gc_on_demand
06-10 09:05 AM
Folks
July bulletin is OUT and NO more significant movement. Please call Lawmakers ASAP. Unless we take action USCIS is not going to do anything. Situation can be worse once we head towards election season. Still we have 1-2 months to get things done or we will be waiting for years to get green card OR EAD ( For some folks ).
It is just 10-15 minutes need to spend to call. Let them know WHO WE ARE AND WHAT ARE OUR ISSUES .
Please I request all of you to call , if you already call then ask your friends and family members to call.
Now its time to act. If we dont take action CHC will not allow to move ahead our 3 bills.
CALL NOW .... and Spread this message to everyone.
July bulletin is OUT and NO more significant movement. Please call Lawmakers ASAP. Unless we take action USCIS is not going to do anything. Situation can be worse once we head towards election season. Still we have 1-2 months to get things done or we will be waiting for years to get green card OR EAD ( For some folks ).
It is just 10-15 minutes need to spend to call. Let them know WHO WE ARE AND WHAT ARE OUR ISSUES .
Please I request all of you to call , if you already call then ask your friends and family members to call.
Now its time to act. If we dont take action CHC will not allow to move ahead our 3 bills.
CALL NOW .... and Spread this message to everyone.
wallpaper sunny sandler in grown ups.
prinive
03-13 10:02 AM
I couldnt belive it. But let us wait... I told some one that I will send sugar to them... Let me contact them through PM...
krishmunn
04-18 06:24 PM
As I see it, the only persons benefited are the ones having the priority dates in ancient times. I think we really should not mind letting them have their GC's, being our seniors.
Yes, later year porters might end up having to wait. It's all in the game, fortunately or unfortunately. One thing is for sure, we as a whole, have an uphill battle
If it really comes to matter, I think it should be easy for an EB2 to port to EB3 if the dates are current for him in the different category. So if I were EB2 today, I wouldn't be so apprehensive :)
I have neither become apprehensive nor have got any ill feeling ... just showing where the problem is .
Yes, later year porters might end up having to wait. It's all in the game, fortunately or unfortunately. One thing is for sure, we as a whole, have an uphill battle
If it really comes to matter, I think it should be easy for an EB2 to port to EB3 if the dates are current for him in the different category. So if I were EB2 today, I wouldn't be so apprehensive :)
I have neither become apprehensive nor have got any ill feeling ... just showing where the problem is .
2011 more.
signin241
07-26 09:21 AM
I'm getting married in August and my wife will be here in Sep/Oct. My PD is pretty recent - May 2007 EB2 (India). I'm planning to file my 140/485 (concurrent) and maintain my H1B for now and also bring my wife on H4. As long as she wants to be on H4, I'll maintain my H1 and once my PD comes CURRENT again, I'll file her 485.
Now, I've heard that my 485 won't be approved before my date is CURRENT again. Once the bulletin releases and if my date is CURRENT, I'll send my wife's papers to USCIS immediately. But it seems like I can get FP notice even before my dates become CURRENT. That case, my FP and other stuff might finish early and my wife's late. Does this affect her case in anyway as there is every chance that my 485 gets approved early and hers late. Will she be "out of status" because of her 485 pending and mine approved.
What do you suggest ??
Now, I've heard that my 485 won't be approved before my date is CURRENT again. Once the bulletin releases and if my date is CURRENT, I'll send my wife's papers to USCIS immediately. But it seems like I can get FP notice even before my dates become CURRENT. That case, my FP and other stuff might finish early and my wife's late. Does this affect her case in anyway as there is every chance that my 485 gets approved early and hers late. Will she be "out of status" because of her 485 pending and mine approved.
What do you suggest ??
more...
immique
06-11 10:50 PM
I disagree with the earlier comment. I don't agree that any one(including EB3) lost due to July 2007 visa bulletin. sure it was haphazard by the way it was handled, but thousands of well qualified applicants from many retrogressed countries had a chance to file their I 485 and were able to obtain well deserved benefits like EAD, AP or themselves and their dependants which thy have been denied for many yearsdue to the inefficient processing of various agencies. people have to realize that all of us are in the same boat and most of the people getting unfair treatment are from the retrogressed countries waiting for their green cards for 8-9 years
a_paul1
04-02 08:41 PM
1. Employer gave documentary evidence of a valid job for the candidate to secure H1B visa. The question of calling or not calling the candidate to come to US does not arise. The employer, by petitioning USCIS, admited that he wants to employ the candidate in US. The candidate does not need any further letter to come to US. All the required documents are already with the candidate when he goes for stamping.
