fairman
08-18 11:06 PM
The IV page is full of Active-X controls. God knows what happens when i allow them to execute. Is there a way to find out what are those ?
wallpaper Pictures of 2007 HONDA ELEMENT
amitjoey
05-25 12:17 PM
We are thinking about applying for canadian PR. Should we include our son (US citizen) in the application? or do US citizens get to reside in Canada without visa?
Also, currently my company is processing my GC, will this be affected if we apply for canadian PR?
US citizens can come in and stay in canada as a tourist for temporary purposes, but you need a Canadian PR for longer stays. So YES, add your son in your application. Your US-Gc application is not affected by processing canadian PR or vice-versa.
Also, currently my company is processing my GC, will this be affected if we apply for canadian PR?
US citizens can come in and stay in canada as a tourist for temporary purposes, but you need a Canadian PR for longer stays. So YES, add your son in your application. Your US-Gc application is not affected by processing canadian PR or vice-versa.
snathan
01-21 06:27 PM
I got the below email from multiple friends. I don't know what is the source, who wrote this analysis because there is no links. I did NOT mean to spread the fear. Just sharing the contents unaltered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
Everyone knows what the impact would be...no one coming up with the solutions or ready to fight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
Everyone knows what the impact would be...no one coming up with the solutions or ready to fight.
2011 pictures Honda Element SC
NNReddy
04-03 01:12 AM
1. Mayawati.
2. Sharad Pawar.
3. ManMohan Singh.
one of these for sure
2. Sharad Pawar.
3. ManMohan Singh.
one of these for sure
more...
rockstart
07-08 12:52 PM
How should one answer Immigration Officer at POE "Are you working for your GC sponsoring Employer?" in case one has used AC-21 and moved to a same or similar job position in other company.
wellwishergc
07-03 04:32 PM
I would suggest getting the congressmen/senators' attention on this issue. If not a short-term benefit, this issue may give us mileage to get a legal-immigration based bill rolling this year.
Here is one more to digg
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
Here is one more to digg
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
more...
m306m
02-14 01:48 PM
lazycis/hopefulgc I am willing to send $10 as a token of support for your initiative. I am impressed by your confidence and conviction. Let us form a new group and we will definitely get moral support from all good IV members. Personally I dont want to be plaintiff as I have too much to loose. But I support your group. Waiting for your direction.
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it. I have voted NO on the poll, I would prefer we take a more conciliatory approach to USCIS. As the saying goes "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Having said that, if IV were to go ahead with the lawsuit, I could be counted on to contribute financially.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it. I have voted NO on the poll, I would prefer we take a more conciliatory approach to USCIS. As the saying goes "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Having said that, if IV were to go ahead with the lawsuit, I could be counted on to contribute financially.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
2010 The Element LX has a 4-speaker
_TrueFacts
09-03 11:40 PM
We cannot judge when some one who is no more. No court will punish any one after death. If he is bad, he will face the final JUDGEMENT with every one.
That's is what YSR has met with, what you call final Judgment. His head, legs chopped. In our language we call Kukka Chavu.
That's is what YSR has met with, what you call final Judgment. His head, legs chopped. In our language we call Kukka Chavu.
more...
ramus
07-03 04:20 PM
Any other way you can get in touch with her... phone??
Wrote to Jennifer Ludden at NPR who regularly reports on immigration
email addresses are first name initial followed by lastname at npr dot org, if you would like to write
Wrote to Jennifer Ludden at NPR who regularly reports on immigration
email addresses are first name initial followed by lastname at npr dot org, if you would like to write
hair 2007 Honda Element SC SUV
gc28262
06-05 03:14 PM
Country cap was introduced with a racial intent. It was never meant for diversity.
Let us call country cap what it is : racism
Let us not fool ourselves by thinking it is meant for diversity.
Please refer the law that introduced country cap.
Please refer INA 1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigra...ty_Act_of_1965 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)
Highlights:
During debate on the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) floor, Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia.... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.... The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-1) The act's supporters not only claimed the law would not change America's ethnic makeup, but that such a change was not desirable.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-.2770s_268-0)
Let us call country cap what it is : racism
Let us not fool ourselves by thinking it is meant for diversity.
Please refer the law that introduced country cap.
