%252525252Bas%252525252Bshe%252525252Btakes%252525252Bthe%252525252Bstage%252525252Bat%252525252Bpolitical%252525252Brally%252525252B2.jpg "lady gaga no makeup or wig.")
bayarea07
09-11 08:30 PM
Called and left a VM for
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
wallpaper lady gaga no makeup or wig.
sc3
08-20 02:00 PM
It is not true. The orignal text in IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT says "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), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, an d whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
Beyond 28.6 percent, there is no words/requirements from the law that EB1 should spillover to EB2 first, then EB2 can spillover to EB3. It is just saying that EB1 can spillover to EB2, EB1&EB2 can spillover to EB3.
"
That is true. USCIS behaviour no longer (or never has) assumes the meaning of EB1&EB2 wording in the law text.
Previously a lot of visas flowed into EB3 because USCIS misinterpreted ( rather did not take into account) the AC21 change, which suggests that the per-category spill over numbers must be used within the category before flowing out of the category.
Unfortunately, when they realized it, they seem to now ignore (or have always ignored) the wording of EB1&EB2 numbers flowing in EB3. A lot of people here don't agree with this interpretation, but I am very sure that USCIS is misreading the law and is shafting EB3 big time.
I dont know how to word a letter to USCIS that shows them their oversight, and yet word it in a positive (or a non-confrontational) manner. If you have any idea's, lets work on a letter campaign to make USCIS aware of this. However, let us do this through personal PMs while we work out the details, as this is a very contentious issue and you will spend a lot of time responding to distracting arguments.
Beyond 28.6 percent, there is no words/requirements from the law that EB1 should spillover to EB2 first, then EB2 can spillover to EB3. It is just saying that EB1 can spillover to EB2, EB1&EB2 can spillover to EB3.
"
That is true. USCIS behaviour no longer (or never has) assumes the meaning of EB1&EB2 wording in the law text.
Previously a lot of visas flowed into EB3 because USCIS misinterpreted ( rather did not take into account) the AC21 change, which suggests that the per-category spill over numbers must be used within the category before flowing out of the category.
Unfortunately, when they realized it, they seem to now ignore (or have always ignored) the wording of EB1&EB2 numbers flowing in EB3. A lot of people here don't agree with this interpretation, but I am very sure that USCIS is misreading the law and is shafting EB3 big time.
I dont know how to word a letter to USCIS that shows them their oversight, and yet word it in a positive (or a non-confrontational) manner. If you have any idea's, lets work on a letter campaign to make USCIS aware of this. However, let us do this through personal PMs while we work out the details, as this is a very contentious issue and you will spend a lot of time responding to distracting arguments.
MARY_GC
06-28 12:10 AM
Hi,
Can anybody pls help me with regard to my situation.As my kid was born in india Whether i need to apply employment authorisation/EAD (I 765 application) for my kid..We asked the attorney she told u can do what ever u want.Anybody in this situation?or anybody have applied EAD for kids under 14yrs ?
thanks
Can anybody pls help me with regard to my situation.As my kid was born in india Whether i need to apply employment authorisation/EAD (I 765 application) for my kid..We asked the attorney she told u can do what ever u want.Anybody in this situation?or anybody have applied EAD for kids under 14yrs ?
thanks
2011 Torture-testing the wig grip !
belmontboy
09-23 04:15 PM
This is probably as close information that we can get from horses mouth(USCIS). Just hope its true.
horses don't lie man
horses don't lie man
more...
Dakota Newfie
05-23 05:46 PM
The Priority Date refers to the date your Labour Certification Application (LCA) was filed and the I-485 Processing date refers to your Adjustment of Status Application- specifically, it is the filing date of the I-485 application(s) that they are now processing. Translated, that means about nine months to get your Green Card once your PD becomes current. Fortunately, the processing time for an EAD in Nebraska still stands at about 2.5 months.
Libra
07-09 08:59 PM
:D
by any chance are you related to a south indian actress named as Smitha??...if u know whom i am talking about..
:D :D
by any chance are you related to a south indian actress named as Smitha??...if u know whom i am talking about..
:D :D
more...
pappu
08-21 10:15 AM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!Not all cell phones are included!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nothing is 'unlimited'. There is always a fine print. :)
Nothing is 'unlimited'. There is always a fine print. :)
2010 lady gaga no makeup and wig.
