nomi
12-13 08:38 AM
Whats the advice on this from core group?
can we start mass web faxing USCIS for rule change?
Now we are talking....first we need green signal from Core Team and request them to make fax for USCIS. Once we have fax, then we will fax this latter to USCIS same day. I hope once 6000 member fax this letter to USCIS same day then we will see some action from them too and we will be in media.
I will also say that Core Team should sell this fax to its member for $10. If everymember pay $10 for this letter and if we are 6000 then it will be $ 60,000 for IV which will be very nice funds for IV.
All we want from USCIS that allow us to file I-485 or allow us to file EAD or AP so we can have some freedom of travel and job change and it will also help USCIS to start name check ahead of time and that will also cut their processing time to process I-485.
what do you guys think ??
thx.
Nomi
can we start mass web faxing USCIS for rule change?
Now we are talking....first we need green signal from Core Team and request them to make fax for USCIS. Once we have fax, then we will fax this latter to USCIS same day. I hope once 6000 member fax this letter to USCIS same day then we will see some action from them too and we will be in media.
I will also say that Core Team should sell this fax to its member for $10. If everymember pay $10 for this letter and if we are 6000 then it will be $ 60,000 for IV which will be very nice funds for IV.
All we want from USCIS that allow us to file I-485 or allow us to file EAD or AP so we can have some freedom of travel and job change and it will also help USCIS to start name check ahead of time and that will also cut their processing time to process I-485.
what do you guys think ??
thx.
Nomi
wallpaper hair Spring Flower Wallpaper
amitjoey
11-11 01:49 PM
YES! We can, we should go to court. But time and again, IV Core (I am not one) has evaluated individual issues and told us that we dont have a strong enough case to justify the money involved. If and only IF we have a strong case, we can get media attention, we should spend the money. Otherwise the money is well spent lobbying. We are talking 50k and more.
Do you know how effort intensive taking USCIS to court is. We are talking about complete dedication of our time and resources. We are talking about 10-15 committed IV members spending a minimum of 15 hours every week researching, doing paper work with the lawyers. Also, we would need volunteers to come forward give interviews, appear in court (if need be), travel and stay out of home.
We have trouble getting members go to their local lawmakers office to petition and lobby. Should we not first prove to IV Core that we can come up with 15 committed members and atleast $10k.
I do not want to discourage anyone in going this route, infact I want us to sue USCIS, BUT before we do that we should all first go and meet our lawmakers. Get some attention to the issue, maybe we submit this letter to their offices while we are there.
Do you know how effort intensive taking USCIS to court is. We are talking about complete dedication of our time and resources. We are talking about 10-15 committed IV members spending a minimum of 15 hours every week researching, doing paper work with the lawyers. Also, we would need volunteers to come forward give interviews, appear in court (if need be), travel and stay out of home.
We have trouble getting members go to their local lawmakers office to petition and lobby. Should we not first prove to IV Core that we can come up with 15 committed members and atleast $10k.
I do not want to discourage anyone in going this route, infact I want us to sue USCIS, BUT before we do that we should all first go and meet our lawmakers. Get some attention to the issue, maybe we submit this letter to their offices while we are there.
hpandey
10-15 02:25 PM
I have a doubt about what can be accomplished by the flower campaign. I am totally for it if it would help but just think - it is not in USCIS hands to assign more visas to EB3 or EB2. The number of visas is limited and the number of people waiting for the visas is huge. That is the whole cause of retrogression . If there were as many visas as the people everything would be current.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
2011 flowers wallpaper hd. flower
feedfront
09-17 02:02 PM
Attorney will contact us as soon as they get letter. They are not going to respond w/o service fee.
Chillax, it's Friday. We'll definitely get it by next week.
Chillax, it's Friday. We'll definitely get it by next week.
more...
battineni
07-13 11:05 AM
Thanks for the information. I believe I have to wait for another month to get any updates from the Sep visa bulletin or wait till same time next year since my PD is Mar-06.
Congrats to all to have received it and good luck to those who have become current !
TooClose,
Don't worry you will get it soon....!!
I'm waiting for these dates from long longgggggg time....:-((
Congrats to all to have received it and good luck to those who have become current !
