BharatPremi
12-18 07:35 PM
Can 2 sue US immigration system/Government for this condition?
wallpaper Calendar. January 2011
sarangbeley
02-25 08:20 PM
Payment sent transaction ID: 5XF7750851624640H
wc_user
07-25 10:16 PM
What happened to EB3-I, call to action ? I sent out the letters ,but what is the follow-up ? Looks like everyone is interested only in EB2 India and nobody is doing anything about EB3-India.
2011 A collection of lue,
Administrator2
11-17 08:06 PM
just
1,747 Letters and Emails Sent So Far
:(
Leo,
Just so that we are clear, please note that signing online petitions doesn't mean anything if there is no matching advocacy. Timing of the activity is also very important. In the end, advocacy and grassroots effort must compliment each other at the same time. The website you are referring is an advertisement website. Its not a resource for serious advocacy effort.
The Congress is right now focused on DREAM Act. If we just say "Erase Green card backlog", it will mean nothing. But there is a chance if we send specific targeted message asking to include specific provisions in the bill that appear to be moving (i.e. DREAM Act in this case), and IV is complimenting this message with the advocacy on the ground.
Just sending random email from some online advertisement for profit website does not mean anything. We think that some of these websites are just collecting your Email and Home Address, which they could sell for making profit.
Immigration Voice would like to request its all members not to send out random messages from advertisement websites because such messages are out of sink with reality. Please participate in the well defined and targeted 'Action Items' on IV.
Team IV
1,747 Letters and Emails Sent So Far
:(
Leo,
Just so that we are clear, please note that signing online petitions doesn't mean anything if there is no matching advocacy. Timing of the activity is also very important. In the end, advocacy and grassroots effort must compliment each other at the same time. The website you are referring is an advertisement website. Its not a resource for serious advocacy effort.
The Congress is right now focused on DREAM Act. If we just say "Erase Green card backlog", it will mean nothing. But there is a chance if we send specific targeted message asking to include specific provisions in the bill that appear to be moving (i.e. DREAM Act in this case), and IV is complimenting this message with the advocacy on the ground.
Just sending random email from some online advertisement for profit website does not mean anything. We think that some of these websites are just collecting your Email and Home Address, which they could sell for making profit.
Immigration Voice would like to request its all members not to send out random messages from advertisement websites because such messages are out of sink with reality. Please participate in the well defined and targeted 'Action Items' on IV.
Team IV
more...
gjoe
10-09 06:18 AM
Why do you think FIFO is scientifically impossible? If you beleive that weather forecast is reliable like most of the Americans do, making the FIFO system work more effeciently without wasting even a single visa is possible.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
Kodi
07-30 09:54 AM
Just received an email from CRIS, our I-131 was approved. Nothing on EAD.
more...
jkays94
06-22 12:17 AM
Let's start our campaign for our own bill immediately. There is no motive to wait. We should pay lobbysts and ask them to approach lawmakers using the argument that legal immigrants need a relief without waiting for amnesty bills for illegal aliens.
The same argument applies, why would someone like Dianne Feinstein or other lawmakers who supported CIR because of industries such as agriculture, turn around and support a bill for legal immigrants when they traditionally have been opposed to bills that favor skilled workers ? The reality is that there will be no new bill until after November. I'm being pessimistic with good reason, look at the example that this Senator (http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroom/release.cfm?id=256689) gave regarding a measure that made it to the Senate and collapsed, but they did have success in the house where it passed as they would have wanted it to. What happened in this same case is what has happened to CIR, it got past the Senate but is now facing problems in the house. It goes to show that lobbying even with massive resources does not guarantee immediate success neither is the result what one set out to get, but indeed one is better off lobbying than not lobbying at all :
18 families worth a total of $185.5 billion quietly financed and coordinated a 10-year effort to repeal the estate tax. The report (http://www.citizen.org/documents/EstateTaxFinal.pdf) tells how these families spent over $200 million dollars contributing to political campaigns, financing outside lobby groups and trade associations, and creating a massive anti-estate tax coalition that served as the main coordinator of the repeal campaign.