BharatPremi
03-26 10:47 AM
I understand your frustration. I have heard similar things from employers about hiring people on H-1B.
Are you just assuming or have you actually tried to find out if there is indeed some law which allows employers to not consider a candidate solely based on the fact that he/she has an EAD as opposed to a green card? I can certainly understand that you don't want to get involved in a lawsuit and pay lawyer fees when you can easily find another job. But its not that difficult to contact OSC.
Having said that, I do understand that the employer can find a number of reasons to not hire somebody and all that would be legal. But here we have a case where you have 5 companies who have refused to consider you solely based on your immigration status. Somebody earlier has this in writing from Capital One.
I urge you and anybody else who has gone through this to find out more about this by calling the OSC's hotline. (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/htm/engperliwdiss.htm) If I were in your situation, I would at least want to find out what my rights are, what is discriminatory and what is allowed by law. Call them and simply explain that you believe that you were not considered eligible for a job because you have an EAD card as opposed to a Green Card.
Yes, I am aware about this but in my case I do not have any written or tape recorded evidence. In other guy's case at least he have written proof (Capital One) and that can be the base. Now many companies are doing this so it is ofcourse my assumption that they can do this under "Hire and fire" authority.. And main problem is that, when you are out for a job, you do not stop thinking to takle particular one "no", you want to just move haead and fix your job first.. That is practical reality:)
Are you just assuming or have you actually tried to find out if there is indeed some law which allows employers to not consider a candidate solely based on the fact that he/she has an EAD as opposed to a green card? I can certainly understand that you don't want to get involved in a lawsuit and pay lawyer fees when you can easily find another job. But its not that difficult to contact OSC.
Having said that, I do understand that the employer can find a number of reasons to not hire somebody and all that would be legal. But here we have a case where you have 5 companies who have refused to consider you solely based on your immigration status. Somebody earlier has this in writing from Capital One.
I urge you and anybody else who has gone through this to find out more about this by calling the OSC's hotline. (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/htm/engperliwdiss.htm) If I were in your situation, I would at least want to find out what my rights are, what is discriminatory and what is allowed by law. Call them and simply explain that you believe that you were not considered eligible for a job because you have an EAD card as opposed to a Green Card.
Yes, I am aware about this but in my case I do not have any written or tape recorded evidence. In other guy's case at least he have written proof (Capital One) and that can be the base. Now many companies are doing this so it is ofcourse my assumption that they can do this under "Hire and fire" authority.. And main problem is that, when you are out for a job, you do not stop thinking to takle particular one "no", you want to just move haead and fix your job first.. That is practical reality:)
more...
eb_retrogession
01-23 07:36 PM
Guys,
Have we contacted national newspapers New York Times,Washington Post ?
In effort to make legislators and people aware of legal immigration issues, we should take help of media.This would be most effective.
Hiring a lobbying firm to pursue our issues with legislators is a good idea but it should be accompanied with media awareness as well.This is money intensive project and it will take time to reach its target of 100k.We need some other channel of awareness open as well and we need to do that soon so that it has some effect on Feb bills.
People are not aware that we are going thru such long waits to get immigrate legally.This issue needs to be highlighted.
Lawmakers would listen to legal immigration issues if they read in leading newspapers NYT and Washington Post. These newspapers are very influential.
Java,
We are working on it. Media coverage isn't easy and immediate. They check us out, and take their time to research facts before even considering.
But the process has started.
If you know of any serious contacts that can help out, or have any suggestions about regional/local media pls send a note to info@immigrationVoice.org with "Media" as the subject, and it'll come to me
Thanks
Have we contacted national newspapers New York Times,Washington Post ?
In effort to make legislators and people aware of legal immigration issues, we should take help of media.This would be most effective.
Hiring a lobbying firm to pursue our issues with legislators is a good idea but it should be accompanied with media awareness as well.This is money intensive project and it will take time to reach its target of 100k.We need some other channel of awareness open as well and we need to do that soon so that it has some effect on Feb bills.
People are not aware that we are going thru such long waits to get immigrate legally.This issue needs to be highlighted.