Hence, it is valid for the candidate to come to US by presenting documentation.
1.1 Exception: If the Employer proactively cancels the H1B that changes everything, which I believe is not the situation here. (The candidate wouldn't even be able to enter US in that case.). Unless, the H1B is canceled, the employer is on the hook and not the candidate.
2. Payment for visa by candidate is not fraud on the part of the candidate if he had no intention. Although ignorance of the law is almost never an excuse, this is a grey area really. The candidate might have paid to the employer and not to USCIS for the petition. The actual responsibility to not take payment lies with the employer. My opinion: Candidate will not be held liable for this.
3. If Employer fails to provide paystubs or fails to put him on payroll, he is on the hook. He is liable for full wages as long as he does not cancel H1b (unless the H1B is transferred of course). He is also liable to pay return fare to the candidate.
IMHO, the candidate is cool. No issue. Go ahead with your complaint to DOL. Good luck to you. Come back to work for a genuine employer with a new stamp.
Hence, it is valid for the candidate to come to US by presenting documentation.
1.1 Exception: If the Employer proactively cancels the H1B that changes everything, which I believe is not the situation here. (The candidate wouldn't even be able to enter US in that case.). Unless, the H1B is canceled, the employer is on the hook and not the candidate.
2. Payment for visa by candidate is not fraud on the part of the candidate if he had no intention. Although ignorance of the law is almost never an excuse, this is a grey area really. The candidate might have paid to the employer and not to USCIS for the petition. The actual responsibility to not take payment lies with the employer. My opinion: Candidate will not be held liable for this.
3. If Employer fails to provide paystubs or fails to put him on payroll, he is on the hook. He is liable for full wages as long as he does not cancel H1b (unless the H1B is transferred of course). He is also liable to pay return fare to the candidate.
IMHO, the candidate is cool. No issue. Go ahead with your complaint to DOL. Good luck to you. Come back to work for a genuine employer with a new stamp.
more...
vikram2101
08-22 02:01 PM
>> which country would you side?
Without a doubt, USA as I am a US citizen and USA is my country.
that would most certainly be the politically correct thing to say. Unfortunately, most people don't come with an OFF/ON switch.. Yesterday, I was a citizen of X - country , I support X whole heartedly, today, I am a citizen of Z - country, so I will support Z whole heartedly - more so because the whole naturalization process is not an OFF/ON switch either.
Without a doubt, USA as I am a US citizen and USA is my country.
that would most certainly be the politically correct thing to say. Unfortunately, most people don't come with an OFF/ON switch.. Yesterday, I was a citizen of X - country , I support X whole heartedly, today, I am a citizen of Z - country, so I will support Z whole heartedly - more so because the whole naturalization process is not an OFF/ON switch either.
2010 tattoo kristin chenoweth
deep2480
01-20 04:50 PM
Count me in and let me know how can i donate money and where we can see how the progress is going on???
more...
Macaca
02-15 01:54 PM
As soon as some one expresses his frustration, person is automatically labeled as a bad guy.
A short digression to an answer.
Most CS undergraduate curriculums have a 4 course sequence CS-1, CS-2, CS-3 and CS-4. This means that CS-3 is pre-requisite for CS-4, .... In CS-4 it is not possible to answer CS-1 questions. The instructor gets irritated if you do that.
Your following concerns are covered in Retrogression 101.
1. Things change in DC. Core had some info in Dec/Jan that changed.
2. No one can promise anything. Bush is the most ardent supporter of CIR but can (will) not get it done.
Nothing happening as some core members wrote in very optimistic tone about Feb 15. No congressman is even talking about it lately.
Are core members trying to just enroll more by giving hollow promises?
It is very irritating for someone in Retrogression 401 to answer Retrogression 101 questions at the rate of 1 per day with no desire to be educated.
I have tried to answer a Retrogression 101 question in Issues surrounding Immigration Voice's disclosure of Funds (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3236&page=5). My answer was from a URL without my opinions. This thread was devoted to this one person. The answers had no effect on the person. We wasted a day on it.
Forget contributions - find other ways to survive......
A lot of people, including me have lost faith in IV. They are not going to pay. We don't know what IV is working on and we don't believe it can do anything. The sooner IV accepts it, the better. I have seen this personally in talking to people and you can see the evidence with less than 300 people contributing. IV needs to produce results first.
A short digression to an answer.
Most CS undergraduate curriculums have a 4 course sequence CS-1, CS-2, CS-3 and CS-4. This means that CS-3 is pre-requisite for CS-4, .... In CS-4 it is not possible to answer CS-1 questions. The instructor gets irritated if you do that.
Your following concerns are covered in Retrogression 101.
1. Things change in DC. Core had some info in Dec/Jan that changed.
2. No one can promise anything. Bush is the most ardent supporter of CIR but can (will) not get it done.
Nothing happening as some core members wrote in very optimistic tone about Feb 15. No congressman is even talking about it lately.
Are core members trying to just enroll more by giving hollow promises?
It is very irritating for someone in Retrogression 401 to answer Retrogression 101 questions at the rate of 1 per day with no desire to be educated.
I have tried to answer a Retrogression 101 question in Issues surrounding Immigration Voice's disclosure of Funds (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3236&page=5). My answer was from a URL without my opinions. This thread was devoted to this one person. The answers had no effect on the person. We wasted a day on it.
Forget contributions - find other ways to survive......
A lot of people, including me have lost faith in IV. They are not going to pay. We don't know what IV is working on and we don't believe it can do anything. The sooner IV accepts it, the better. I have seen this personally in talking to people and you can see the evidence with less than 300 people contributing. IV needs to produce results first.
hair more.
gsc999
07-19 06:01 PM
Guys I am ready to pay my dues to core....If you want I can start a thread to track the payment only for the core members. Lemme know what do you think.
Zoooom & Anzerraja:
The core membership may be modest and may not want to speak out much on this issue. It becomes our prerogative to drive this.
Lets do this. Zooom do you mind opening a separate thread, "Reimburse past expenses to Aman & other IV Core members" or something like that. Please post a message asking people to "pledge" an amount towards that effort. Can you two drive this effort. I am also available for assistance.
We will update members who pledge how to finalize their pledge by any of the following methods based on subsequent expert advice:
1) Should they contribute to IV directly
2) Send a personal check to Aman.
3) Other method like IV reimbursing Aman and others from the common donation corpus.
Zoooom & Anzerraja:
The core membership may be modest and may not want to speak out much on this issue. It becomes our prerogative to drive this.
Lets do this. Zooom do you mind opening a separate thread, "Reimburse past expenses to Aman & other IV Core members" or something like that. Please post a message asking people to "pledge" an amount towards that effort. Can you two drive this effort. I am also available for assistance.
We will update members who pledge how to finalize their pledge by any of the following methods based on subsequent expert advice:
1) Should they contribute to IV directly
2) Send a personal check to Aman.
3) Other method like IV reimbursing Aman and others from the common donation corpus.
more...
gcsomeday
07-11 12:41 PM
Sorry- I think it is already being addressed. My bad.
hot angel melaku. Angel Melaku
answers_seeker
07-18 01:13 PM
I am not sure if that is going to be an advantage since my PD was not current in JUNE
For all practical purposes, the date on which it was recieved is your RD=> Receipt Date. The postmark date has no relevance except for records unless USCIS explicitly states so ( which it did once in 2001 http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=89a5f3cee754ad0499e55e731191f 360).
485 filings are strictly Receipt date. I am still searching for the uscis link and will post one as soon as I find one.
For all practical purposes, the date on which it was recieved is your RD=> Receipt Date. The postmark date has no relevance except for records unless USCIS explicitly states so ( which it did once in 2001 http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=89a5f3cee754ad0499e55e731191f 360).
485 filings are strictly Receipt date. I am still searching for the uscis link and will post one as soon as I find one.
more...
house more.
pappu
10-16 12:46 PM
Are there only 3 people suffering from namechecks?
This issue can be pushed if we have strong support for it.
This issue can be pushed if we have strong support for it.
tattoo tattoo house Nate Berkus
anzerraja
07-19 06:36 PM
Thanks very much !
Will DO...Just gimme some time.
Will DO...Just gimme some time.
more...
pictures more.
nixstor
05-23 02:07 PM
I am not sure how can one call it "absurdity" if 200 calls spread over 12 lawmakers got 2 law makers from the CHC co sponsor all three bills. ?
Digital signatures might help every IV member sign it off with out moving an inch. Web faxes and Digital signatures are NOT what we need. been there, done that and we know how it works.
I am not sure how the OP concluded that we are calling haphazardly. A lot of State chapters are talking with their rep's offices to get co sponsorship. If that's some thing of interest to you, work with your state chapter to see what they are doing in the chapter. I hope the OP would not say that calling a representative's office is haphazard.
Digital signatures might help every IV member sign it off with out moving an inch. Web faxes and Digital signatures are NOT what we need. been there, done that and we know how it works.
I am not sure how the OP concluded that we are calling haphazardly. A lot of State chapters are talking with their rep's offices to get co sponsorship. If that's some thing of interest to you, work with your state chapter to see what they are doing in the chapter. I hope the OP would not say that calling a representative's office is haphazard.
dresses more.
reddymjm
08-25 11:19 AM
Will find out that ICICI was better.
more...
makeup hairstyles The Bank Job
Oli-G
06-22 07:59 PM
and that, my friend, is just childish behavior =)
Battle finished a few days ago. People have a right to want to kow the winner, and to get "excited". I'd kinda like to know also ;).
Battle finished a few days ago. People have a right to want to kow the winner, and to get "excited". I'd kinda like to know also ;).
girlfriend hair Tyler James Williams and
stucklabor
04-08 11:17 AM
Xu1, that is a valid concern. I have sent in this request to admin. But on important issues like this, please do PM admin and other Moderators in addition to public posts. The core group is so drained by all the during the week activities that posts may not be actively monitored during weekends. I think the problem is also logistical, in that we are now getting a lot of checks - which is great, but also now, the core team members handling finances must now take time out to start sending email receipts. So wait for admin and the financial people to get back to you.
Moderators, do you think it's possible to issue an email receipt to contributors? I donated $250 so far and the first $100 was done through my bank billpay.. However, the online billpay deducted the amount right away, and it didn't give me any indication whether the check was actually endorsed by the intended recipient on the supposed delivery date.. Worrying about that, I sent in my second contribution via paypal.
Writing an actual paper check, I would see a copy of endorsement online, or using paypal I would know it's cashed out via email. But this is not the case with my bank's (bank of america) online billpay. Thanks!
Moderators, do you think it's possible to issue an email receipt to contributors? I donated $250 so far and the first $100 was done through my bank billpay.. However, the online billpay deducted the amount right away, and it didn't give me any indication whether the check was actually endorsed by the intended recipient on the supposed delivery date.. Worrying about that, I sent in my second contribution via paypal.
Writing an actual paper check, I would see a copy of endorsement online, or using paypal I would know it's cashed out via email. But this is not the case with my bank's (bank of america) online billpay. Thanks!
hairstyles michael pena shooter. michael
sledge_hammer
02-03 09:53 AM
I have somewhat uderstood the rulemaking process. What I fail to understand is that since the rule to stop labor substitution is the final rule, does it mean that this rule has been implemented? Or is the next step for OMB to approve the final rule?
I am confused!
I am confused!
pbojja
06-12 06:12 PM
I believe that there is a great flaw in the way the USCIS allocates VISA NUMBERS among EB1, EB2 and EB3 which is very much evident and if we can stand united we can get something done.
After carefully observing the trend in VISA approval and VISA bulletins, It is a reality that EB3-I is not moving and at the same time EB2 and EB1 are moving fast in relative terms and probably may even become current ( EB1 is already current ), But one thing USCIS is clearly not considering is the Priority Date, which basically means that they are not giving a damn thing about how long the person from EB3-I is waiting for. Here is my suggestion and some of the IV representatives need to analyse what Iam gonna say and see if they can stand up. Being an EB3-I india myself, i totally agree that EB1 and EB2 should be given a weightage and some preference over EB3, but I dont agree to what USCIS is currently following, EB2 With priority 2006 getting ahead of EB3-I with priority date 2001. This is ridiculous and to even think about it, it just sounds stupid. What they can do is , They can move the Dates in both Categories while giving preference to EB1 and EB2 first.
