeing the selfless efforts of the core team especially Aman, I feel sad and hence contributing. I know if some one asks me to spend even one hour time for some social life, I may not do so. But this core team has been tirelessly working and I feel ashamed of myself.
This 485 eligibility to apply will not even benefit me as my labor is stuck with PBEC and I hope all the people waiting with 140 approvals will get benefit.
Thank you Team IV.
hairstyles Tipos de Flores « Tipos de
pappu
12-13 12:50 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
ndbhatt
06-10 09:04 PM
I disagree that it effects EB Community for EAD holders. COming on to options if the amendment stands it might take the form of TARP - God Forbid. Everyone of us predicted Financial industry has so much clout etc.. but those days are gone. I think US companies have decided to bend to laws and find ways to overcome them.
Reg. Options : we are here to earn bread. Just FYI for countries like Canada they have already closed gates. for Ppl who already have PR's over there life is not easy as "is" here right now in getting jobs. Moving the all operations to different country is only possible for companies like Microsoft. not all. btw no one will hire undocumented.
So we need to really motivate ourselves and friends against this headless draft version. This is not first time it came in to light everytime there was a immigration issue it used to come on top. But it failed as climate was cordial for immigrants or economy was good. Things have changed far far beyond in 2008 and TARP bill restrictions is one example where companies decided not to hire H1B at all (mostly) even it applies to TARP recipients.
My thoughts.
I humbly disagree with you on TARP analogy. TARP was due to direct funding by Government to save "Too Big to Fail" companies and obviously they had a say in that case since it was tax payers money. The focus was only on those limited companies. Having said that this text has a wider repercussions and doesn't spare anyone, whether they are financially sound or goverment funded.
I completely agree with you that US offers better job prospects and earning potential. However, when the noose around the neck turns tighter with such "headless" bills, people will sooner or later, start looking at options.
Trust me companies don't hesitate to move on if the environment isn't business friendly(reasons are higher tax, difficulty hiring immigrants, finding people with right skillsets, and so on) as they are more accountable to shareholders and they would care less if it is US today or Brazil tomorrow, the show must go on.
You have heard of horrific stories of people getting CDN PR and hard to find jobs. Failure stories show up lot quicker than the success stories. I have known three close ones who are well placed in Canada.
There are always two sides of coin and so is the half glass full, a half glass empty.
Bottomline is if such bills turn into bill, its not just immigrant community but the economy as whole gets impacted.
Bhattji
Reg. Options : we are here to earn bread. Just FYI for countries like Canada they have already closed gates. for Ppl who already have PR's over there life is not easy as "is" here right now in getting jobs. Moving the all operations to different country is only possible for companies like Microsoft. not all. btw no one will hire undocumented.
So we need to really motivate ourselves and friends against this headless draft version. This is not first time it came in to light everytime there was a immigration issue it used to come on top. But it failed as climate was cordial for immigrants or economy was good. Things have changed far far beyond in 2008 and TARP bill restrictions is one example where companies decided not to hire H1B at all (mostly) even it applies to TARP recipients.
My thoughts.
I humbly disagree with you on TARP analogy. TARP was due to direct funding by Government to save "Too Big to Fail" companies and obviously they had a say in that case since it was tax payers money. The focus was only on those limited companies. Having said that this text has a wider repercussions and doesn't spare anyone, whether they are financially sound or goverment funded.
I completely agree with you that US offers better job prospects and earning potential. However, when the noose around the neck turns tighter with such "headless" bills, people will sooner or later, start looking at options.
Trust me companies don't hesitate to move on if the environment isn't business friendly(reasons are higher tax, difficulty hiring immigrants, finding people with right skillsets, and so on) as they are more accountable to shareholders and they would care less if it is US today or Brazil tomorrow, the show must go on.
You have heard of horrific stories of people getting CDN PR and hard to find jobs. Failure stories show up lot quicker than the success stories. I have known three close ones who are well placed in Canada.
There are always two sides of coin and so is the half glass full, a half glass empty.
Bottomline is if such bills turn into bill, its not just immigrant community but the economy as whole gets impacted.
Bhattji
FinalGC
07-13 08:27 AM
Hi,
Can you point me to the source of the above? The reason why I ask this is because my priority date falls between March 01 and 07....So near, yet so far!
Thanks,
March 1 is NOT included.......See attachment Page 1 paragraph 5....
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number.
Hopefully next round of spillover buddy....hang in there...:-)
Can you point me to the source of the above? The reason why I ask this is because my priority date falls between March 01 and 07....So near, yet so far!
Thanks,
March 1 is NOT included.......See attachment Page 1 paragraph 5....
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number.
Hopefully next round of spillover buddy....hang in there...:-)