TooClose,
Don't worry you will get it soon....!!
I'm waiting for these dates from long longgggggg time....:-((
Jbpvisa
07-12 11:01 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
more...
Macaca
06-11 08:29 AM
Dear Colleague:
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
Where the Job Openings Are Now (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704575304575296692796660262.html) By JOE LIGHT | Wall Street Journal, Jun 10 2010
The number of job openings grew in April, indicating a continued loosening of the job market after the worst downturn in decades. Employers had a seasonally-adjusted 3.1 million openings on the last business day of April, up about 300,000 from March and about 800,000 from last summer's trough.
Industries seeing the most growth included education and health services, which saw openings rise 7% from last month, and professional and business services, which grew about 24%. Government job openings saw the largest contraction--about 8.5% fewer public sector jobs were available in April than were available in March.
The slowest growing region in April was the South, which saw openings rise by about 6%, while the Northeast, Midwest, and West saw increases of between 12% and 16%.
"We're definitely seeing a brighter outlook, but not near a rubber-band snap back," says Rich Milgram, CEO of Beyond.com, a network of 15,000 niche career websites.
Entry-level jobs posted on Beyond.com's network increased 80% between the first quarter of last year and this year, with engineering, healthcare, and information technology industries faring the best. High-paying, managerial roles saw more tepid increases, indicating that employers are choosing to fill cheap positions first, Mr. Milgram says.
Even though the number of openings has grown, it can take three to four months before increases in openings start to translate to increases in actual hires, Mr. Milgram says.
Soliant Health, a staffing firm for the health care industry, has seen requests from companies for nurse practitioners and physician assistants triple in the last year, says president David Alexander. Retailers, many of which have opened clinics inside their stores, and companies conducting in-home clinical trials have been among employers showing the most demand, while pharmacy technicians and licensed practical nurses, who don't need as much training as registered nurses, have been hard to place.
"We're just starting to see pockets of demand pick up after the layoffs last year, but employers are still having no trouble finding candidates," Mr. Alexander says.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
Where the Job Openings Are Now (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704575304575296692796660262.html) By JOE LIGHT | Wall Street Journal, Jun 10 2010
The number of job openings grew in April, indicating a continued loosening of the job market after the worst downturn in decades. Employers had a seasonally-adjusted 3.1 million openings on the last business day of April, up about 300,000 from March and about 800,000 from last summer's trough.
Industries seeing the most growth included education and health services, which saw openings rise 7% from last month, and professional and business services, which grew about 24%. Government job openings saw the largest contraction--about 8.5% fewer public sector jobs were available in April than were available in March.
The slowest growing region in April was the South, which saw openings rise by about 6%, while the Northeast, Midwest, and West saw increases of between 12% and 16%.
"We're definitely seeing a brighter outlook, but not near a rubber-band snap back," says Rich Milgram, CEO of Beyond.com, a network of 15,000 niche career websites.
Entry-level jobs posted on Beyond.com's network increased 80% between the first quarter of last year and this year, with engineering, healthcare, and information technology industries faring the best. High-paying, managerial roles saw more tepid increases, indicating that employers are choosing to fill cheap positions first, Mr. Milgram says.
Even though the number of openings has grown, it can take three to four months before increases in openings start to translate to increases in actual hires, Mr. Milgram says.
Soliant Health, a staffing firm for the health care industry, has seen requests from companies for nurse practitioners and physician assistants triple in the last year, says president David Alexander. Retailers, many of which have opened clinics inside their stores, and companies conducting in-home clinical trials have been among employers showing the most demand, while pharmacy technicians and licensed practical nurses, who don't need as much training as registered nurses, have been hard to place.
"We're just starting to see pockets of demand pick up after the layoffs last year, but employers are still having no trouble finding candidates," Mr. Alexander says.
2010 Nice Flowers Wallpaper HD for
acecupid
08-13 04:12 PM
D. VISA AVAILABILITY FOR OCTOBER
The Mexico F2A and Employment Third preference cut-off dates are �unavailable� for both August and September, since those FY-2008 annual limits have been reached. The Visa Office had originally anticipated that this would be a temporary situation. Then with the start of the new fiscal year in October the cut-off dates would have returned to those which had applied during June. However, continued heavy demand in those categories may require the establishment of cut-off dates which are earlier than those which had applied in June. A formal decision determination of the October cut-off dates will not be possible until early September.