The same argument applies, why would someone like Dianne Feinstein or other lawmakers who supported CIR because of industries such as agriculture, turn around and support a bill for legal immigrants when they traditionally have been opposed to bills that favor skilled workers ? The reality is that there will be no new bill until after November. I'm being pessimistic with good reason, look at the example that this Senator (http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroom/release.cfm?id=256689) gave regarding a measure that made it to the Senate and collapsed, but they did have success in the house where it passed as they would have wanted it to. What happened in this same case is what has happened to CIR, it got past the Senate but is now facing problems in the house. It goes to show that lobbying even with massive resources does not guarantee immediate success neither is the result what one set out to get, but indeed one is better off lobbying than not lobbying at all :
18 families worth a total of $185.5 billion quietly financed and coordinated a 10-year effort to repeal the estate tax. The report (http://www.citizen.org/documents/EstateTaxFinal.pdf) tells how these families spent over $200 million dollars contributing to political campaigns, financing outside lobby groups and trade associations, and creating a massive anti-estate tax coalition that served as the main coordinator of the repeal campaign.
2010 2011 Calendar General Blue
khukubindu
05-05 06:20 PM
Thanks reddymjm for your quick reply. How long would it be current , do you think ?
What should I do from my side if it the date is correct ?
Should I call USCIS.
What should I do from my side if it the date is correct ?
Should I call USCIS.
more...
psaxena
02-09 10:13 AM
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 32R78275M69540623.
donated $50
I will be in India around that time so cannot attend the campaign in person.
All the best to IV .. hope we get the justice ASAP.
donated $50
I will be in India around that time so cannot attend the campaign in person.
All the best to IV .. hope we get the justice ASAP.
hair photo : lue calendar 2011
arihant
05-02 11:23 AM
Does section 201 mean that those with advanced degrees from US Universities are exempt from the 3 year requirement? This clarification is critical because of the 3 years in the RELATED field clause. I do not believe any of the other bills incorporating similar provisions have made this distinction for US advanced degree holders vs advanced degree holders from other countries. I believe all other bills impose the 3 year RELATED field restriction for ALL advanced degree holders.
If the 3 year RELATED field clause does not exist for US advanced degree holders in STEM, it would give relief to many members.
Kindly clarify.
If the 3 year RELATED field clause does not exist for US advanced degree holders in STEM, it would give relief to many members.
Kindly clarify.
more...
vadapav
12-02 03:46 PM
Friends,
Please give your opinion on my plan.
Current Status:EB3 PD 08/2004, I140 Approved, Got EAD, Good relations with current employer
I have no realistic hopes by getting GC by end of next year.
New employment: Have an offer to start a new job around middle of next year by which 180 days will be complete. New job is very different than current one. Here is my plan:
1. Don't file AC21, hope that I won't receive RFE since my PD wont be current for a long time.
2. Change address, but give friend's address in the same city as mentioned on application
3. Convince current employer to respond to RFE (in case any) positively
4. May be have an arrangement with current employer to work part time when I start new job. So that way, I'll remain on previous employer's payroll and he can respond to RFE
Does this sound far fetched?
thnx
Please give your opinion on my plan.
Current Status:EB3 PD 08/2004, I140 Approved, Got EAD, Good relations with current employer
I have no realistic hopes by getting GC by end of next year.
New employment: Have an offer to start a new job around middle of next year by which 180 days will be complete. New job is very different than current one. Here is my plan:
1. Don't file AC21, hope that I won't receive RFE since my PD wont be current for a long time.
2. Change address, but give friend's address in the same city as mentioned on application
3. Convince current employer to respond to RFE (in case any) positively
4. May be have an arrangement with current employer to work part time when I start new job. So that way, I'll remain on previous employer's payroll and he can respond to RFE
Does this sound far fetched?
thnx
hot calendar for January 2011
desi3933
06-28 10:58 AM
On a practical note, if the company has sponsored H1Bs in the past, what justification can the company give for not filing another H1B ?
