go_guy123
09-12 03:42 AM
Seriously...both r of no use as far as legal immigration is concerned
very true...both are mainly interested in the vote bank politics and EB immigrants are too small in number to be of interest to them.
very true...both are mainly interested in the vote bank politics and EB immigrants are too small in number to be of interest to them.
wallpaper in laden stencil_08. royal
kevinkris
02-12 05:41 PM
And users should able to give numbers in that.. not just radio options..
And i remember most of the people are sending letters only to President not a copy to IV.
How does sending letters to IV matters?
Between my side i sent letter to president and requested 10 of my friends to do so..
And i remember most of the people are sending letters only to President not a copy to IV.
How does sending letters to IV matters?
Between my side i sent letter to president and requested 10 of my friends to do so..
gapala
03-21 09:56 AM
OK. loud and clear Desi :D
Now, I have provided the reference to part of AC21 law with my interpretation, which allows visa portability (unofficially known as transfer) from one sponsor to another and excempt from numeric limits.
All I hear is "incorrect", "wrong" followed by individual interpretation or opinion. I respect all disagreement part, Which may be/not be accurate. Why don't you quantify your comments with references to law or CIS memo? Don't you think discussion need to be healthy and fair?
Now, I have a lot of filthy and rediculous offensive messages on the discussion threads with reds, which I would not like to post in public. If this is what our anonymous so called "highly skilled" can bring to the table, then I am speachless.
Now, I have provided the reference to part of AC21 law with my interpretation, which allows visa portability (unofficially known as transfer) from one sponsor to another and excempt from numeric limits.
All I hear is "incorrect", "wrong" followed by individual interpretation or opinion. I respect all disagreement part, Which may be/not be accurate. Why don't you quantify your comments with references to law or CIS memo? Don't you think discussion need to be healthy and fair?
Now, I have a lot of filthy and rediculous offensive messages on the discussion threads with reds, which I would not like to post in public. If this is what our anonymous so called "highly skilled" can bring to the table, then I am speachless.
2011 in laden stencil_08. bare essentuals mineral makeup. Bare-Mineral-Make-up
unitednations
03-24 08:06 PM
There is a logical fallacy here. What you are saying is:
Suppose country quotas exist to limit abuse
There are country quotas
Therefore abuse is limited
The very fact that you are complaining about abuse in the system disproves your proposition.
it's very easy to make assumptions of how the system works in this country when people want a solution that fits their own particular needs.
When people have been part of this society for less then 10 years; it is a very, very short time to understand how the system works and the whole history and what goes on behind the scenes.
I've said this in the past; many people walk around with eyes wide shut. Do some really exhaustive work of the history of immigration; the debates that happened when the laws got created; what has passed, what hasn't; what uscis/ice/dol is doing; request for evidence, denials, consulate refusals; underbidding of contracts, etc.; you may come up with different conclusions then what you may currently believe.
Suppose country quotas exist to limit abuse
There are country quotas
Therefore abuse is limited
The very fact that you are complaining about abuse in the system disproves your proposition.
it's very easy to make assumptions of how the system works in this country when people want a solution that fits their own particular needs.
When people have been part of this society for less then 10 years; it is a very, very short time to understand how the system works and the whole history and what goes on behind the scenes.
I've said this in the past; many people walk around with eyes wide shut. Do some really exhaustive work of the history of immigration; the debates that happened when the laws got created; what has passed, what hasn't; what uscis/ice/dol is doing; request for evidence, denials, consulate refusals; underbidding of contracts, etc.; you may come up with different conclusions then what you may currently believe.
more...
bluekayal
03-17 10:49 AM
SEC. 401. ELIMINATION OF EXISTING BACKLOGS.
(a) Family-Sponsored Immigrants- Section 201(c) (8 U.S.C. 1151(c)) is amended to read as follows:
`(c) Worldwide Level of Family-Sponsored Immigrants- The worldwide level of family-sponsored immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(1) 480,000;
`(2) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year;
`(3) the difference between--
`(A) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 minus the number of visas issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(B) the number of visas calculated under subparagraph (A) that were issued after fiscal year 2005.'.
(b) Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 201(d) (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)) is amended to read as follows:
`(d) Worldwide Level of Employment-Based Immigrants-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), the worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(A) 290,000;
`(B) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year; and
`(C) the difference between--
`(i) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and the number of visa numbers issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(ii) the number of visas calculated under clause (i) that were issued after fiscal year 2005.
