![gas prices funny. .com/gas-prices/][img]http](http://pictures.bigfunnysite.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/better-start-drinking-now.jpg ".com/gas-prices/][img]http")
maximus777
06-08 06:17 PM
Plain and simple. From now on just imagine that you are working in one of those persian gulf countries - work on a visa as long as you work. This way its less stressful. If you have immigration intent, then enter illegally. :mad:
wallpaper .com/gas-prices/][img]http
vagish
04-04 03:03 PM
This bill would affect all of us if they apply these same rules when we try to exend or transfer out existing H1s. Does it(the bill) say anything about that?
sometimes they say don't wish, your wish might come true, we are fighting for retrogression thinking that it is the worst possible thing of our lifetime,
guess what if they pass a bill to reduce retrogression along with other provisions,
like the one's mentioned by Durbin's bill and then many would become ineligible for GC at the first place.
Once thing is sure, if the GC or H1B numbers are increased, it will come with some good enforcement measures and some other provisions which would tighten this whole process.
there won't be any free riders any more , many in america are becomming aware of this day by day.
thanks
sometimes they say don't wish, your wish might come true, we are fighting for retrogression thinking that it is the worst possible thing of our lifetime,
guess what if they pass a bill to reduce retrogression along with other provisions,
like the one's mentioned by Durbin's bill and then many would become ineligible for GC at the first place.
Once thing is sure, if the GC or H1B numbers are increased, it will come with some good enforcement measures and some other provisions which would tighten this whole process.
there won't be any free riders any more , many in america are becomming aware of this day by day.
thanks
bank_king2003
02-08 02:27 PM
All,
Disclaimer: I am not a ron's associate and he is not even my lawyer. just want to bring this under everyone's observations.
there is a very nice article on ron's site about how USCIS still waste visas. this is a real slavery where due to USCIS inefficiency - hard earning people like us suffer alot and the agony is that noone is there to even listen and stop USCIS from this practice. for details
go to:
Discussion thread for ImmInfo Blog article: DOS explanation of visa controls (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/9732-discussion-thread-for-imminfo-blog-article-dos-explanation-of-visa-controls.html)
some fine prints from the above discussion wanted to share:
Consider the fact that USCIS purport to have preapproved about 150,000 cases. All of those cases were reported to VO as ready for closure. VO's system automatically generates specific visa numbers for specific cases. If the CIS doesn't use them, they expire and are wasted. Based on the numbers provided so far, it appears that the CIS failed to close out enough EB3 cases and about 3,000 to 5,000 numbers were wasted.
If the CIS does not act on the assignment of individual visa numbers to pre-approved cases, then those numbers are wasted. That appears to be what happened last fiscal year.
by law "unused" visa numbers fall across within a fiscal quarter. So, for example, all of the unused Worldwide EB2 numbers for the first fiscal quarter (Oct - Dec) "fell across" and became available to applicants chargeable to single state limited countries - in this case China and India. If for any reason there were no unused visas in a particular quarter, then there would be no fall across for that quarter. They do not save them up and issue them at the end of the fiscal year.
Disclaimer: I am not a ron's associate and he is not even my lawyer. just want to bring this under everyone's observations.
there is a very nice article on ron's site about how USCIS still waste visas. this is a real slavery where due to USCIS inefficiency - hard earning people like us suffer alot and the agony is that noone is there to even listen and stop USCIS from this practice. for details
go to:
Discussion thread for ImmInfo Blog article: DOS explanation of visa controls (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/9732-discussion-thread-for-imminfo-blog-article-dos-explanation-of-visa-controls.html)
some fine prints from the above discussion wanted to share:
Consider the fact that USCIS purport to have preapproved about 150,000 cases. All of those cases were reported to VO as ready for closure. VO's system automatically generates specific visa numbers for specific cases. If the CIS doesn't use them, they expire and are wasted. Based on the numbers provided so far, it appears that the CIS failed to close out enough EB3 cases and about 3,000 to 5,000 numbers were wasted.
If the CIS does not act on the assignment of individual visa numbers to pre-approved cases, then those numbers are wasted. That appears to be what happened last fiscal year.
by law "unused" visa numbers fall across within a fiscal quarter. So, for example, all of the unused Worldwide EB2 numbers for the first fiscal quarter (Oct - Dec) "fell across" and became available to applicants chargeable to single state limited countries - in this case China and India. If for any reason there were no unused visas in a particular quarter, then there would be no fall across for that quarter. They do not save them up and issue them at the end of the fiscal year.
2011 High Gas Prices
alisa
01-27 08:16 PM
My simplistic model breaks down with this data.