Many reasons. Pick any one of you choice.
1. Employer does not want file H-1B this year at all.
2. Employer already has 15% workforce on H-1B and does not want to become H-1B dependent employer.
3. This job is permanent and H-1B can be filed only for temporary jobs.
H-1B Specialty (Professional) Workers (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/h-1b.cfm) The H-1B program allows an employer to temporarily employ a foreign worker in the U.S. on a nonimmigrant basis in a specialty occupation or as a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability.
4. H-1B quota is over (if applicable) and employee is on F1 OPT.
5. In past, many H1-B has been rejected by USCIS for this job position.
6. The job does not qualify as specialty occupation under H-1B
All of these reasons are valid legal reasons. One more time, valid legal reasons.
Practically there are many ways a company can avoid hiring an H1B or GC if they want to. But the point is, as per law that is illegal.
Are you suggesting the employer is required, by law, to file for H-1B sponsorship for the job applicant?
Avoiding H-1B applicant is legal, whereas avoiding GC/EAD/OPT applicant isn't.
For argument sake, assuming if H-1B applicant can force employer to file H-1B and he/she was not picked because of his/her H-1B visa status, he/she has legal route of filing case against that employer. In this was true, there will be many attorneys eager to file such cases. But, alas, there is not even one such case.
Employer has choice of
1. Filing or not filing H-1B
2. Filing or not filing green card for the employee.
These are employer's choices. Legal choices.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Many reasons. Pick any one of you choice.
1. Employer does not want file H-1B this year at all.
2. Employer already has 15% workforce on H-1B and does not want to become H-1B dependent employer.
3. This job is permanent and H-1B can be filed only for temporary jobs.
H-1B Specialty (Professional) Workers (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/h-1b.cfm) The H-1B program allows an employer to temporarily employ a foreign worker in the U.S. on a nonimmigrant basis in a specialty occupation or as a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability.
4. H-1B quota is over (if applicable) and employee is on F1 OPT.
5. In past, many H1-B has been rejected by USCIS for this job position.
6. The job does not qualify as specialty occupation under H-1B
All of these reasons are valid legal reasons. One more time, valid legal reasons.
Practically there are many ways a company can avoid hiring an H1B or GC if they want to. But the point is, as per law that is illegal.
Are you suggesting the employer is required, by law, to file for H-1B sponsorship for the job applicant?
Avoiding H-1B applicant is legal, whereas avoiding GC/EAD/OPT applicant isn't.
For argument sake, assuming if H-1B applicant can force employer to file H-1B and he/she was not picked because of his/her H-1B visa status, he/she has legal route of filing case against that employer. In this was true, there will be many attorneys eager to file such cases. But, alas, there is not even one such case.
Employer has choice of
1. Filing or not filing H-1B
2. Filing or not filing green card for the employee.
These are employer's choices. Legal choices.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
house in a cobalt lue and cloud
sina
11-18 02:53 PM
Sent the email and received email from John Kerry. I donated $100 this afternoon and still do not have access to the Donor Forum? Is there anything more to get access?
tattoo Thursday, January 06, 2011
GC4ALL
07-21 01:53 PM
EAD Renewal eFiled date: 05/26/08
USCIS Received date: 6/6/08
LUD on : 6/11/08
FP date: 6/21/08
USCIS Received date: 6/6/08
LUD on : 6/11/08
FP date: 6/21/08
more...
pictures January 2011 - Vacation on Grand Cayman - The Endangered Blue Iguana
bsnf
11-19 05:02 PM
Send 1 for me and 1 for my wife.
dresses A new 2011 calendar would be
Positive
07-20 12:44 PM
We all are equally frustrated with the situation we are in. We can always find reasons to fight within our community (EB Vs FB, Legal Vs Illegal, EB1 vs EB2 Vs EB3 - the list is endless). These outburst of frustrations / arguments and counter arguments do not take us anywhere.
