ItIsNotFunny
10-16 10:36 AM
As per IV core we should be doing lobbing and lobbing needs money. We had tried few times and the latest High Five had not collected enough money that can be used for lobbying. How can we count on our members to do something big.
I think we should work in our state level chapters, collect funds for activites and when we have a solid foundation talk about activities like flower campaign, rally etc.. where everybody would be involved.
Red and Green dots Welcomed.
Thanks
I would say lets make a small group who is really willing to be active, share personal contact information - no anonymous. Then discuss exactly what and how to do something. Leave junks and losers behind, paying attention on them is not going to help us.
I think we should work in our state level chapters, collect funds for activites and when we have a solid foundation talk about activities like flower campaign, rally etc.. where everybody would be involved.
Red and Green dots Welcomed.
Thanks
I would say lets make a small group who is really willing to be active, share personal contact information - no anonymous. Then discuss exactly what and how to do something. Leave junks and losers behind, paying attention on them is not going to help us.
wallpaper Large Shade Trees:
BharatPremi
03-17 02:03 PM
Are you saying EB3-India visa date will be set as Jan 2004 by USCIS some time soon? I thought they kept saying that EB3-India dates would move very slowly only. So from the current Oct 2001 to Jan 2004 is a very long and narrow road.
Applicants with PD before January First 2004 will mostly be current by December 2008 end. That is what I belive, USCIS will head towards. If it will not happen than do not kill me.:) Ultimately we all are in USCIS's lap..
Applicants with PD before January First 2004 will mostly be current by December 2008 end. That is what I belive, USCIS will head towards. If it will not happen than do not kill me.:) Ultimately we all are in USCIS's lap..
Positive
11-11 08:25 AM
At the minimum legal action will force someone to look into what is going on here. I don't think that AILA is going to partner with us in this initiative.
2011 English hawthorn bonsai
iluvcric
08-13 08:11 AM
Count me in.
This wait is killing us.
This wait is killing us.
more...
Imigrait
07-11 05:28 PM
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
chanduv23
09-28 05:18 PM
I have met a British guy here in New York who was like that. He loved the money, and always smiled to me for the money. But he never even want to lift a finger for the money he has been paid to do. And he despised me and was ashamed of having to talk to me because he was surrounded by some Southerners who were equally racist.
In fact, he even scammed me for money. And he was a businessman and now a CEO of a corporation.
This is a regular practice. This happens to everyone in their daily life. People tend to be nice to u and smile when you are paying money, but after that they let you know that they hate you for what you are.
In fact, he even scammed me for money. And he was a businessman and now a CEO of a corporation.
This is a regular practice. This happens to everyone in their daily life. People tend to be nice to u and smile when you are paying money, but after that they let you know that they hate you for what you are.
more...
askreddy
06-25 05:31 AM
Hi NJ members,
Iam joined yesterday this forum.
My PD is 9/2003 and EB3.
Iam having issue with birth certificate.Can any one from india pls send me non availability and affidavits you have. you can erase your imp details. i just want the format.
thanks in advance....
Iam joined yesterday this forum.
My PD is 9/2003 and EB3.
Iam having issue with birth certificate.Can any one from india pls send me non availability and affidavits you have. you can erase your imp details. i just want the format.
thanks in advance....
2010 Hawthorn is a thorny tree that
swede
09-19 08:49 AM
All speeches and performances were great. I did not intend to leave anyone out. The song that was written for the occasion(!) was cool. Jay's speech was powerful. And everything else. It was all great. People who were not there really missed something. As someone said, "America is about fighting for your rights." and I was glad to see that so many decided to do that yesterday!
more...
unseenguy
05-27 07:57 PM
I have sent exact size photocopies to USCIS all times, no issues. Never ask for help in Kinkos for photocopy, DIY.
hair Initially, the trees were
anilsal
12-11 03:06 PM
First someone from IV core has to confirm that this rule change does not need congress action. I am sure the core has explored this option before.
Until then, there is no point in having any discussion on this.