Please refer INA 1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigra...ty_Act_of_1965 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)
Highlights:
During debate on the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) floor, Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia.... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.... The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-1) The act's supporters not only claimed the law would not change America's ethnic makeup, but that such a change was not desirable.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965#cite_note-.2770s_268-0)
more...
advad
07-15 01:01 AM
Hi there,
Here is my situation, any help to resolve this is appreciated.
- My self (primary) & my wife's(derivative) I-485's (PD June 2002) were filed in March 2007.
- My I-485 was approved in July 2007, my wife's was pending due to NC.
- My wife's employer filed PERM (PD June 2007) & then filed I-140 in March 2008.
- We recently contacted NSC regarding my wife's case status, we received a letter from them stating that, her I485 is waiting for I-140 to get approved.
They linked her new I-140 to her pending I-485 that was filed as derivative.Is this USCIS error?.How to correct this error and have them consider her I-485 application as a derivative application?.
Thanks for your help.
Here is my situation, any help to resolve this is appreciated.
- My self (primary) & my wife's(derivative) I-485's (PD June 2002) were filed in March 2007.
- My I-485 was approved in July 2007, my wife's was pending due to NC.
- My wife's employer filed PERM (PD June 2007) & then filed I-140 in March 2008.
- We recently contacted NSC regarding my wife's case status, we received a letter from them stating that, her I485 is waiting for I-140 to get approved.
They linked her new I-140 to her pending I-485 that was filed as derivative.Is this USCIS error?.How to correct this error and have them consider her I-485 application as a derivative application?.
Thanks for your help.
hot 2007 Honda Element SC
srkamath
07-30 09:10 AM
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
This Ron Gotcher guy does not seem to get it.... he has an agenda, I dont buy his logic. It is unlikely that ~ 50 cases at consular posts are enough motivation to move dates forward by two years.
It took roughly one year for EB2-I dates to advance beyond April04 from the time it first got to April 04.
We know 2005 is a lean year.
It is likely that it will take almost a year before EB2-I dates advance beyond June06.
Those with PD < June06 that do not get a GC by Sep08 can expect to get it by Sep 09. Until then we will see some short term swings between 2003 and 2006.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
This Ron Gotcher guy does not seem to get it.... he has an agenda, I dont buy his logic. It is unlikely that ~ 50 cases at consular posts are enough motivation to move dates forward by two years.
It took roughly one year for EB2-I dates to advance beyond April04 from the time it first got to April 04.
We know 2005 is a lean year.
It is likely that it will take almost a year before EB2-I dates advance beyond June06.
Those with PD < June06 that do not get a GC by Sep08 can expect to get it by Sep 09. Until then we will see some short term swings between 2003 and 2006.
more...
house images 2007 Honda Element SC
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:18 PM
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Ahhh my friend forever_waiting, how are you. It is good to see your reply to the post. Will be do this the civilized way or the old way??
In direct response to your post
First i am not a expert nor an analyst musch less a self proclaimed expert analyst. Take that as a given and we can procced further
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
None because i do not believe in supporting, representing or furthering the agenda of an organization which has loop holes in it and is determental to my case
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation?
I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
No i have not. Why do i need to visit capitol hill and view in person what congress thinks about EB legislation when i can do the same by watching CSPAN(I am a regular watcher expecially when there is something immigrant related going on. All a process of expanding my knowlesge of immigration or do you think i got up yesterday morning and decided that i want to fight with IV. If you did then i am sorry i gave you more credit then that. And please do not start a new thread about how lazy i am and how i want others to work for me and how i just want the benefit without effort. That would be old and stale. If there is something to be done in which i believe i will be the first to jump in and volunteer
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
YES and i never said you are not fair. I know EB2 and EB23 owkr toghether in IV. My efforts of meeting people have been made outside the scope of what you and others do. I am being modest when i say this but i was the first person in my company to make generate awareness about what IV did and how it is helping immigrants like us and encouraged them to visit the website and read about what IV is all about. This is about 75 to 100 indains (EB2 and EB3) in an organization of size 500 during teh time period 2006 to 2007. Now most of them were EB2 so they got their green card and i am sure are no longer on the IV forum anymore. I am sure those who are still on IV forum are EB3 like me. How much they parrticipate, it is hard to tell. Maybe they were smarter than me and got dissalusioned with IV way before i did. They might be porting or they might not be for all i know
Besides that i am pretty much regular on Murthy where i have provided advise or tried to help people with information whne i could (O f course all of this was H1B/ Visit Visa stuff). Even today on IV forum i am trying my level best to help peopl ewith information related to AOS/EAD/140/485 etc
I am sorry because what i did till now is nowhere near what you and other IV volunteers are doing but i do what i can when i can.