Lawmakers would listen to legal immigration issues if they read in leading newspapers NYT and Washington Post. These newspapers are very influential.
Java,
We are working on it. Media coverage isn't easy and immediate. They check us out, and take their time to research facts before even considering.
But the process has started.
If you know of any serious contacts that can help out, or have any suggestions about regional/local media pls send a note to info@immigrationVoice.org with "Media" as the subject, and it'll come to me
Thanks
hair lady gaga no makeup no wig.
wantgc23
09-24 11:21 AM
Bharatpremi,
Thanks for the excellent analysis. One question, your analysis assumes category excess visas goto next category on a per country basis, is this correct ?
Example, EB-1 china number goto EB-2 China ? I thought all EB-1 China numbers are added to the excess pool and then given to most retrogressed EB2 category ?
Thanks for anyone who clarifies this.
No matter how the data is sliced and diced, being EB3-I certainly means a loo...ong wait time ... :)
Thanks for the excellent analysis. One question, your analysis assumes category excess visas goto next category on a per country basis, is this correct ?
Example, EB-1 china number goto EB-2 China ? I thought all EB-1 China numbers are added to the excess pool and then given to most retrogressed EB2 category ?
Thanks for anyone who clarifies this.
No matter how the data is sliced and diced, being EB3-I certainly means a loo...ong wait time ... :)
more...
logiclife
01-07 03:07 PM
House Majority leader Tom Delay has resigned and will not seek the Majority post until next year. See here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/07/AR2006010700488.html
The house republicans will move to start working on electing a new house majority leader. Tom Delay was considered to be anti-immigration that tightened immigration laws according to anti-immigration organizations like www.numbersusa.com. He voted in favor of HR 4437 that is a nightmare for illegal immigration but does not address the ones already here illegally. And no, there is no mention of legal immigration facing backlogs in this bill either. Just enforcement to crackdown on illegal immigration. Voting "Yes" by any congressman on HR 4437 should not be construed as either supporting or opposing the legal immigration and/or retrogression relief.
There are 3 house members likely to seek the position and replace Tom Delay:
1. Roy Blunt (Missouri's 7th District). http://www.blunt.house.gov/
Roy Blunt has gotten poor grades from Anti-immigration orgs. However he voted to support HR 4437 that deals will illegal immigration. His views on legal immigration are unpredictable at best.
2. John Boehner (Ohio's 8th District). http://johnboehner.house.gov/
John Boehner has scored poor grades like Roy Blunt on immigration issues from Anti-immigration sites. However he too has voted to support HR 4437. His views on legal kind of immigration are again unknown at best.
3. Jeff Flake (Arizona's 6th District). http://www.house.gov/flake/
This is interesting. Jeff Flake is considered against immigration by Anti-immigration orgs. He got 100% marks by their grading system (God only knows how that grading system works on numbersusa.com, but whatever). He also voted to support HR 4437.
However he has co-sponsored a bill along with Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback, Jim Kolbe etc that deals comprehensively with immigration problem in this country, both the legal and the illegal variety. See that here: http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005512A04.html
Title VI describes proposals for retrogression relief.:) :)
Jeff Flake is one of the saner and more pragmatic voices in immigration debate. While he wants to crackdown on the illegal variety, he also understands the other reform need in other areas of immigration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/07/AR2006010700488.html
The house republicans will move to start working on electing a new house majority leader. Tom Delay was considered to be anti-immigration that tightened immigration laws according to anti-immigration organizations like www.numbersusa.com. He voted in favor of HR 4437 that is a nightmare for illegal immigration but does not address the ones already here illegally. And no, there is no mention of legal immigration facing backlogs in this bill either. Just enforcement to crackdown on illegal immigration. Voting "Yes" by any congressman on HR 4437 should not be construed as either supporting or opposing the legal immigration and/or retrogression relief.
There are 3 house members likely to seek the position and replace Tom Delay:
1. Roy Blunt (Missouri's 7th District). http://www.blunt.house.gov/
Roy Blunt has gotten poor grades from Anti-immigration orgs. However he voted to support HR 4437 that deals will illegal immigration. His views on legal immigration are unpredictable at best.
2. John Boehner (Ohio's 8th District). http://johnboehner.house.gov/
John Boehner has scored poor grades like Roy Blunt on immigration issues from Anti-immigration sites. However he too has voted to support HR 4437. His views on legal kind of immigration are again unknown at best.