Please dont jump up & down before i complete. Iam just giving you an example of how things should work and how they can move dates forward for all 3 categories while maintaining that EB1 and EB2 gets preference over EB3. Let us ignore Eb1, since it is already current. Now Coming to Eb2, the priority Date is 2004 for them.Ideally speaking, They should not move them ahead until atleast EB3 reaches 2004. But once Both EB2 and EB3 reaches the priority date of 2004, Obviously EB2 gets the preference over Eb3 and EB2 will start to move ahead but not by much, let us say 1 year. Now, Clearly, EB2 is still given the extra preference over EB3 but at the same time, we are maintaining the priority dates between EB2 and EB3 as close as possible so that the system is not totally unfair to EB3 filers. I think, as one of the un-biased Organisation we should stand up against this unfair treatment in general. I hope even EB-2 will understand what iam trying to say.
let me know if iam making any sense. If am wrong, also let me know. So that i can get a better understanding of things and correct myself.
Not sure whatz ur point , But here is the deal EB2 has more numbers because of roll overs from ROW and EB-1 and they are ahead of EB3 .
If we talk about ridiculous things here are some
ROW EB2 - 2008 can get a green card before Indian EB2 -2004
Counting Dependents under Employment based
CIS wasting Visa Numbers even when they had 500 k pending applications
After carefully observing the trend in VISA approval and VISA bulletins, It is a reality that EB3-I is not moving and at the same time EB2 and EB1 are moving fast in relative terms and probably may even become current ( EB1 is already current ), But one thing USCIS is clearly not considering is the Priority Date, which basically means that they are not giving a damn thing about how long the person from EB3-I is waiting for. Here is my suggestion and some of the IV representatives need to analyse what Iam gonna say and see if they can stand up. Being an EB3-I india myself, i totally agree that EB1 and EB2 should be given a weightage and some preference over EB3, but I dont agree to what USCIS is currently following, EB2 With priority 2006 getting ahead of EB3-I with priority date 2001. This is ridiculous and to even think about it, it just sounds stupid. What they can do is , They can move the Dates in both Categories while giving preference to EB1 and EB2 first.
Please dont jump up & down before i complete. Iam just giving you an example of how things should work and how they can move dates forward for all 3 categories while maintaining that EB1 and EB2 gets preference over EB3. Let us ignore Eb1, since it is already current. Now Coming to Eb2, the priority Date is 2004 for them.Ideally speaking, They should not move them ahead until atleast EB3 reaches 2004. But once Both EB2 and EB3 reaches the priority date of 2004, Obviously EB2 gets the preference over Eb3 and EB2 will start to move ahead but not by much, let us say 1 year. Now, Clearly, EB2 is still given the extra preference over EB3 but at the same time, we are maintaining the priority dates between EB2 and EB3 as close as possible so that the system is not totally unfair to EB3 filers. I think, as one of the un-biased Organisation we should stand up against this unfair treatment in general. I hope even EB-2 will understand what iam trying to say.
let me know if iam making any sense. If am wrong, also let me know. So that i can get a better understanding of things and correct myself.
Not sure whatz ur point , But here is the deal EB2 has more numbers because of roll overs from ROW and EB-1 and they are ahead of EB3 .
If we talk about ridiculous things here are some
ROW EB2 - 2008 can get a green card before Indian EB2 -2004
Counting Dependents under Employment based
CIS wasting Visa Numbers even when they had 500 k pending applications
T-O
06-15 06:48 AM
Introducing the Apple iBOY. Wish I could have spent more time on it, but I'm too lazy ;).
Edit: I just realized this is not really a skin... more of a modification. Is it legal? If not, I'd like to have this entry voided so I can try again hehe.
:thumb: This one's awesome! :D
Edit: I just realized this is not really a skin... more of a modification. Is it legal? If not, I'd like to have this entry voided so I can try again hehe.
:thumb: This one's awesome! :D
0 comments:
Post a Comment