With these numbers, the ROW backlog for 2002 should have cleared by now, but it hasn't. The Indian backlog should clear in a few years.
I guess, there is a reason why people don't model these things. The results are no better than pulling things outta thin air if there isn't sufficient data.......
Maybe USCIS needs computers more than we need visa numbers......
If there are any estimates on the number of applicants in the different years, we could try some math on it.....I had assumed 160K applicants for ROW in 2002, and from the numbers that andy provided, that backlog should have cleared in 2004.
Unless we are missing something really really big, things should start moving forward in a year or two. (Especially after USCIS learns about the amazing new invention called a 'computer')
As my lawyer says, in two to ten years, the PDs will be current.....
alisa
i hope that country caps are removed
i also hope it's not at your expense :-)
i don't see why people think these things are mutually exclusive
we all want the best to happen- for ourselves- and as much as we can help it
for everyone else too!!
great work on putting the data together, hopefully we can develop some concise sound bites to present to affected people and to lawmakers.
i do suggest that the final summary should show 3 examples
China EB2 and EB3
India EB2 and EB3
ROW EB3
this way everyone affected sees something about themselves
With these numbers, the ROW backlog for 2002 should have cleared by now, but it hasn't. The Indian backlog should clear in a few years.
I guess, there is a reason why people don't model these things. The results are no better than pulling things outta thin air if there isn't sufficient data.......
Maybe USCIS needs computers more than we need visa numbers......
If there are any estimates on the number of applicants in the different years, we could try some math on it.....I had assumed 160K applicants for ROW in 2002, and from the numbers that andy provided, that backlog should have cleared in 2004.
Unless we are missing something really really big, things should start moving forward in a year or two. (Especially after USCIS learns about the amazing new invention called a 'computer')
As my lawyer says, in two to ten years, the PDs will be current.....
alisa
i hope that country caps are removed
i also hope it's not at your expense :-)
i don't see why people think these things are mutually exclusive
we all want the best to happen- for ourselves- and as much as we can help it
for everyone else too!!
great work on putting the data together, hopefully we can develop some concise sound bites to present to affected people and to lawmakers.
i do suggest that the final summary should show 3 examples
China EB2 and EB3
India EB2 and EB3
ROW EB3
this way everyone affected sees something about themselves
more...
mantric
02-17 05:07 AM
canuck has a point, although his wording is not the best.
our own self respect should come first when we are faced with economic coercion of our choices. we came here not as beggars but with skills to offer to employers. in exchange for commitment and hard work there was a promise to a path to permanent residency. we have a right to live here as employees without constant and undue stress because of discriminatory laws and unreasonable delays that constrain our advancement in the very careers that brought us here. this much is true of all EB immigrants.
self-respect is not a question of not obeying laws but of challenging them when they turn out to be unfair and discriminatory to hard working, tax paying residents. this issue is central, not the fact that i came from one country or another.
now if you look at rajiv khanna's lawsuit against USCIS, the main reason USCIS won was because of their argument that i-485 filers were not a unified class. so USCIS used the very argument that these filers were divided to win the case. when USCIS itself has used this argument of divisions between immigrants against legal eb immigrants howcome we are reluctant to admit this policy ?
the instruments of control are much more refined now than they used to be in the days of slavery and divide and rule. but they do exist in and it is for us to recognize them as such. that's the first step to freedom.
our own self respect should come first when we are faced with economic coercion of our choices. we came here not as beggars but with skills to offer to employers. in exchange for commitment and hard work there was a promise to a path to permanent residency. we have a right to live here as employees without constant and undue stress because of discriminatory laws and unreasonable delays that constrain our advancement in the very careers that brought us here. this much is true of all EB immigrants.
self-respect is not a question of not obeying laws but of challenging them when they turn out to be unfair and discriminatory to hard working, tax paying residents. this issue is central, not the fact that i came from one country or another.
now if you look at rajiv khanna's lawsuit against USCIS, the main reason USCIS won was because of their argument that i-485 filers were not a unified class. so USCIS used the very argument that these filers were divided to win the case. when USCIS itself has used this argument of divisions between immigrants against legal eb immigrants howcome we are reluctant to admit this policy ?
the instruments of control are much more refined now than they used to be in the days of slavery and divide and rule. but they do exist in and it is for us to recognize them as such. that's the first step to freedom.
smartboy75
07-11 12:47 PM
source: www.immigration-law.com
07/11/2008: Indian EB-2 Visa Number in Visa Bulletin August 2008 and Anticipated Expedited Adjudication of Their I-485 Applications to Prevent EB 2008 Visa Number Waste
The movement of the EB-2 visa numbers for Indians is indeed a very good news in that it sounds that the USCIS intends to take out the visa numbers for them before the end of September 2008 as best as they can and attempt to adjudicate the applications before the new fiscal year starts on October 1, 2008. Obviously, there must be a large number of EB-2 cases which were filed during the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco whose priority date is June 1, 2006 or earlier date. It appears that the USCIS has been working hard to get these cases ready for adjudication while their visa numbers are availalbe so that the agency prevents the visa number for FY 2008 from being wasted. Please stay tuned to this web site for this remarkable turn of the events.