`(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN- Immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).'.
SEC. 402. COUNTRY LIMITS.
Section 202(a) (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking `, (4), and (5)' and inserting `and (4)'; and
(B) by striking `7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent' and inserting `10 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 5 percent'; and
(2) by striking paragraph (5).
******
(a) Family-Sponsored Immigrants- Section 201(c) (8 U.S.C. 1151(c)) is amended to read as follows:
`(c) Worldwide Level of Family-Sponsored Immigrants- The worldwide level of family-sponsored immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(1) 480,000;
`(2) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year;
`(3) the difference between--
`(A) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 minus the number of visas issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(B) the number of visas calculated under subparagraph (A) that were issued after fiscal year 2005.'.
(b) Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 201(d) (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)) is amended to read as follows:
`(d) Worldwide Level of Employment-Based Immigrants-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), the worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(A) 290,000;
`(B) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year; and
`(C) the difference between--
`(i) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and the number of visa numbers issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(ii) the number of visas calculated under clause (i) that were issued after fiscal year 2005.
`(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN- Immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).'.
SEC. 402. COUNTRY LIMITS.
Section 202(a) (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking `, (4), and (5)' and inserting `and (4)'; and
(B) by striking `7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent' and inserting `10 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 5 percent'; and
(2) by striking paragraph (5).
******
jayleno
06-27 08:21 AM
Man...looks like they are working like crazy to get the EADs approved. My spouse's application: Recieved on 9th June, 08 and card production ordered on the 25th June, 08. 16 days...they are doing everything possible to save some money for USCIS(assuming the EAD they mailed is a 1 year one). I wonder why they even came up with the 2 year EAD when their plan is to do this.
more...
BharatPremi
12-10 10:43 AM
Well said Logiclife and Chanduv23.
2010 in laden stencil_08. solar
amitjoey
06-23 05:05 PM
I called and the staff member said, she will pass the message
more...
prasha98
04-25 10:02 PM
Receipt ID: 0JK36582MP9757447
Paid $100 in contribution. Good Luck
Paid $100 in contribution. Good Luck
hair world cup 2011 final pictures.
vicks_don
06-26 10:29 AM
I applied end of March online at TSC. If they are approving within a month I would have got approval long back and not today. It is not coincidental they are approving so that they can give 1 year renewal.
more...
needhelp!
02-18 02:04 PM
Two more weeks guys. You still have a chance to do something good.
Now y'all got some competition going on, LA will probably never catch CA, but TX better watch out! :)
Now y'all got some competition going on, LA will probably never catch CA, but TX better watch out! :)
hot in laden stencil_08. well buying a 1tb ssd would
alias
10-26 02:33 PM
Hi,
I am just wondering how USCIS can take the GC card back.
Say for example, I have filed my I-485 and it got approved (with out any regard of whethe my pd is current or not )and a card has been issued. If I take the card for granted and started utilizing it, how am I voilating my status. Isn't this USCIS responsibility to make sure that they issue properly or not. The applicant might never know whether his PD is current or not. In this case how could USCIS can take your card back. If they can, Can't we sue them ?
and my attorney said "If you were to pull up to a ATM and withdraw $100, but for some reason the machine spits out $1000, what do you do?". Well, you can keep the money and drive away or walk into the bank and give the 900 dollars back. But if you are caught of not returing that money latter then that would speak about your wrong intention by itself. So at that point you may be actioned based on whatever law exists. In this case however it is very clear, USCIS can revoke your green card anytime.
I am just wondering how USCIS can take the GC card back.
Say for example, I have filed my I-485 and it got approved (with out any regard of whethe my pd is current or not )and a card has been issued. If I take the card for granted and started utilizing it, how am I voilating my status. Isn't this USCIS responsibility to make sure that they issue properly or not. The applicant might never know whether his PD is current or not. In this case how could USCIS can take your card back. If they can, Can't we sue them ?
and my attorney said "If you were to pull up to a ATM and withdraw $100, but for some reason the machine spits out $1000, what do you do?". Well, you can keep the money and drive away or walk into the bank and give the 900 dollars back. But if you are caught of not returing that money latter then that would speak about your wrong intention by itself. So at that point you may be actioned based on whatever law exists. In this case however it is very clear, USCIS can revoke your green card anytime.
more...
house shoulder length blonde
eb3_nepa
03-17 11:52 AM
Not necessarily getGC. I am EB3 but i am a Masters from the US. Sometimes for fresh hires lawyers play it safe by applying in EB3. I had emailed someone at competeamerica.com and they had mentioned that an "advanced degree" is either a masters or a PhD. You mentioned that you had an engineering degree from India. Is that a B.E. or an M.Tech/M.E.? If you have a master's degree from India, you need to ask ur lawyer if that qualifies as an advanced degree.