Does this mean entire EB3 category will be retrogressed in Oct or Mexico has a separate category?
The Mexico F2A and Employment Third preference cut-off dates are �unavailable� for both August and September, since those FY-2008 annual limits have been reached. The Visa Office had originally anticipated that this would be a temporary situation. Then with the start of the new fiscal year in October the cut-off dates would have returned to those which had applied during June. However, continued heavy demand in those categories may require the establishment of cut-off dates which are earlier than those which had applied in June. A formal decision determination of the October cut-off dates will not be possible until early September.
Does this mean entire EB3 category will be retrogressed in Oct or Mexico has a separate category?
more...
ttguy
08-15 04:08 PM
I think we will GC sooner than anticipated. I think those who filed in July/Aug will get in three/four years. Just a rough estimate. Any one agrees with me?
hair flowers wallpaper hd.
AMITAT007
10-03 03:08 AM
I am on L1A visa with Company A & the I-94 was valid till September 10, 2007.
Company B has filed my H1B on April 20, 2007 & I received I797 notice dated May 17, 2007 with change of status from Oct 1, 2007.
In the meantime, Company A has filed an extention of status of L1A from September 10, 2007 on June 8, 2007. For which I received the I797 notice dated June 28, 2007.
I have few question
1. What is my status from Oct 1, 2007, as I did not joined the company B. I am not in a position to leave Company A till Nov 15, 2007. As the I797 for L1 extention was of the latter date, whether the law of last action will be applicable here & I can work for Company A on L1 till Nov 15, 2007
2. If I can work on L1, whether my H1B approval get cancelled automatically. Whether the company B have to file I129 & I539 for me.
3. If I am out of status what should I do. Do i have go back to my native country immediately & leave to idea to work in USA for ever or there is any other way.
Company B has filed my H1B on April 20, 2007 & I received I797 notice dated May 17, 2007 with change of status from Oct 1, 2007.
In the meantime, Company A has filed an extention of status of L1A from September 10, 2007 on June 8, 2007. For which I received the I797 notice dated June 28, 2007.
I have few question
1. What is my status from Oct 1, 2007, as I did not joined the company B. I am not in a position to leave Company A till Nov 15, 2007. As the I797 for L1 extention was of the latter date, whether the law of last action will be applicable here & I can work for Company A on L1 till Nov 15, 2007
2. If I can work on L1, whether my H1B approval get cancelled automatically. Whether the company B have to file I129 & I539 for me.
3. If I am out of status what should I do. Do i have go back to my native country immediately & leave to idea to work in USA for ever or there is any other way.
more...
GCNirvana007
10-12 11:15 AM
The part I didnt understand is how come you are so stupid? I hope you carry your passport when you go to the bathroom also because a dumb ass sheep like you probably needs it.
Mr.Bhootia - It wont take a second to type back the same.
I mentioned about LAW and you are calling me stupid, that explains how you roll isnt it.
Mr.Bhootia - It wont take a second to type back the same.
I mentioned about LAW and you are calling me stupid, that explains how you roll isnt it.
hot Flowering Season - HD Flower
ThinkTwice
09-20 12:09 AM
I agree with sunny1000, We definetly should consider it
We retain the name Immigration Voice but we add a slogan to it
for xample in a news report it would appear some thing like this -
"" IMMIGRATION VOICE- An organisation of Legal Immigrants, was directly responsible for driving the congress to increase the greencard numbers to 300,000, exclude the family members from the quota and reduce the FBI check times to no more than one month, after such huge success and having achieved their ultimate goal IMMIGRATION VOICE - An organisation of Legal Immigrants has decided to fight for world peace.""
Good point...
Just my 25 cents...;)
We retain the name Immigration Voice but we add a slogan to it
for xample in a news report it would appear some thing like this -
"" IMMIGRATION VOICE- An organisation of Legal Immigrants, was directly responsible for driving the congress to increase the greencard numbers to 300,000, exclude the family members from the quota and reduce the FBI check times to no more than one month, after such huge success and having achieved their ultimate goal IMMIGRATION VOICE - An organisation of Legal Immigrants has decided to fight for world peace.""