3. Jeff Flake (Arizona's 6th District). http://www.house.gov/flake/
This is interesting. Jeff Flake is considered against immigration by Anti-immigration orgs. He got 100% marks by their grading system (God only knows how that grading system works on numbersusa.com, but whatever). He also voted to support HR 4437.
However he has co-sponsored a bill along with Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, Sam Brownback, Jim Kolbe etc that deals comprehensively with immigration problem in this country, both the legal and the illegal variety. See that here: http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005512A04.html
Title VI describes proposals for retrogression relief.:) :)
Jeff Flake is one of the saner and more pragmatic voices in immigration debate. While he wants to crackdown on the illegal variety, he also understands the other reform need in other areas of immigration.
hot 2010 lady gaga without makeup and a pics of lady gaga without makeup and wig
pappu
08-04 06:44 PM
How to Contact USCIS and FBI to Check Case Status
1. USCIS Online Status Check
With a case number, you will be able to see the current status and the last updated date (LUD).
You can set up a profile, including user name and password, and create a portfolio that includes all your immigration cases. Then log on and see the latest updates on all of them, such as I-485, I-140, AP, EAD, spouse’s cases, etc. Another useful feature for this option is that you can set up an email alert to receive automatic updates. Note that if there is a LUD change, but the message remains the same, you will not receive an alert.
2. Call National Customer Service at (800) 375 - 5283
Unfortunately, the customer service representatives don't know much more than what the online system shows. So it is not very helpful in most cases. However, on the phone you may place an inquiry with the service center that is processing your case.
3. Place a USCIS Inquiry
If your case is 30 days outside of the current processing dates, you can call customer service ( 800-375-5283) and place an inquiry. The representative will send an online message to the service center, which then mails you a letter in a few weeks to explain why your case hasn't been adjudicated. Recently, the answer is usually "your case is pending security check" or "your case is still within our processing dates."
4. Talk to a Service Center Representative Directly
Still by calling 800-375-5283, you will hear a long list of options. Choosing the right options will lead you to the service center that is processing your case. Because each case is unique, you need to listen to the options carefully and choose the ones that fit your case.
Even if you reach the center, you may be automatically transferred back to general customer service. But sometimes your call will be picked up at the service center. Explain your situation briefly, be polite but persistent, and ask about your case status. They do know a lot more details about your case, but have been instructed not to reveal much information, especially regarding background checks and FBI name checks.
5. Set up an Infopass Appointment
An infopass allows you to talk to an immigration officer directly, who has access to more information than the online system. So this is a better option to check on case status. An officer would be able to tell you whether your FBI name check has been cleared. This information alone is worth a trip for many.
6. Place a Congressional Inquiry
Writing to your senators and/or house representatives is another good option for people whose cases have been pending for a long time. Go to these websites:
and find the congressional representatives for your region. Write a personalized letter to briefly explain your case details (a copy of your i485 receipt notice would help), mention how long it has been pending, and ask for his or her help to inquire about your case status. If you are stuck in FBI name check, and have completed an FOIPA request, send in the response as well which might help.
Some congressional offices are not willing to contact the FBI directly, some will but only if your case is pending for more than one year, yet some will not even respond to your letter. So your mileage may vary. Also you may have to wait several months to receive a response in the mail, possibly due to the increasing number of letters asking for help.
The FBI has clearly stated that congressional inquiry will not help expedite the name check process. However, due to the lack of communication channels with the FBI, even a confirmation that name check is pending is worth the effort for many people anxiously waiting. Sad, but true.
7. FBI Name Check
The FBI is no longer responding to emails sent to FBINNCP@ic.fbi.gov, so a congressional inquiry or infopass with the USCIS may be the only options.
8. FBI Fingerprint Check
Call the FBI at 304-625-5590, and a representative may be able to tell you when the result was sent back to the USCIS. Since it is usually within 24 - 48 hours, this is only useful to confirm that FP was actually processed.
1. USCIS Online Status Check
With a case number, you will be able to see the current status and the last updated date (LUD).