But even otherwise, it still benefits you, coz say even 20-25% of Current EB3 have master's degrees, they will be out of the queue and you will be benefitted. I know it doesnt sound like a benefit, coz it is not a direct one, but if you look at it from a different angle, you will see it.
But even otherwise, it still benefits you, coz say even 20-25% of Current EB3 have master's degrees, they will be out of the queue and you will be benefitted. I know it doesnt sound like a benefit, coz it is not a direct one, but if you look at it from a different angle, you will see it.
tattoo in laden stencil_08. rottweiler wallpaper. Guru feb wallpaper logo;
chmur
11-18 09:07 PM
Join the Nebraska State chapter
more...
pictures cool hairstyles for girls with
Green.Tech
04-10 01:30 AM
I know this is probably asking for trouble but no movement can be credible without listening to the dissenting voices. So here is my gripe ... You cannot open a single thread or forum without being asked for contributions these days. People are told that if they dont contribute, they are not "supporting the cause".
And this new caste system of the DONOR forum which basically says screw you to everyone who has spent time, money or effort on IV and completely goes against the "Change for fairness and Justice" mumbo jumbo is a step in the right direction, IV needs to give way to an actual movement that actually does something and this DONOR forum concept will certainly go a long way in the marginalization of this site and community.
Can I safely assume that you are another anti-immigrant wearing an immigrant's garb and whose sole intention is to argue back and forth with folks who believe in IV so that their energies are drained arguing with you and that they have no energy left to contribute to the common cause of the highly skilled community who by the way has no other voice out there besides IV?
I don't want to waste my energy arguing with you but let me put this nicely - If you don't believe in IV, please find an organization that caters to all your immigration needs and get the heck out of here!
And this new caste system of the DONOR forum which basically says screw you to everyone who has spent time, money or effort on IV and completely goes against the "Change for fairness and Justice" mumbo jumbo is a step in the right direction, IV needs to give way to an actual movement that actually does something and this DONOR forum concept will certainly go a long way in the marginalization of this site and community.
Can I safely assume that you are another anti-immigrant wearing an immigrant's garb and whose sole intention is to argue back and forth with folks who believe in IV so that their energies are drained arguing with you and that they have no energy left to contribute to the common cause of the highly skilled community who by the way has no other voice out there besides IV?
I don't want to waste my energy arguing with you but let me put this nicely - If you don't believe in IV, please find an organization that caters to all your immigration needs and get the heck out of here!
dresses in laden stencil_08.
zilmax007
08-03 11:54 PM
East or West, Gotcher law is THE BEST!!
http://www.gotcherlaw.com/
http://www.gotcherlaw.com/
more...
makeup in laden stencil_08. nathan
bigboy007
06-10 10:17 AM
cshen , i think ur q got answered in your own thread i believe , anyways its for LPR - Legal Permanent Resident not for EB based.
girlfriend selena gomez hair long
new2H1&GC
08-31 11:28 AM
Hi all,
Sorry to be asking again, but I needed some details on changing employers before Oct 1st.
Here's the situation. I am currently on H4 and got my H1B approved this year through a consultancy with start date of Oct 1st 2007 (lucky to get through lottery).
I only have a copy of the H1B approval notice.
A few days back I got an offer for a full time position with another company (NOT a consultancy). And they are willing to do my H1B.
I learned through this forum, that applying for a change of employer before Oct 1st with an approved H1B, is like getting a new H1B only i'm already counted against the cap for the fiscal year. And because it's considered "new" paystubs are not required. Hope I've got this much right.
My questions are:
1. Are all the documents required the same as when you apply for a new H1B ? Only you also have to add the approved H1B notice?
2. Is it ok if a COPY of the H1B approval notice is sent? Consultancy had a verbal agreement with me that I should work for a year with them , but I don't think anything is on paper. Also they said they would only give me my H1B approval notice (original) once I was placed on a project with them.