07/11/2008: Indian EB-2 Visa Number in Visa Bulletin August 2008 and Anticipated Expedited Adjudication of Their I-485 Applications to Prevent EB 2008 Visa Number Waste
The movement of the EB-2 visa numbers for Indians is indeed a very good news in that it sounds that the USCIS intends to take out the visa numbers for them before the end of September 2008 as best as they can and attempt to adjudicate the applications before the new fiscal year starts on October 1, 2008. Obviously, there must be a large number of EB-2 cases which were filed during the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco whose priority date is June 1, 2006 or earlier date. It appears that the USCIS has been working hard to get these cases ready for adjudication while their visa numbers are availalbe so that the agency prevents the visa number for FY 2008 from being wasted. Please stay tuned to this web site for this remarkable turn of the events.
more...
sat0207
04-27 09:23 AM
Immigration Security Checks
�How and Why the Process Works
Background All applicants for a U.S. immigration benefit are subject to criminal and national security background checks to ensure they are eligible for that benefit. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Federal agency that oversees immigration benefits, performs checks on every applicant, regardless of ethnicity, national origin or religion. Since 2002, USCIS has increased the number and scope of relevant background checks, processing millions of security checks without incident. However, in some cases, USCIS customers and immigrant advocates have expressed frustration over delays in processing applications, noting that individual customers have waited a year or longer for the completion of their adjudication pending the outcome of security checks. While the percentage of applicants who find their cases delayed by pending background checks is relatively small, USCIS recognizes that for those affected individuals, the additional delay and uncertainty can cause great anxiety. Although USCIS cannot guarantee the prompt resolution of every case, we can assure the public that applicants are not singled out based on race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. USCIS strives to balance the need for timely, fair and accurate service with the need to ensure a high level of integrity in the decision-making process. This fact sheet outlines the framework of the immigration security check process, explaining its necessity, as well as factors contributing to delays in resolving pending cases. Why USCIS Conducts Security Checks USCIS conducts security checks for all cases involving a petition or application for an immigration service or benefit. This is done both to enhance national security and ensure the integrity of the immigration process. USCIS is responsible for ensuring that our immigration system is not used as a vehicle to harm our nation or its citizens by screening out people who seek immigration benefits improperly or fraudulently. These security checks have yielded information about applicants involved in violent crimes, sex crimes, crimes against children, drug trafficking and individuals with known links to terrorism. These investigations require time, resources, and patience and USCIS recognizes that the process is slower for some customers than they would like. Because of that, USCIS is working closely with the FBI and other agencies to speed the background check process. However, USCIS will never grant an immigration service or benefit before the required security checks are completed regardless of how long those checks take.
To ensure that immigration benefits are given only to eligible applicants, USCIS adopted background security check procedures that address a wide range of possible risk factors. Different kinds of applications undergo different levels of scrutiny. USCIS normally uses the following three background check mechanisms but maintains the authority to conduct other background investigations as necessary:
� The Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS)
Name Check� IBIS is a multiagency effort with a central system that combines information from multiple agencies, databases and system interfaces to compile data relating to national security risks, public safety issues and other law enforcement concerns. USCIS can quickly check information from these multiple government agencies to determine if the information in the system affects the adjudication of the case. Results of an IBIS check are usually available immediately. In some cases, information found during an IBIS check will require further investigation. The IBIS check is not deemed completed until all eligibility issues arising from the initial system response are resolved.
� FBI Fingerprint Check�FBI fingerprint checks are conducted for many applications. The FBI fingerprint check provides information relating to criminal background within the United States. Generally, the FBI forwards responses to USCIS within 24-48 hours. If there is a record match, the FBI forwards an electronic copy of the criminal history (RAP sheet) to USCIS. At that point, a USCIS adjudicator reviews the information to determine what effect it may have on eligibility for the benefit. Although the vast majority of inquiries yield no record or match, about 10 percent do uncover criminal history (including immigration violations). In cases involving arrests or charges without disposition, USCIS requires the applicant to provide court certified evidence of the disposition. Customers with prior arrests should provide complete information and certified disposition records at the time of filing to avoid adjudication delays or denial resulting from misrepresentation about criminal history. Even expunged or vacated convictions must be reported for immigration purposes.