My friend forever_waiting, I hope i answered everything to your satisfaction
As to the below
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread. Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim. I am sorry i am done trying to explain it to you all over again. May god grant you wisdom
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Ahhh my friend forever_waiting, how are you. It is good to see your reply to the post. Will be do this the civilized way or the old way??
In direct response to your post
First i am not a expert nor an analyst musch less a self proclaimed expert analyst. Take that as a given and we can procced further
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
None because i do not believe in supporting, representing or furthering the agenda of an organization which has loop holes in it and is determental to my case
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation?
I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
No i have not. Why do i need to visit capitol hill and view in person what congress thinks about EB legislation when i can do the same by watching CSPAN(I am a regular watcher expecially when there is something immigrant related going on. All a process of expanding my knowlesge of immigration or do you think i got up yesterday morning and decided that i want to fight with IV. If you did then i am sorry i gave you more credit then that. And please do not start a new thread about how lazy i am and how i want others to work for me and how i just want the benefit without effort. That would be old and stale. If there is something to be done in which i believe i will be the first to jump in and volunteer
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
YES and i never said you are not fair. I know EB2 and EB23 owkr toghether in IV. My efforts of meeting people have been made outside the scope of what you and others do. I am being modest when i say this but i was the first person in my company to make generate awareness about what IV did and how it is helping immigrants like us and encouraged them to visit the website and read about what IV is all about. This is about 75 to 100 indains (EB2 and EB3) in an organization of size 500 during teh time period 2006 to 2007. Now most of them were EB2 so they got their green card and i am sure are no longer on the IV forum anymore. I am sure those who are still on IV forum are EB3 like me. How much they parrticipate, it is hard to tell. Maybe they were smarter than me and got dissalusioned with IV way before i did. They might be porting or they might not be for all i know
Besides that i am pretty much regular on Murthy where i have provided advise or tried to help people with information whne i could (O f course all of this was H1B/ Visit Visa stuff). Even today on IV forum i am trying my level best to help peopl ewith information related to AOS/EAD/140/485 etc
I am sorry because what i did till now is nowhere near what you and other IV volunteers are doing but i do what i can when i can.
My friend forever_waiting, I hope i answered everything to your satisfaction
As to the below
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread. Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim. I am sorry i am done trying to explain it to you all over again. May god grant you wisdom
tattoo of the new 2007 Element SC
extra_mint
09-15 12:26 PM
Totally Agree with your assumptions, there are few more that can be added like
Some 3-5% people with PD 2005 - 2006 are already approved (as low hanging fruits) during 2008 Aug-Oct period.
Also recent span of RFE's by USCIS (for preadjudication) resulted in flushing out of some applications
In short pending EB2 numbers that you are taking into account will be 10 to 20% less and available visa numbers from spill overs will be 20 to 30% more than what you projects. So forward movement will surely be there.
However there is a doubt related to spill overs every quarter !!
Allocations are surely made on quarter to quarter basis but there is no certain precedence in the past for spill overs, well i would say the past has been shady
I recall once VB where EB2 I was giving numbers from EB1 and this was before the last quarter (happened in FY 2008). We have to wait till Dec, 2009 Bulletin.
The analysis is very optimistic and does not account for
Duplicates (multiple I-485 for same person)
Discarded Labor (many people just discard the perm since they switch jobs or did not want to do GC)
Upgrades (people had EB2 perm but got GC in EB1 category)
Cross-chargeability (with spouse of PERM hold birth from non retrogressed country)
If they all makeup to 10-20% of applicants then the PD will move much faster.
Some 3-5% people with PD 2005 - 2006 are already approved (as low hanging fruits) during 2008 Aug-Oct period.
Also recent span of RFE's by USCIS (for preadjudication) resulted in flushing out of some applications
In short pending EB2 numbers that you are taking into account will be 10 to 20% less and available visa numbers from spill overs will be 20 to 30% more than what you projects. So forward movement will surely be there.
However there is a doubt related to spill overs every quarter !!