3. Does the job title have to be the same? Consultancy applied as Programmer Analyst, and the new company needs a Web Programmer/Server Administrator. Would that cause any issues?
4. The new company plans to do premium processing, so if all goes well, can I start working with them as soon as the receipt notice comes in, or do I have to wait till I have the approval notice in hand?
5. Can the consultancy cause any problems for me with respect to my H1B? Is there any way they can find out about this and revoke my H1B?
If anyone has been through this and got their H1B approved with a different employer before the H1B start date, then please post your replies here. What were the hurdles , and what should I be wary of to ensure everything goes smoothly?
Sorry to be asking again, but I needed some details on changing employers before Oct 1st.
Here's the situation. I am currently on H4 and got my H1B approved this year through a consultancy with start date of Oct 1st 2007 (lucky to get through lottery).
I only have a copy of the H1B approval notice.
A few days back I got an offer for a full time position with another company (NOT a consultancy). And they are willing to do my H1B.
I learned through this forum, that applying for a change of employer before Oct 1st with an approved H1B, is like getting a new H1B only i'm already counted against the cap for the fiscal year. And because it's considered "new" paystubs are not required. Hope I've got this much right.
My questions are:
1. Are all the documents required the same as when you apply for a new H1B ? Only you also have to add the approved H1B notice?
2. Is it ok if a COPY of the H1B approval notice is sent? Consultancy had a verbal agreement with me that I should work for a year with them , but I don't think anything is on paper. Also they said they would only give me my H1B approval notice (original) once I was placed on a project with them.
3. Does the job title have to be the same? Consultancy applied as Programmer Analyst, and the new company needs a Web Programmer/Server Administrator. Would that cause any issues?
4. The new company plans to do premium processing, so if all goes well, can I start working with them as soon as the receipt notice comes in, or do I have to wait till I have the approval notice in hand?
5. Can the consultancy cause any problems for me with respect to my H1B? Is there any way they can find out about this and revoke my H1B?
If anyone has been through this and got their H1B approved with a different employer before the H1B start date, then please post your replies here. What were the hurdles , and what should I be wary of to ensure everything goes smoothly?
hairstyles pictures more. in laden
houston2005
06-10 09:36 AM
Senator Hilary Clinton introduced an amendment to exempt apllicant's dependents from visa quotos, which will reduce the retrogression signifcantly, why Core choose the Coryn's not supporting Hilary Clinton's? She is very likly to be our future president.
Her amendment realted to FB based and not to EB based.
PS: I am not from IV core
Her amendment realted to FB based and not to EB based.
PS: I am not from IV core
hebbar77
04-10 11:33 AM
that's ok, you are eb2. so no worries, totally understand. no one is asking you to donate, did u get a personal email or phone call from me asking you to donate? You came to this thread, read my post, felt guilty conscious, and thought someone is asking you to donate, and came up with an absurd reason not to contribute. who asked you to contribute in the first place?
History? your I-485 was applied on 2nd July, 2007. Do u know the history of why u'r AOS was not thrown out the window because CIS reversed the visa bulletin? Who cares, as long as you are in the queue and others are paying for your free lunch.
.
I am not saying that you sent me personal request to donate, go through this website and you will see what I am talking abt.
that sounds like july second fiasco reversal from USCIS was affected by IV... I dont believe so.
I would not try to get the ocean level up by throwing pennies into it.
History? your I-485 was applied on 2nd July, 2007. Do u know the history of why u'r AOS was not thrown out the window because CIS reversed the visa bulletin? Who cares, as long as you are in the queue and others are paying for your free lunch.
.
I am not saying that you sent me personal request to donate, go through this website and you will see what I am talking abt.
that sounds like july second fiasco reversal from USCIS was affected by IV... I dont believe so.
I would not try to get the ocean level up by throwing pennies into it.
nomorelogins
11-28 09:21 AM
I was under the impression that unused visas of one category ( EB/F ) may be used for the other category ( F/EB ) for the next year.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also I have no idea what that number exactly is. It is pbly somewhere in the uscis ombudsman report. Just too lazy today morning to look it up :D
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also I have no idea what that number exactly is. It is pbly somewhere in the uscis ombudsman report. Just too lazy today morning to look it up :D
No comments:
Post a Comment