� FBI Name Checks�FBI name checks are also required for many applications. The FBI name check is totally different from the FBI fingerprint check. The records maintained in the FBI name check process consist of administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel and other files compiled by law enforcement. Initial responses to this check generally take about two weeks. In about 80 percent of the cases, no match is found. Of the remaining 20 percent, most are resolved within six months. Less than one percent of cases subject to an FBI name check remain pending longer than six months. Some of these cases involve complex, highly sensitive information and cannot be resolved quickly. Even after FBI has provided an initial response to USCIS concerning a match, the name check is not complete until full information is obtained and eligibility issues arising from it are resolved. For most applicants, the process outlined above allows USCIS to quickly determine if there are criminal or security related issues in the applicant�s background that affect eligibility for immigration benefits. Most cases proceed forward without incident. However, due to both the sheer volume of security checks USCIS conducts, and the need to ensure that each applicant is thoroughly screened, some delays on individual applications are inevitable. Background checks may still be considered pending when either the FBI or relevant agency has not provided the final response to the background check or when the FBI or agency has provided a response, but the response requires further investigation or review by the agency or USCIS. Resolving pending cases is time-consuming and labor-intensive; some cases legitimately take months or evenseveral years to resolve. Every USCIS District Office performs regular reviews of the pending caseload to determine when cases have cleared and are ready to be decided. USCIS does not share information about the records match or the nature or status of any investigation with applicants or their representatives.
�How and Why the Process Works
Background All applicants for a U.S. immigration benefit are subject to criminal and national security background checks to ensure they are eligible for that benefit. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Federal agency that oversees immigration benefits, performs checks on every applicant, regardless of ethnicity, national origin or religion. Since 2002, USCIS has increased the number and scope of relevant background checks, processing millions of security checks without incident. However, in some cases, USCIS customers and immigrant advocates have expressed frustration over delays in processing applications, noting that individual customers have waited a year or longer for the completion of their adjudication pending the outcome of security checks. While the percentage of applicants who find their cases delayed by pending background checks is relatively small, USCIS recognizes that for those affected individuals, the additional delay and uncertainty can cause great anxiety. Although USCIS cannot guarantee the prompt resolution of every case, we can assure the public that applicants are not singled out based on race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. USCIS strives to balance the need for timely, fair and accurate service with the need to ensure a high level of integrity in the decision-making process. This fact sheet outlines the framework of the immigration security check process, explaining its necessity, as well as factors contributing to delays in resolving pending cases. Why USCIS Conducts Security Checks USCIS conducts security checks for all cases involving a petition or application for an immigration service or benefit. This is done both to enhance national security and ensure the integrity of the immigration process. USCIS is responsible for ensuring that our immigration system is not used as a vehicle to harm our nation or its citizens by screening out people who seek immigration benefits improperly or fraudulently. These security checks have yielded information about applicants involved in violent crimes, sex crimes, crimes against children, drug trafficking and individuals with known links to terrorism. These investigations require time, resources, and patience and USCIS recognizes that the process is slower for some customers than they would like. Because of that, USCIS is working closely with the FBI and other agencies to speed the background check process. However, USCIS will never grant an immigration service or benefit before the required security checks are completed regardless of how long those checks take.
To ensure that immigration benefits are given only to eligible applicants, USCIS adopted background security check procedures that address a wide range of possible risk factors. Different kinds of applications undergo different levels of scrutiny. USCIS normally uses the following three background check mechanisms but maintains the authority to conduct other background investigations as necessary:
� The Interagency Border Inspection System (IBIS)
Name Check� IBIS is a multiagency effort with a central system that combines information from multiple agencies, databases and system interfaces to compile data relating to national security risks, public safety issues and other law enforcement concerns. USCIS can quickly check information from these multiple government agencies to determine if the information in the system affects the adjudication of the case. Results of an IBIS check are usually available immediately. In some cases, information found during an IBIS check will require further investigation. The IBIS check is not deemed completed until all eligibility issues arising from the initial system response are resolved.
� FBI Fingerprint Check�FBI fingerprint checks are conducted for many applications. The FBI fingerprint check provides information relating to criminal background within the United States. Generally, the FBI forwards responses to USCIS within 24-48 hours. If there is a record match, the FBI forwards an electronic copy of the criminal history (RAP sheet) to USCIS. At that point, a USCIS adjudicator reviews the information to determine what effect it may have on eligibility for the benefit. Although the vast majority of inquiries yield no record or match, about 10 percent do uncover criminal history (including immigration violations). In cases involving arrests or charges without disposition, USCIS requires the applicant to provide court certified evidence of the disposition. Customers with prior arrests should provide complete information and certified disposition records at the time of filing to avoid adjudication delays or denial resulting from misrepresentation about criminal history. Even expunged or vacated convictions must be reported for immigration purposes.
� FBI Name Checks�FBI name checks are also required for many applications. The FBI name check is totally different from the FBI fingerprint check. The records maintained in the FBI name check process consist of administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel and other files compiled by law enforcement. Initial responses to this check generally take about two weeks. In about 80 percent of the cases, no match is found. Of the remaining 20 percent, most are resolved within six months. Less than one percent of cases subject to an FBI name check remain pending longer than six months. Some of these cases involve complex, highly sensitive information and cannot be resolved quickly. Even after FBI has provided an initial response to USCIS concerning a match, the name check is not complete until full information is obtained and eligibility issues arising from it are resolved. For most applicants, the process outlined above allows USCIS to quickly determine if there are criminal or security related issues in the applicant�s background that affect eligibility for immigration benefits. Most cases proceed forward without incident. However, due to both the sheer volume of security checks USCIS conducts, and the need to ensure that each applicant is thoroughly screened, some delays on individual applications are inevitable. Background checks may still be considered pending when either the FBI or relevant agency has not provided the final response to the background check or when the FBI or agency has provided a response, but the response requires further investigation or review by the agency or USCIS. Resolving pending cases is time-consuming and labor-intensive; some cases legitimately take months or evenseveral years to resolve. Every USCIS District Office performs regular reviews of the pending caseload to determine when cases have cleared and are ready to be decided. USCIS does not share information about the records match or the nature or status of any investigation with applicants or their representatives.
2010 gas prices funny. high gas
prinive
04-07 04:43 PM
Finally just received THAT email. "Current Status: Card production ordered"
PD Sep 2001
EB3 India.
PD Sep 2001
EB3 India.
more...
delax
07-13 08:19 AM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
hair As gas prices rise rapidly
arvindkappula
01-19 12:19 AM
Since my statement about making copies of offical US documents is causing confusion, let me rephrase & elaborate -
I, as many of you were, was stopped and requested to provide proof of immigration status. I had a color photocopy of my US Visa Stamp of my passport.
Besides the fact that the Border Patrol agent denied the photocopy as proof of immigration status, he did let me go as soon as I provided my College ID and a DL, warning me that it is against the law to make a photocopy of an official US IMMIGRATION document FOR PERSONAL USE. I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE. So, while you are allowed to provide photocopies of official US documents for official government purposes, you cannot make copies of official US IMMIGRATION documents for personal use. I have a pretty busy schedule so I don't have the patience to search, cut and paste the section of the law which refers to this since I did research this at that time and deemed correct the Border Agent's warning.
Are you sure that you were able to make a color photocopy of your passport? How did you manage to do that, at your work copy machine or from Kinko's, Staples, office depot, or some where else?
The reason I am asking is, in FL, recently I tried to take color copies of my passport in Staples, where I was not allowed to take photocopies of passport which was clearly labeled on copy machine and same thing at Kinko's and I wonder how you managed to get color copies.. (sorry folks my questions was way out from the main topic of this post).
I, as many of you were, was stopped and requested to provide proof of immigration status. I had a color photocopy of my US Visa Stamp of my passport.
Besides the fact that the Border Patrol agent denied the photocopy as proof of immigration status, he did let me go as soon as I provided my College ID and a DL, warning me that it is against the law to make a photocopy of an official US IMMIGRATION document FOR PERSONAL USE. I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE. So, while you are allowed to provide photocopies of official US documents for official government purposes, you cannot make copies of official US IMMIGRATION documents for personal use. I have a pretty busy schedule so I don't have the patience to search, cut and paste the section of the law which refers to this since I did research this at that time and deemed correct the Border Agent's warning.
Are you sure that you were able to make a color photocopy of your passport? How did you manage to do that, at your work copy machine or from Kinko's, Staples, office depot, or some where else?
The reason I am asking is, in FL, recently I tried to take color copies of my passport in Staples, where I was not allowed to take photocopies of passport which was clearly labeled on copy machine and same thing at Kinko's and I wonder how you managed to get color copies.. (sorry folks my questions was way out from the main topic of this post).
more...
ramaonline
04-23 02:19 AM
according to a recent news item, the house speaker needs the support of at least 70 republicans to even consider a vote:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has told the White House she could not pass a bill with Democratic votes alone, nor would she seek to enforce party discipline on the issue.
Bush would have to produce at least 70 Republican votes before she would consider a vote on comprehensive immigration legislation. Garnering such support might be very difficult for a president saddled with low approval ratings.
Democratic conservatives, particularly freshmen who seized their seats from Republicans, had to weather a barrage of attacks on the issue before their victories in November and are not eager to relive the experience, party aides and lawmakers say.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has told the White House she could not pass a bill with Democratic votes alone, nor would she seek to enforce party discipline on the issue.
Bush would have to produce at least 70 Republican votes before she would consider a vote on comprehensive immigration legislation. Garnering such support might be very difficult for a president saddled with low approval ratings.
Democratic conservatives, particularly freshmen who seized their seats from Republicans, had to weather a barrage of attacks on the issue before their victories in November and are not eager to relive the experience, party aides and lawmakers say.
hot The rising price of gasoline
prinive
04-07 05:09 PM
Thanks.
It is NSC.
First of all Congrats!!
BTW,what is your 485 RD and processing center??
It is NSC.
First of all Congrats!!
BTW,what is your 485 RD and processing center??
more...
house wallpaper gas prices funny
rsriram
11-02 03:57 PM
I am on L1 & my I-94 is expiring in a month from now on 11 Dec 2007 . I have applied for my L-Extenstion and is pending for approval.
Given this case - can my wife apply for a EAD with the current L1 approved document (expiring on 11 Dec 2007( and add my L-Extension approval papers later on?
There seems to be a three month delay in getting the EAD - hence wanted to initiate the process earlier and not till my L-Extension papers come-in
Please help me ASAP.
Sriram
Given this case - can my wife apply for a EAD with the current L1 approved document (expiring on 11 Dec 2007( and add my L-Extension approval papers later on?
There seems to be a three month delay in getting the EAD - hence wanted to initiate the process earlier and not till my L-Extension papers come-in
Please help me ASAP.
Sriram
tattoo With gas prices climbing again
rayoflight
05-26 11:54 PM
Here is the link on CNN on the new rules being implemented..
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/05/26/canada.passport.requirement/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/05/26/canada.passport.requirement/index.html
more...
pictures gas prices funny signs.
Libra
09-28 04:19 PM
some of them are doing for votes and some of them doing it for show ratings, but racism and hatred is there in their blood. i dont think they change their stance on this. but if they continue provoking white americans against immigrants like this, one day we have to face same thing what black americans faced in 50's and 60's, and govt is fully ignoring this.
dresses gas prices funny. gas prices
Mr.Z
12-09 01:43 PM
Hi friends,
I need your help!!!
I'm here at California with L-2 visa. I can stay legally in US but i can not get a SSN number, i can work too.But For a driver license they ask for SSN. Do i still get the Driver License or no?
Thank you very much...
I need your help!!!
I'm here at California with L-2 visa. I can stay legally in US but i can not get a SSN number, i can work too.But For a driver license they ask for SSN. Do i still get the Driver License or no?
Thank you very much...
more...
makeup higher gas prices as
vdlrao
07-14 12:45 PM
Please find out the visa numbers allotment for EB1, EB2 and EB3 till now. Till now there is about 100k visa numbers allotment for EB3 every year due to the vertical fallout. From now on there would be around 100K allotment in EB2 due to the change to Horizontal Fall out of visa numbers. Out of these 100k EB2 visa numbers, India will get greatest share of around 50k + visas. Please see the below.
Type and class of admission 1998-- 1999-- 2000-- 2001-- 2002-- 2003-- 2004-- 2005-- 2006-- 2007
Employment-based preferences 77,413-- 56,678-- 106,642--178,702--173,814--81,727--155,330--246,877--159,081--162,176
First: Priority workers 21,375-- 14,844-- 27,566-- 41,672-- 34,168-- 14,453-- 31,291-- 64,731-- 36,960-- 26,697
Second: advanced degrees or exceptional ability 14,362--8,557-- 20,255-- 42,550-- 44,316-- 15,406-- 32,534 --42,597-- 21,911-- 44,162
Third: Skilled workers 34,282 --27,920--49,589--85,847-- 88,002-- 46,415-- 85,969-- 129,070--89,922-- 85,030
Fourth: Special immigrants 6,570-- 5,072-- 9,014-- 8,442-- 7,186-- 5,389-- 5,407-- 10,133-- 9,539-- 5,481
Fifth: (investors) 824-- 285-- 218-- 191-- 142-- 64-- 129-- 346-- 749-- 806
See the link below for reference:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s...7/table06d.xls
Type and class of admission 1998-- 1999-- 2000-- 2001-- 2002-- 2003-- 2004-- 2005-- 2006-- 2007
Employment-based preferences 77,413-- 56,678-- 106,642--178,702--173,814--81,727--155,330--246,877--159,081--162,176
First: Priority workers 21,375-- 14,844-- 27,566-- 41,672-- 34,168-- 14,453-- 31,291-- 64,731-- 36,960-- 26,697
Second: advanced degrees or exceptional ability 14,362--8,557-- 20,255-- 42,550-- 44,316-- 15,406-- 32,534 --42,597-- 21,911-- 44,162
Third: Skilled workers 34,282 --27,920--49,589--85,847-- 88,002-- 46,415-- 85,969-- 129,070--89,922-- 85,030
Fourth: Special immigrants 6,570-- 5,072-- 9,014-- 8,442-- 7,186-- 5,389-- 5,407-- 10,133-- 9,539-- 5,481
Fifth: (investors) 824-- 285-- 218-- 191-- 142-- 64-- 129-- 346-- 749-- 806
See the link below for reference:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s...7/table06d.xls
girlfriend is sorry about gas prices
chanduv23
12-15 11:20 AM
gcisadawg,
Very well said. What you said, also gives strength to my point. We are self proclaimed "highly skilled" workers. We shouldn't have been trained, we shouldn't have been air lifted by desi consultants. We shouldn't have been sold for short/long term projects after coming to the US.
Actually, during 1999-2000 year, when I was about to graduate from IIT, yes, my class mates used to receive calls from Microsoft based in Seattle and Phillips based in Holland. Those companies paid final year graduating students (with good track record), a return trip to Seattle for interview. That was the real demand! And mind you, those students were very talented. They already had secured 100% aid from excellent US universities. So, it was a scenario of good company taking interest in excellent students and then filing for H1-B and subsequently green card. Can you imagine, Microsoft getting a RFE from USCIS to show "ability to pay"! We have so many people yelling on these forums because companies do not have the ability to pay to these "highly skilled workers".
I can go on and on.....
I do not agree with anyone who claims that we are really "required" here. We are fighting to survive here and we are fighting to get Green Cards. We have 50 million hate groups in the US that do not like us at all. It is a tough road ahead !
It is not about demand and supply - these two things can never me matched in the best possible way. remember - H1b and GC are typically platforms provided by US govt towards bringing in talent and workers and fill in gaps and keep the competitive spirit and keep US always the best country in the world.
If there is demand - there is demand. Period. if there is supply there is supply. Period. Supply can come from anywhere. Demand cane arise from anywhere. For eg.. An IITian need not necessarily be the best candidate to fill a spot in a X company in North Dakota and a MSFT need not necessarily be the only company to go abroad and find candidates ONLY from ivyleague.
I know so many people who are from IIT and work for desi companies - they get good salary and are happy.
Just go back and think about the best professor you had in your college. If you think that he must get a GC because he is very intelligent - youare wrong. On another note - if the same professor feels he must get a GC, he may probably pay a desi body shop , learn SAP and get an IT job come here - then he may rather go back to his ways of teaching if he wanted to do it again.
What I am trying to say is - there is no point in discussing about demand, supply, talent, whether we are required or not, we must look at ourselves - whether we want what we want. If we want what we want - we must work towards it - unfortunately our community thinks - we are/are not entitled - and have so many discussions. There are people who do what it takes to get what they want - and they may use body shops or whatever they can to navigate the system. There are people who think others will help them and now a lot of people think Obama will come to their house personally to give them a GC.
Very well said. What you said, also gives strength to my point. We are self proclaimed "highly skilled" workers. We shouldn't have been trained, we shouldn't have been air lifted by desi consultants. We shouldn't have been sold for short/long term projects after coming to the US.
Actually, during 1999-2000 year, when I was about to graduate from IIT, yes, my class mates used to receive calls from Microsoft based in Seattle and Phillips based in Holland. Those companies paid final year graduating students (with good track record), a return trip to Seattle for interview. That was the real demand! And mind you, those students were very talented. They already had secured 100% aid from excellent US universities. So, it was a scenario of good company taking interest in excellent students and then filing for H1-B and subsequently green card. Can you imagine, Microsoft getting a RFE from USCIS to show "ability to pay"! We have so many people yelling on these forums because companies do not have the ability to pay to these "highly skilled workers".
I can go on and on.....
I do not agree with anyone who claims that we are really "required" here. We are fighting to survive here and we are fighting to get Green Cards. We have 50 million hate groups in the US that do not like us at all. It is a tough road ahead !
It is not about demand and supply - these two things can never me matched in the best possible way. remember - H1b and GC are typically platforms provided by US govt towards bringing in talent and workers and fill in gaps and keep the competitive spirit and keep US always the best country in the world.
If there is demand - there is demand. Period. if there is supply there is supply. Period. Supply can come from anywhere. Demand cane arise from anywhere. For eg.. An IITian need not necessarily be the best candidate to fill a spot in a X company in North Dakota and a MSFT need not necessarily be the only company to go abroad and find candidates ONLY from ivyleague.
I know so many people who are from IIT and work for desi companies - they get good salary and are happy.
Just go back and think about the best professor you had in your college. If you think that he must get a GC because he is very intelligent - youare wrong. On another note - if the same professor feels he must get a GC, he may probably pay a desi body shop , learn SAP and get an IT job come here - then he may rather go back to his ways of teaching if he wanted to do it again.
What I am trying to say is - there is no point in discussing about demand, supply, talent, whether we are required or not, we must look at ourselves - whether we want what we want. If we want what we want - we must work towards it - unfortunately our community thinks - we are/are not entitled - and have so many discussions. There are people who do what it takes to get what they want - and they may use body shops or whatever they can to navigate the system. There are people who think others will help them and now a lot of people think Obama will come to their house personally to give them a GC.
hairstyles High Gas Prices Have Made Bobo
nixstor
07-02 10:50 PM
I support online petition idea and can get more than 50 friends to sign it.
Lets start it as soon as possible so it can have an positive impact on those three pending bills that will be presented to Congress this summer.
Thanks.
If web faxes to the representatives offices have not made an impact, How will a petition on a third party website will make an impact?
I don't mean to dampen any one's enthusiasm here but we have been clearly the best ways to make an impact on a law maker's decision are
(1) Go to their offices and meet their legislative assistant/ aide's
(2) Call them.
If you haven't called Rep Smith's office, call now. If you did encourage your friends from San Antonio / Austin area to do so.
Lets start it as soon as possible so it can have an positive impact on those three pending bills that will be presented to Congress this summer.
Thanks.
If web faxes to the representatives offices have not made an impact, How will a petition on a third party website will make an impact?
I don't mean to dampen any one's enthusiasm here but we have been clearly the best ways to make an impact on a law maker's decision are
(1) Go to their offices and meet their legislative assistant/ aide's
(2) Call them.
If you haven't called Rep Smith's office, call now. If you did encourage your friends from San Antonio / Austin area to do so.
stucklabor
07-24 12:42 PM
It all depend how we interpret the law.
Here is the arguement by stuck labor
"INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed."
BUT
The above is applicable for adjustment of status only not for filing of 485.
Here the case in point is to argue for filing 485, not for adjusting of status even VISA numbers are not available. It is not mentioned anywhere in the act that the 485 petition cannot be filed. It is worth to give a try with USCIS. The present law does not mention anything about filing and we can take advantage of that.
The law is the law, there is no room for interpretation. We cannot file for Adjustment of Status using form I-485 without visa number availability. Remember that I-485 is the form name that you use to apply for Adjustment of Status. When you file I-485, you are filing for Adjustment of Status.
Please think through your ideas before posting them.
Just as a FYI and anticipating arguments that may arise, EAD is available by law to Adjustment of Status applicants and others - such as students on OPT etc - and the law specifically says who may get EAD.
I will not respond to any further arguments on this thread that are on the lines of "Let us get USCIS to reinterpret the law, let us file I-485 and not call it an Adjustment of Status application, let us lobby USCIS to get EADs without filing for Adjustment of Status etc".
In response to the posts by rpatel, valabor etc - there is ZERO potential in pursuing this directly with USCIS. IV will not and should not waste any time in this effort.
Here is the arguement by stuck labor
"INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed."
BUT
The above is applicable for adjustment of status only not for filing of 485.
Here the case in point is to argue for filing 485, not for adjusting of status even VISA numbers are not available. It is not mentioned anywhere in the act that the 485 petition cannot be filed. It is worth to give a try with USCIS. The present law does not mention anything about filing and we can take advantage of that.
The law is the law, there is no room for interpretation. We cannot file for Adjustment of Status using form I-485 without visa number availability. Remember that I-485 is the form name that you use to apply for Adjustment of Status. When you file I-485, you are filing for Adjustment of Status.
Please think through your ideas before posting them.
Just as a FYI and anticipating arguments that may arise, EAD is available by law to Adjustment of Status applicants and others - such as students on OPT etc - and the law specifically says who may get EAD.
I will not respond to any further arguments on this thread that are on the lines of "Let us get USCIS to reinterpret the law, let us file I-485 and not call it an Adjustment of Status application, let us lobby USCIS to get EADs without filing for Adjustment of Status etc".
In response to the posts by rpatel, valabor etc - there is ZERO potential in pursuing this directly with USCIS. IV will not and should not waste any time in this effort.
imneedy
04-10 10:28 AM
buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
lol :d
lol :d
No comments:
Post a Comment