Let us keep supporting IV and build a strong partnership of interested parties. Let us focus on areas where we can agree. Many among us worked hard to build this community, let us try to strengthen and preserve it.
Let us keep supporting IV and build a strong partnership of interested parties. Let us focus on areas where we can agree. Many among us worked hard to build this community, let us try to strengthen and preserve it.
more...
makeup Tuesday, January 4, 2011
VMH_GC
07-19 08:20 PM
can you create an excel sheet in google and share it so that it is easy to track the contribution
girlfriend Published Wed 26 Jan 2011
24fps
03-08 05:47 PM
I am a lurker in this site. This is my first post. I have seen many posts by United Nations. He has helped and still trying to help many users at IV. His posts has insight and valuable information. Doubting his intentions just because he is in this society for 35 years is not appropriate.
I agree, UN has given good, free advice and information worth thousands of dollars in here without any malice, and he's always ready to give any info, i think he deserves more respect that someone childishly questioning him.
I agree, UN has given good, free advice and information worth thousands of dollars in here without any malice, and he's always ready to give any info, i think he deserves more respect that someone childishly questioning him.
hairstyles of the calendar to give us
gcwait2007
08-18 02:44 PM
Mine is a labor substitution case. Labor PD: 02/2007. I-140 filed on 06/29/2007 in NSC and received the case number and also notice of action (I-797). If it is not a labor substitution case, then it would have been filed in TSC.
I live in Texas and my attorney filed I-1485 in TSC on 08/02/2007.
Whether my I-140 (based on labor substitution) will be transferred to TSC, from NSC? Or my I-485 will be transferred from TSC to NSC? How this transfer of cases from one center to another happening?
I live in Texas and my attorney filed I-1485 in TSC on 08/02/2007.
Whether my I-140 (based on labor substitution) will be transferred to TSC, from NSC? Or my I-485 will be transferred from TSC to NSC? How this transfer of cases from one center to another happening?
actaccord
02-01 12:41 PM
to create forum like this and get people who complains about India and slowly work on fixing it one by one. Hope our kids get to enjoy without (or with very less) complaints.
PS: If I want to fix anything, 1st I would work on fixing the education system. My kids will start screaming (bcs of bad experience they had) the moment I say "You will be moved to India school shortly".
I am from Hyderabad, l left that city in 1999 to do my MS, got my MS, switched a couple of jobs as i thought career growth / job satisfaction was more important than filing a GC, finally my present company filed my GC in 2009 (PD 2009), I am fed up of this laborious process, not everyone can take it, and I am one of them, and as I get older, I am getting more conservative and I find it difficult to adjust here. I am visiting India this year, if everything works out, I will be heading back, even with all the complaints about India, it still is my country of birth, and there is a saying, "Janani Janma bhoomishya swargadapi gariyasi", translated, Mother and motherland are superior to the Heaven.
PS: If I want to fix anything, 1st I would work on fixing the education system. My kids will start screaming (bcs of bad experience they had) the moment I say "You will be moved to India school shortly".
I am from Hyderabad, l left that city in 1999 to do my MS, got my MS, switched a couple of jobs as i thought career growth / job satisfaction was more important than filing a GC, finally my present company filed my GC in 2009 (PD 2009), I am fed up of this laborious process, not everyone can take it, and I am one of them, and as I get older, I am getting more conservative and I find it difficult to adjust here. I am visiting India this year, if everything works out, I will be heading back, even with all the complaints about India, it still is my country of birth, and there is a saying, "Janani Janma bhoomishya swargadapi gariyasi", translated, Mother and motherland are superior to the Heaven.
kosu
06-12 11:14 AM
Hi,
I filed on June 5th and TSC received my package on June 6th. Still my Checks hasnt cleared.
I filed on June 5th and TSC received my package on June 6th. Still my Checks hasnt cleared.
No comments:
Post a Comment