Good point...
Just my 25 cents...;)
more...
house Nice HD Flowers Wallpaper for
sparklinks
02-20 03:15 PM
Its really a good NEWS !!
tattoo HTC Digital Flower Wallpaper
sc3
10-16 06:05 PM
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people’s answers.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
more...
pictures Nice Flowers Wallpaper HD
Rajeev
12-19 10:47 AM
Hi Varsha
I will join the conference. My e-mail address is rajeevm100@hotmail.com
I will join the conference. My e-mail address is rajeevm100@hotmail.com
dresses flowers wallpaper hd. hd
ndbhatt
06-10 08:19 PM
Guys,
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
more...
makeup flower wallpaper hd. full hd
actaccord
03-14 05:54 PM
/\/\/\/\
girlfriend Wonderful Orange HD Flowers
conundrum
12-08 04:48 PM
we will have to ask for more pointed info rather than ask for all the info at once.
My suggestion is for a few of us to ask USCIS for just EB - 2 India, China and ROW and another for just EB-3 India, China and ROW. Maybe we might get a faster response that way.
My suggestion is for a few of us to ask USCIS for just EB - 2 India, China and ROW and another for just EB-3 India, China and ROW. Maybe we might get a faster response that way.
hairstyles flowers wallpaper hd. flowers
Catherine
03-09 09:57 AM
I don't have many but I can contribute a few Continental airmiles if this would help? How do I go about it?
Thank you and good luck in DC!
Thank you and good luck in DC!
pdakwala
04-22 04:11 PM
First we would like to thank you everyone who took some time off on Saturday evening and attended the event in San Jose. We also thanks Jay who came to San Jose to attend this event from Reno. The event took approximatly one and half to two hour. Majority of the People from our community left after 45 to 60 minutes. Very few people had stayed for the entire event.
There are some members who were upset and had made statements on this forum saying that the entire event was for illegal immigrants and they don't know why they went. Please note that the STRIVE ACT does not have only our provisions. The STRIVE ACT is 700+ page bill and there are several provision for other immigrant community. It will be unfair if we expect every senator and congressman to mention legal immigration whenever they are giving a speech. If the senator or congressman does not say anything about the legal immigration in their speech, that does not mean that they does not support us. Immigration Voice core group is requesting everyone to be polite and have patience.
After the event was over (as per the plan) myself and Jay got an opportunity to speak with Congressman Gutierrez. Congressman and his Deputy Chief of Staff have asked us to convey to everyone that they appretiate the effort that all our members took by making themselves available for this event. Congressman have told us that he fully support legal immigration and his bill will solve the issues that we are facing.
There are some members who were upset and had made statements on this forum saying that the entire event was for illegal immigrants and they don't know why they went. Please note that the STRIVE ACT does not have only our provisions. The STRIVE ACT is 700+ page bill and there are several provision for other immigrant community. It will be unfair if we expect every senator and congressman to mention legal immigration whenever they are giving a speech. If the senator or congressman does not say anything about the legal immigration in their speech, that does not mean that they does not support us. Immigration Voice core group is requesting everyone to be polite and have patience.
After the event was over (as per the plan) myself and Jay got an opportunity to speak with Congressman Gutierrez. Congressman and his Deputy Chief of Staff have asked us to convey to everyone that they appretiate the effort that all our members took by making themselves available for this event. Congressman have told us that he fully support legal immigration and his bill will solve the issues that we are facing.
LostInGCProcess
09-05 04:10 PM
most of the desi consultants seem to be concentrated in NJ or Chicago. Are there any reliable desi consultants for H-1 in CA? What are the websites which give info in this direction?
What are the steps to be followed and things to watch out for in selecting a desi consultant?
My humble opinion: The best suggestion you could get it from your own trusted friends.
Thanks.
What are the steps to be followed and things to watch out for in selecting a desi consultant?
My humble opinion: The best suggestion you could get it from your own trusted friends.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment