looivy
06-11 10:36 PM
Emaied IL senator and will snail mail as well. Same for my spouse.
wallpaper farmer girls working so hard
sprash
02-02 01:42 PM
Out of status is usually checked until date of I-485 filing. One exception being working without valid and active EAD when I-485 is pending.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
I have been following this thread with great interest. I'm the guy who posted the RFE scans on Pg1.
In my case the RFE was issued 1.5 years after filing for AOS (I filed in July 07 and this RFE was on Oct 08). Also, I'm not the only person who got this. I know many folks who work for big companies like Intel etc, who got such an RFE.
Also if I remember correctly, Belle on Murthy Forums (who also seems in the know) mentioned that one must be employed at all times on EAD. I didn't find any specific timeframe -- most people said you could get into trouble if an RFE (such as mine) is raised and you're out of a job. On the other hand, it is might be safe till such an RFE is issued (???)
I tried to look for that thread, but couldn't find it. However I did find another similar thread on which she (he?) has said the same thing:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=9941019581&r=3791069581#3791069581
In tumultuous times such as these, I would expect USCIS to raise many more such RFEs.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
I have been following this thread with great interest. I'm the guy who posted the RFE scans on Pg1.
In my case the RFE was issued 1.5 years after filing for AOS (I filed in July 07 and this RFE was on Oct 08). Also, I'm not the only person who got this. I know many folks who work for big companies like Intel etc, who got such an RFE.
Also if I remember correctly, Belle on Murthy Forums (who also seems in the know) mentioned that one must be employed at all times on EAD. I didn't find any specific timeframe -- most people said you could get into trouble if an RFE (such as mine) is raised and you're out of a job. On the other hand, it is might be safe till such an RFE is issued (???)
I tried to look for that thread, but couldn't find it. However I did find another similar thread on which she (he?) has said the same thing:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=9941019581&r=3791069581#3791069581
In tumultuous times such as these, I would expect USCIS to raise many more such RFEs.
user1205
08-15 05:20 PM
Well, I mean no offense to anybody but why is EB3 ROW so far back while EB2 India and China are as per June bulletin or better?
I thought for India the approved cases were 5 times the country quota for 2007? Good for those guys that were approved but I still don't get it why ROW is 2002!
I thought for India the approved cases were 5 times the country quota for 2007? Good for those guys that were approved but I still don't get it why ROW is 2002!
2011 hard-suffering farmer girl
kate123
02-19 04:58 PM
DITTO!
I feel the same...
You guys are really making me laugh by having this less than and longer than 5 years arguing. If you've been on this forum long enough, you'll know the chance of this bill passes will be next to nothing.
I feel the same...
You guys are really making me laugh by having this less than and longer than 5 years arguing. If you've been on this forum long enough, you'll know the chance of this bill passes will be next to nothing.
more...
pappu
12-18 09:12 AM
Just need a place to vent and share my frustration with this system.
I came to US 12 years ago for undergrad. Got a good job with a fortune 500 company, been with the same company for 8 years. Did my Masters and MBA part time.
Company filed paper work for GC under EB3 in 2002, but the system was too slow and I decided to take a new role. Had to re-file another appication since i took a new role, but this time in EB2 in '04. 4 years have passed and both applications have only cleared labor.
Not sure when this wait will end. I do hope that this wait and patience is worth it for all of us.
I do hope we see some miracle in 2007.
Welcome to the club.
everyone is in the same boat. Pls try to get more people like us in this organization. Together we can all make the miracle happen in 2007
I came to US 12 years ago for undergrad. Got a good job with a fortune 500 company, been with the same company for 8 years. Did my Masters and MBA part time.
Company filed paper work for GC under EB3 in 2002, but the system was too slow and I decided to take a new role. Had to re-file another appication since i took a new role, but this time in EB2 in '04. 4 years have passed and both applications have only cleared labor.
Not sure when this wait will end. I do hope that this wait and patience is worth it for all of us.
I do hope we see some miracle in 2007.
Welcome to the club.
everyone is in the same boat. Pls try to get more people like us in this organization. Together we can all make the miracle happen in 2007
new_horizon
10-19 11:46 PM
I don't get it why our folks blindly follow the dems, and somehow think Obama is our savior when in fact it's contrary. Obama can talk so smoothly that you'll leave feeling that he's for you even if he was saying the opposite. Time to wake up and look at the facts. Go Mccain.
more...