Allocations are surely made on quarter to quarter basis but there is no certain precedence in the past for spill overs, well i would say the past has been shady
I recall once VB where EB2 I was giving numbers from EB1 and this was before the last quarter (happened in FY 2008). We have to wait till Dec, 2009 Bulletin.
The analysis is very optimistic and does not account for
Duplicates (multiple I-485 for same person)
Discarded Labor (many people just discard the perm since they switch jobs or did not want to do GC)
Upgrades (people had EB2 perm but got GC in EB1 category)
Cross-chargeability (with spouse of PERM hold birth from non retrogressed country)
If they all makeup to 10-20% of applicants then the PD will move much faster.
more...
pictures bullet
rajesh_kamisetty
07-10 09:53 PM
I know how to get in and out .......... just kidding.
appreciate your ego strength man...thanks for the edit...u r the man..
appreciate your ego strength man...thanks for the edit...u r the man..
dresses FS: 2007 RBM Element SC 17K
rajuram
05-31 04:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do these figures include dependents??
Do these figures include dependents??
more...
makeup Type-M#39;s amp; Element SC
amsgc
07-04 12:30 PM
What is $170 and $180? I got this number from my attorney.
However, we are getting conflicting #s on application fee!
Please resolve these #s. Lawyer fees vary. So we can give least and max #s.
There should be no discrepancy in the application fee - I pulled out these numbers from www.uscis.gov.
EAD (I-765): $180
AP (I-131): $170
As for lawyer fees, it varies by State, Experience, Number of dependents, and Reputation. I think the $2000 is representative of lawyer fees for primary applicant plus 1 dependent. I spoke to a lawyer in California who charges around $1700 for I-485/AP/EAD, and multiply that by the number of dependents. Another one on the east coast said $2000 for primary and spouse.
If you go for I-140/I-485, then lawyer fees for 1 applicant can go up to $4000 easy.
However, we are getting conflicting #s on application fee!
Please resolve these #s. Lawyer fees vary. So we can give least and max #s.
There should be no discrepancy in the application fee - I pulled out these numbers from www.uscis.gov.
EAD (I-765): $180
AP (I-131): $170
As for lawyer fees, it varies by State, Experience, Number of dependents, and Reputation. I think the $2000 is representative of lawyer fees for primary applicant plus 1 dependent. I spoke to a lawyer in California who charges around $1700 for I-485/AP/EAD, and multiply that by the number of dependents. Another one on the east coast said $2000 for primary and spouse.
If you go for I-140/I-485, then lawyer fees for 1 applicant can go up to $4000 easy.
girlfriend 2007 HONDA ELEMENT SC MODEL
vahdam
11-01 07:32 PM
In 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and, again, in 2000, Canada was ranked No.1 by the United Nations Human Development Index as the best country in the world to live. Unlike the United States and other countries, there is no quota based on either nationality or occupation. The Canadian Government's new immigration plan for the next five years and beyond is to emphasize the admission of a greater number of skilled immigrants with abilities to contribute directly to Canada's economic and social development.
The rights of Canadian Permanent Residents are almost the same as those of the Canadian citizens except a few, such as right to vote.
1. After becoming a Permanent Resident you will have the freedom to live and work anywhere in Canada.
2. You will also have the freedom to work in/with any profession/employer of your choice.
3. You may purchase/sell any property, own and operate any business anywhere in Canada.
4. A Permanent Resident becomes eligible for Canadian citizenship after living in Canada for a period of three years of the last four years prior to the date of the application for citizenship.
5. The best of all, you and your family can enjoy the benefits of free Canadian Healthcare, free primary and secondary education and subsidized post secondary education, security of unemployment insurance, old age pension, child allowance etc.
Benefits for H1B, F1 or L1 holders:
1. Unlike US work visa for a specific employer/profession a Canadian immigrant is free to work anywhere with any employer or in any profession in Canada.
2. Unlike applying for GC in US, you need not to be present in Canada or working in Canada in order to apply for permanent immigration for Canada.
3. It might take you years to get a Green Card in US, whereas you along with your spouse & dependent children can get Canadian immigration within a period of 12 to 16 months.
4. May opt to stay outside Canada for a period of 3 years in any given period of 5 years and still maintain his/her permanent residence status.