Until then, there is no point in having any discussion on this.
more...
mariner5555
03-12 01:38 AM
Please see the following thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=229630#post229630
Way to go Singhsa3 ..I for one strongly believe that this has the best chance. I guess in simple terms the world functions in the Give and Take theory. the chances of success are more when both the parties have something to gain. at the very least we (immigrants and IV) would get more support (at the minimum donations, ads etc) from builders realtors dealers etc (if they become aware of this) ..even the latest campaign for admin fix would have had more chance of success if the above had been included. let me know if you want me to help in any way ...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=229630#post229630
Way to go Singhsa3 ..I for one strongly believe that this has the best chance. I guess in simple terms the world functions in the Give and Take theory. the chances of success are more when both the parties have something to gain. at the very least we (immigrants and IV) would get more support (at the minimum donations, ads etc) from builders realtors dealers etc (if they become aware of this) ..even the latest campaign for admin fix would have had more chance of success if the above had been included. let me know if you want me to help in any way ...
hot tree pics hawthorn tree
DianaSteve
10-29 05:36 PM
Sept 2001
EB3 India
LC approved April 2007
I-140 Pending
I-485 Pending
EB3 India
LC approved April 2007
I-140 Pending
I-485 Pending
more...
house WASHINGTON
hsm2007
09-20 07:37 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
tattoo Variegated Tulip Tree
dotnetguru
04-07 12:23 PM
Sure I will give the link..
I know its not fake..because I have 3 people on our floor who came from a visit..who saw these kind of things happening right in front of them (and my friends were GCs so I guess they themselves were left alone).
first of all cut this BS. citizens and GC holders have different queues at POE and all visa people have different queues.how the hell ur friends heard the officers questions.do they have snake ears or what.use ur common sense.
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
I know its not fake..because I have 3 people on our floor who came from a visit..who saw these kind of things happening right in front of them (and my friends were GCs so I guess they themselves were left alone).
first of all cut this BS. citizens and GC holders have different queues at POE and all visa people have different queues.how the hell ur friends heard the officers questions.do they have snake ears or what.use ur common sense.
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
more...
pictures Desert Ironwood Tree
sri1309
02-19 11:46 AM
My assesment is not based on any single case. If this comes as law then people who are here for more than 5 years will get gc immeditely. Because of that backlog will be reduced and waiting time also will be reduced for others those who are here less than 5 years and they will also get GC. Anyhow this bill will not be taken unless CIR is introduced
Senthil, well said.
Those hardworking folks under < 5 years:
We went thru this for more than 5 years and we dont want you to be in that. It wasnt a pleasure. So support this fully and once people with >5 years are cleared (note that its not counted in any quota.. which is good too.. ), then all these cases will just disappear from the waiting lists and you will suddenly see current dates as recent as 2008. Also in the parallel track people get their GCs as they cross 5 years.
Senthil, well said.
Those hardworking folks under < 5 years:
We went thru this for more than 5 years and we dont want you to be in that. It wasnt a pleasure. So support this fully and once people with >5 years are cleared (note that its not counted in any quota.. which is good too.. ), then all these cases will just disappear from the waiting lists and you will suddenly see current dates as recent as 2008. Also in the parallel track people get their GCs as they cross 5 years.
dresses WASHINGTON - DECEMBER 03:
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.
more...
makeup Clammy Locust Tree
Canadian_Dream
04-04 02:18 PM
The Durbin-Grassley bill would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B employees who are then outsourced to other companies. This is a method that some companies use to evade restrictions on hiring H-1Bs.
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
girlfriend Bolcom#39;s #39;The Hawthorn Tree#39;
Googler
05-20 09:53 PM
I had scanned a copy of DHS 7001 and emailed to Ombudsman last Wednesday (special thanks to Googler for all his informative messages). Also, when I spoke to TSC IO three weeks ago, the IO mentioned that they will email the 485 team based on my case details....not sure what triggered an action to my case....but whatever it was....I'm glad it did!! :) Congratulations Harish! Btw, Googler is a her not a his. :)
hairstyles Ginkgo+tree+facts
meg_z
06-22 03:52 PM
USCIS filing fee - $180.00 check payable to 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS' with your SSN# and I-765 mentioned in the comments section of the check
Thanks.
Thanks.
zuhail
05-08 07:07 PM
Friends,
Time is right now to recapture the visa numbers.
"No army can stop an idea whose time has come." --Victor Hugo.
We need to raise funds for the sole purpose of passing the EB Visa Re-Capture Bill!
Time is right now to recapture the visa numbers.
"No army can stop an idea whose time has come." --Victor Hugo.
We need to raise funds for the sole purpose of passing the EB Visa Re-Capture Bill!
nojoke
10-22 03:07 PM
I mean tax everyone equally. During this tough economy time, consider everyone and not the middle class or upper class or lower class.
Equally- That is tough to define. Equally as a percentage of their income/earnings? Rich don't even have 'income' to pay the income tax. They probably are paying 5 or10% of their earnings, while you and me pay 30+% of our income.
Equally- That is tough to define. Equally as a percentage of their income/earnings? Rich don't even have 'income' to pay the income tax. They probably are paying 5 or10% of their earnings, while you and me pay 30+% of our income.
No comments:
Post a Comment