You can set up a profile, including user name and password, and create a portfolio that includes all your immigration cases. Then log on and see the latest updates on all of them, such as I-485, I-140, AP, EAD, spouse’s cases, etc. Another useful feature for this option is that you can set up an email alert to receive automatic updates. Note that if there is a LUD change, but the message remains the same, you will not receive an alert.
2. Call National Customer Service at (800) 375 - 5283
Unfortunately, the customer service representatives don't know much more than what the online system shows. So it is not very helpful in most cases. However, on the phone you may place an inquiry with the service center that is processing your case.
3. Place a USCIS Inquiry
If your case is 30 days outside of the current processing dates, you can call customer service ( 800-375-5283) and place an inquiry. The representative will send an online message to the service center, which then mails you a letter in a few weeks to explain why your case hasn't been adjudicated. Recently, the answer is usually "your case is pending security check" or "your case is still within our processing dates."
4. Talk to a Service Center Representative Directly
Still by calling 800-375-5283, you will hear a long list of options. Choosing the right options will lead you to the service center that is processing your case. Because each case is unique, you need to listen to the options carefully and choose the ones that fit your case.
Even if you reach the center, you may be automatically transferred back to general customer service. But sometimes your call will be picked up at the service center. Explain your situation briefly, be polite but persistent, and ask about your case status. They do know a lot more details about your case, but have been instructed not to reveal much information, especially regarding background checks and FBI name checks.
5. Set up an Infopass Appointment
An infopass allows you to talk to an immigration officer directly, who has access to more information than the online system. So this is a better option to check on case status. An officer would be able to tell you whether your FBI name check has been cleared. This information alone is worth a trip for many.
6. Place a Congressional Inquiry
Writing to your senators and/or house representatives is another good option for people whose cases have been pending for a long time. Go to these websites:
and find the congressional representatives for your region. Write a personalized letter to briefly explain your case details (a copy of your i485 receipt notice would help), mention how long it has been pending, and ask for his or her help to inquire about your case status. If you are stuck in FBI name check, and have completed an FOIPA request, send in the response as well which might help.
Some congressional offices are not willing to contact the FBI directly, some will but only if your case is pending for more than one year, yet some will not even respond to your letter. So your mileage may vary. Also you may have to wait several months to receive a response in the mail, possibly due to the increasing number of letters asking for help.
The FBI has clearly stated that congressional inquiry will not help expedite the name check process. However, due to the lack of communication channels with the FBI, even a confirmation that name check is pending is worth the effort for many people anxiously waiting. Sad, but true.
7. FBI Name Check
The FBI is no longer responding to emails sent to FBINNCP@ic.fbi.gov, so a congressional inquiry or infopass with the USCIS may be the only options.
8. FBI Fingerprint Check
Call the FBI at 304-625-5590, and a representative may be able to tell you when the result was sent back to the USCIS. Since it is usually within 24 - 48 hours, this is only useful to confirm that FP was actually processed.
more...
house lady gaga without makeup and
GCVictim
08-24 12:37 PM
If you give my reference we both will get 2 months free.
Srikanth Vadlakonda
972-798-0307 (H)
friend.
Srikanth Vadlakonda
972-798-0307 (H)
friend.
tattoo lady gaga without makeup and
map_boiler
08-17 08:25 PM
PD: Feb 06 EB2 I
CPO: Aug 6th
Received approval notice: Aug 12th
Received cards for self and spouse: Aug 16th
Greened finally after 10 years in the country!
Contributed $100 to IV - Receipt ID: 0122-2698-8222-7402 (have contributed in the past as well).
To folks waiting for the magic email...hang in there....your time will definitely come. In the meantime, do all you can to ensure that USCIS closes out your case (such as SR, emails, congressman, etc.). In my case, the first four working days of August were very difficult...as it's very hard to sit around and not do anything. I did open an SR by calling USCIS on the 5th, but I am not sure if it mattered since we received the magic email the very next day.
CPO: Aug 6th
Received approval notice: Aug 12th
Received cards for self and spouse: Aug 16th
Greened finally after 10 years in the country!
Contributed $100 to IV - Receipt ID: 0122-2698-8222-7402 (have contributed in the past as well).
To folks waiting for the magic email...hang in there....your time will definitely come. In the meantime, do all you can to ensure that USCIS closes out your case (such as SR, emails, congressman, etc.). In my case, the first four working days of August were very difficult...as it's very hard to sit around and not do anything. I did open an SR by calling USCIS on the 5th, but I am not sure if it mattered since we received the magic email the very next day.
more...
pictures girlfriend lady gaga no makeup
hpandey
01-24 02:17 PM
Flying through Asian Countires is not an option for people residing in East Coast. I am travelling to India in the next week Via Amsterdam. I am told by the consulate that we do not need Transit Visas. My H1B Visa is expired and I am travelling on AP. Did any one hear differently?
Thanks
then you do not need a transit visa at Amsterdam.
Thanks
then you do not need a transit visa at Amsterdam.
dresses lady gaga no makeup or wig
optimystic
08-21 08:30 PM
I think the division of Eb2 and EB3 will be over when oct VB comes. Mostly Eb3 will go back 2003 or 2004 and Eb3 date may be 2002. At that time there will be unity.
The current visa bulletin says EB3 PDs may go back to the level that was in June 08 visa bulletin or worser. So it is very likely that EB3 will be anywhere between Apr 2001 to Nov 2001. Personally I would be happy if it remained at least beyond May 2001.
I dont see EB3 moving to 2002 unless USCIS wants to agressively move it forward, so that they can continue their unfair trend of procesing some out of order low hanging fruit cases in EB3 category, just because they are sitting on the top of their applications pile, even if they had much later PDs. Just like they are doing with EB2
What will unite people is to fight against the common pain point... *Unfair advantage given to out of order applicants* , whether it be EB2 or EB3, who are much later in the queue, but some how are on the top of application piles, and easily accessible to IOs- who are making DOS move the PDs, just so that they can clear of their tables by approving these cases, rather than trying to access applications in FIFO and follow a fair process.
The whole EB2-EB3 divide arose out of this unfair practice of USCIS. Which just on their whim move PDs forward , be it EB3 or EB2. It just happened, that EB2 date has been moved more aggressively, probably because there is less backlog there. But looking at all the EB2 people still waiting with 2003, 2004 PDs while 2006 are getting approvals, indicates that the real problem is USCIS not doing due diligence to identify the right cases to be processed next and get the exact count of such cases.
Just asking them to recapture visa numbers or cyring foul against wasted numbers etc will still not solve the problem unless we also FORCE them to follow FIFO and process cases FAIRLY. And do their due diligence to spend some time and put their application piles in proper order. Otherwise USCIS will continue to use these recaptured visas and use them to approve FU***&G Out of Order cases and manipulate & play the system to achieve that by jumping around the PD up/down/'U' and what not, just so because it is *convenient* for them to do so.
The current visa bulletin says EB3 PDs may go back to the level that was in June 08 visa bulletin or worser. So it is very likely that EB3 will be anywhere between Apr 2001 to Nov 2001. Personally I would be happy if it remained at least beyond May 2001.
I dont see EB3 moving to 2002 unless USCIS wants to agressively move it forward, so that they can continue their unfair trend of procesing some out of order low hanging fruit cases in EB3 category, just because they are sitting on the top of their applications pile, even if they had much later PDs. Just like they are doing with EB2
What will unite people is to fight against the common pain point... *Unfair advantage given to out of order applicants* , whether it be EB2 or EB3, who are much later in the queue, but some how are on the top of application piles, and easily accessible to IOs- who are making DOS move the PDs, just so that they can clear of their tables by approving these cases, rather than trying to access applications in FIFO and follow a fair process.
The whole EB2-EB3 divide arose out of this unfair practice of USCIS. Which just on their whim move PDs forward , be it EB3 or EB2. It just happened, that EB2 date has been moved more aggressively, probably because there is less backlog there. But looking at all the EB2 people still waiting with 2003, 2004 PDs while 2006 are getting approvals, indicates that the real problem is USCIS not doing due diligence to identify the right cases to be processed next and get the exact count of such cases.