***The pass marks for federal immigration under the skilled worker category was lowered to 67 from 75 points. This is the best time to apply for immigration to Canada as this points criteria might change again any time which may render you ineligible for this opportunity.
The rights of Canadian Permanent Residents are almost the same as those of the Canadian citizens except a few, such as right to vote.
1. After becoming a Permanent Resident you will have the freedom to live and work anywhere in Canada.
2. You will also have the freedom to work in/with any profession/employer of your choice.
3. You may purchase/sell any property, own and operate any business anywhere in Canada.
4. A Permanent Resident becomes eligible for Canadian citizenship after living in Canada for a period of three years of the last four years prior to the date of the application for citizenship.
5. The best of all, you and your family can enjoy the benefits of free Canadian Healthcare, free primary and secondary education and subsidized post secondary education, security of unemployment insurance, old age pension, child allowance etc.
Benefits for H1B, F1 or L1 holders:
1. Unlike US work visa for a specific employer/profession a Canadian immigrant is free to work anywhere with any employer or in any profession in Canada.
2. Unlike applying for GC in US, you need not to be present in Canada or working in Canada in order to apply for permanent immigration for Canada.
3. It might take you years to get a Green Card in US, whereas you along with your spouse & dependent children can get Canadian immigration within a period of 12 to 16 months.
4. May opt to stay outside Canada for a period of 3 years in any given period of 5 years and still maintain his/her permanent residence status.
***The pass marks for federal immigration under the skilled worker category was lowered to 67 from 75 points. This is the best time to apply for immigration to Canada as this points criteria might change again any time which may render you ineligible for this opportunity.
hairstyles new 2007 Honda Element SC
skrish
09-25 11:48 AM
The logic is that you are 'putting down roots' by buying a house. If all it takes is proof of closing a mortgage, one could always turn around and sell the house. somethng like that would undermine the credibility of IV in the medium/long run.
I had initially advocated treating first time home buying as the same as marriage to an American citizen. In my opinion, that is a short,sweet,simple and sensible approach to follow that will also resonate/stick in lawmakers minds (rather than a long,rambling letter, no offense meant to the writers, it was quite well put together).
I had initially advocated treating first time home buying as the same as marriage to an American citizen. In my opinion, that is a short,sweet,simple and sensible approach to follow that will also resonate/stick in lawmakers minds (rather than a long,rambling letter, no offense meant to the writers, it was quite well put together).
unseenguy
08-16 06:14 PM
In that case we have to do it everyday...not only when SRk was detained. are you doing that...no. Why?
There is difference between a common man and a celebrity. We did make noise about Abdul Kalam and Fernandez when the news came out. I think SRK was right to make an issue out of it.
I have been through secondary once and frisked about 4-5 times as a "singled out" case. Man I hated it, whole flight was watching what was going on. What if I make an issue? It will be dismissed as everyone goes through it.
When I went for secondary exam , I was released with 5 mins of questioning but was made to wait 30 mins. The secondary officer was nice, but the primary inspection officer was really mean. She picked on me coz I was smiling in the queue and talking to other people. and I laughed at the jokes cracked by other immigration officers.
3 out of 4 frisking incidents were insensitive and derogatory.
But voice of celebrity has more credence to it.
There is difference between a common man and a celebrity. We did make noise about Abdul Kalam and Fernandez when the news came out. I think SRK was right to make an issue out of it.
I have been through secondary once and frisked about 4-5 times as a "singled out" case. Man I hated it, whole flight was watching what was going on. What if I make an issue? It will be dismissed as everyone goes through it.
When I went for secondary exam , I was released with 5 mins of questioning but was made to wait 30 mins. The secondary officer was nice, but the primary inspection officer was really mean. She picked on me coz I was smiling in the queue and talking to other people. and I laughed at the jokes cracked by other immigration officers.
3 out of 4 frisking incidents were insensitive and derogatory.
But voice of celebrity has more credence to it.
chintu25
02-13 11:23 AM
Ok - so what is it going to cost us to get a consult with Rajiv Khanna? Anyone know this? Until we have more details on this, I commit $25 for this first consultation. (I will gladly raise the commitment once I know how much this will cost and if IV Core Members support this initiative).
We have three now and atleast 8 who supported this issue on the thread
We have three now and atleast 8 who supported this issue on the thread
No comments:
Post a Comment