Buran
02-15 01:09 PM
Everybody stands in one single queue......one line not five lines......one line my friend, irrespective of your nationality. so if you wait 2 years, or 2 hours..I wait the same. Unlike NOW, where some people wait 5-8 years and others 1-2 years.
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
2010 when farmer#39;s wives change
vamsi_poondla
09-26 12:36 PM
Excellent coordination...
more...
ashkam
02-12 04:10 PM
Are you people daft? Using terms like ethnic cleansing, lynching or comparing our plight to the holocaust borders on the hysterical. Please do not lose your perspective on life.
hair Black Farmer Girl Waving And
zram1977
06-08 06:08 PM
Welcome to the club, China! :D
What is the status of unused Eb1 /Eb2 visas of ROW?
Will it spill over or be wasted?
GOK
What is the status of unused Eb1 /Eb2 visas of ROW?
Will it spill over or be wasted?
GOK
more...
zen
04-03 03:09 PM
o.k. ..I will first tell the issues which are preventing me from doing what you say.
whenever we/I come with ideas - some members come up with posts to attack and kill the idea. ( teli and sanju ..).
everything seems to be tied to donations ..but do people even think before parting with their money ?(it is their money and there is a saying for such attitude). some say donate for lobbying ... how much does that cost ? how much is needed ? no info is provided.
say we are raising 10K every month and say lobbying requires 500 K ...5 - 8 years will go just to reach that amount (by that time, some will say lobbying needs more money ) !!!
whenever we/I come with ideas - some members come up with posts to attack and kill the idea. ( teli and sanju ..).
everything seems to be tied to donations ..but do people even think before parting with their money ?(it is their money and there is a saying for such attitude). some say donate for lobbying ... how much does that cost ? how much is needed ? no info is provided.
say we are raising 10K every month and say lobbying requires 500 K ...5 - 8 years will go just to reach that amount (by that time, some will say lobbying needs more money ) !!!
hot Farm Girl Farmers Wife Doll
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
more...
house CARTOON FARMER COLOURING
GCanyMinute
08-02 03:17 PM
The unavailabilty of a Visa number does not 'cancel' an I-485 that has already been filed.
It merely means that one cannot file an I-485, OR if one has previously filed (during a period when cut-off dates were not retrogressed) an I-485, it cannot be approved.
USCIS may have proceeded very far on your case... but they (like you) must wait for an available number before approving your I-485.
By the way, I'm in EXACTLY the same boat as you: my PD is 03may02, everything but I-485 approved. My only difference was that my i-140 was approved in may 2005, a month before the retrogression crash: just missed getting GC, now expecting to wait 2 more years.:(
Thanks for your comments!! it is good to know that i'm not alone in the road lol !! but hey do you really think that it is gonna take 2 years for our PD ?? That's just crazy I don't know if I'm willing to wait that long... (of course I'll but ya know just some drama :p )
It merely means that one cannot file an I-485, OR if one has previously filed (during a period when cut-off dates were not retrogressed) an I-485, it cannot be approved.
USCIS may have proceeded very far on your case... but they (like you) must wait for an available number before approving your I-485.
By the way, I'm in EXACTLY the same boat as you: my PD is 03may02, everything but I-485 approved. My only difference was that my i-140 was approved in may 2005, a month before the retrogression crash: just missed getting GC, now expecting to wait 2 more years.:(
Thanks for your comments!! it is good to know that i'm not alone in the road lol !! but hey do you really think that it is gonna take 2 years for our PD ?? That's just crazy I don't know if I'm willing to wait that long... (of course I'll but ya know just some drama :p )
tattoo Showman cartoon 2 - search ID
abd
09-17 11:20 AM
Anyone received RFE letter? I've not received it yet.
In my case only attorney received in 5 days of RFE. I never got copy.
In my case only attorney received in 5 days of RFE. I never got copy.
more...
pictures Fashionista Farm Girls Sowing
kondur_007
04-09 06:22 PM
This is an "Ouch..." visa bulletin.