Just asking them to recapture visa numbers or cyring foul against wasted numbers etc will still not solve the problem unless we also FORCE them to follow FIFO and process cases FAIRLY. And do their due diligence to spend some time and put their application piles in proper order. Otherwise USCIS will continue to use these recaptured visas and use them to approve FU***&G Out of Order cases and manipulate & play the system to achieve that by jumping around the PD up/down/'U' and what not, just so because it is *convenient* for them to do so.
more...
makeup hot lady gaga without makeup
gc28262
08-25 05:10 PM
How is your experience with Lingo customer service. Last year, I tried to switch to Lingo and the lady at customer service is very rude. She is so tired to answer questions and asked me to get all from website. I stopped switching to them.
This is true. Lingo customer service is bad. Now I am stuck with them for 2 years. Rep was rude. Talked to the supervisor. Even he was rude. Asked him to pass me on to his manager. He refused to directly transfer to his manager.
I am even thinking of paying $100 cancellation fee and get off their service.
I am happy that Vonage came up with a good plan.
This is true. Lingo customer service is bad. Now I am stuck with them for 2 years. Rep was rude. Talked to the supervisor. Even he was rude. Asked him to pass me on to his manager. He refused to directly transfer to his manager.
I am even thinking of paying $100 cancellation fee and get off their service.
I am happy that Vonage came up with a good plan.
girlfriend lady gaga without makeup
tnite
01-03 10:25 AM
Not sure I understand this line
>>
If things continue this bad, am planning to use my AP to travel back to the US.
>>
How can you come back to US w/out passport?
VO doesnt keep your passport if a via not issued at the time of the interview . He gives it back after the interview. Once you receive the email , you have to go the VFS office and then had in the passport.
>>
If things continue this bad, am planning to use my AP to travel back to the US.
>>
How can you come back to US w/out passport?
VO doesnt keep your passport if a via not issued at the time of the interview . He gives it back after the interview. Once you receive the email , you have to go the VFS office and then had in the passport.
hairstyles lady gaga without makeup
go_guy123
09-27 12:31 PM
Canada PR can no longer be backup...since 2002 the new rules have are requiring Canadian PRs to physically stay in Canada for 2 out of 5 years to
maintain PR.
maintain PR.
gc28262
06-14 02:36 PM
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
l1fraud,
I sympathize with you. If your job is getting impacted by this, you have every right to complain.
On a friendly note, you need to upgrade your skill. You cannot survive on just oracle/db development.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
l1fraud,
I sympathize with you. If your job is getting impacted by this, you have every right to complain.
On a friendly note, you need to upgrade your skill. You cannot survive on just oracle/db development.
BharatPremi
03-26 10:32 AM
I agree we might not always have hard evidence unlike the OP here. And lot of employers might be doing this. I have never faced this, yet. However, we have to act on it. The first step is to complain to the govt. Maybe if there are lot of complaints, govt will investigate and find the dirt, and fix it.
Another idea is to bring it to the attention of the job boards that discriminatory ads should not be posted. Lets give this a try.
To those effected, write to the govt if you are in a situation where you can.
Right but the here problem is that how to come up with written evidence of discrimination? These jerks do not send you an email "Hey, we do not consider EAD". Their pattern is generally as under.
You get an first email for their interest as your resume matches teh job
description and they want you to spit out everything in your reply
Say you have written " Authorized to work for Any employer in USA" for
work status, they do not communicate to have you spitted out specifics.
They call you. If you do not spit out, they would not go ahead. If you spit
out "EAD" smart ones do not even talk further and you find all
communication stopped. Now this is my own experience. Tell me how can
I convert this into "evidence of discrimination". Even if I have tape
recorded conversation, that guy did not utter any single word after I
spitted out "EAD"
Another idea is to bring it to the attention of the job boards that discriminatory ads should not be posted. Lets give this a try.
To those effected, write to the govt if you are in a situation where you can.
Right but the here problem is that how to come up with written evidence of discrimination? These jerks do not send you an email "Hey, we do not consider EAD". Their pattern is generally as under.
You get an first email for their interest as your resume matches teh job
description and they want you to spit out everything in your reply
Say you have written " Authorized to work for Any employer in USA" for
work status, they do not communicate to have you spitted out specifics.
They call you. If you do not spit out, they would not go ahead. If you spit
out "EAD" smart ones do not even talk further and you find all
communication stopped. Now this is my own experience. Tell me how can
I convert this into "evidence of discrimination". Even if I have tape
recorded conversation, that guy did not utter any single word after I
spitted out "EAD"
0 comments:
Post a Comment