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
dresses Friendly Caucasian Farmer Man
mirage
02-03 01:32 PM
You first thought of calling me jerk privately, than changed your mind...Anyway, waiting in this country for 10 years without Green Card, I am certainly a jerk, atleast that's how I felt when I saw the Fijian guy who landed here in 2007 got his Green Card, you are right for that point. First point of your's that I didn't understand was 'I may annoy people'. I acknowledged that in my first post itself. If being ROW I was to get my Green Card in 1 year, I will certainly be unhappy if someone try to make it 2 years...secondly you need to tell me how this effort is going to hurt the entire effort, I am looking for 15-20 volunteers who can work with me on this. Since this is also on IV's agenda so, it is certainly not against IV's goals, But I will try to work only on 1 goal. I am not stopping IV to continue with it's efforts. The whole point is, as we have seen in all the debates, lawmakers see Visa recapturing as new visas. Go around and read some stuff, America is more anti immigrant today than it was ever, in this scenario, getting a bill passed with recapturing Visas etc. sounds impossible to me(I hope I am wrong), but taking of country quota or increasing country limits may be to 15% will bring lot of relief to the hugely baclogged countries...Moreover as I mentioned when a strong lawmaker like Zoe Logfren supports such thing, I'm sure she'll be ready to bring something for it....again don't tell me it is not possible. I know it is impossible, but atleast I'll give it a shot...
I did want to PM you, but thought of posting it on the open forum. So here is what I have to say.
You are a total jerk because you do not understand, and you do not want to understand that your actions could annoy people and harm the effort. There is a time for everything. Just because we are all feeling the fear of the shrinking economy, doesn't mean that we have to do something, which may even harm the entire effort. Waiting for the right moment is better than doing wrong things at the wrong time and failing.
.
I did want to PM you, but thought of posting it on the open forum. So here is what I have to say.
You are a total jerk because you do not understand, and you do not want to understand that your actions could annoy people and harm the effort. There is a time for everything. Just because we are all feeling the fear of the shrinking economy, doesn't mean that we have to do something, which may even harm the entire effort. Waiting for the right moment is better than doing wrong things at the wrong time and failing.
.
more...
makeup Outlined Farmer Girl Holding A
senthil1
06-13 02:08 PM
If the restrictions in H1b comes then I may be impacted also many of my friends and relatives may be impacted. For our personal lives H1b and green card are important if we want to stay in USA. My point is if congress make sure that if I or you will not take any eligible US persons job in USA that is acceptable for me. That will make sure everyone happy
Anyhow we will see what next for CIR and we will do more analysis when it comes.
Senthil1, Pineapple
Please let us not sound harsh and have a bipartisan :D discussion. It is just my statement I do not disagree with neither of you.
Rule 2
You mean Microsoft and Google and other companies want to stop outsourcing. They would not have build a huge team in india if they wanted to do this. The point that you are missing is that they need H1-Bs here because no american born is availabe here to fill those positions.
Read my statement thoroughly.
Big consulting companies(Bearing point....my list will go on) that are plenty in the US who hire and fire H1-B and american born if they cannot find another client for them after few days.
What will happen to these companies .. they have to shut down
Rule 2 will be a disaster for all these companies.
These companies do not go to india to get H1-B's they get them when they come here brought by india Desi companies.
It will be a mess. You might be talking about one company that will never displace and american and will garauntee an employee that he will never be fired once hired : Give me a break.
Anyhow we will see what next for CIR and we will do more analysis when it comes.
Senthil1, Pineapple
Please let us not sound harsh and have a bipartisan :D discussion. It is just my statement I do not disagree with neither of you.
Rule 2
You mean Microsoft and Google and other companies want to stop outsourcing. They would not have build a huge team in india if they wanted to do this. The point that you are missing is that they need H1-Bs here because no american born is availabe here to fill those positions.
Read my statement thoroughly.
Big consulting companies(Bearing point....my list will go on) that are plenty in the US who hire and fire H1-B and american born if they cannot find another client for them after few days.
What will happen to these companies .. they have to shut down
Rule 2 will be a disaster for all these companies.
These companies do not go to india to get H1-B's they get them when they come here brought by india Desi companies.
It will be a mess. You might be talking about one company that will never displace and american and will garauntee an employee that he will never be fired once hired : Give me a break.
girlfriend Cute farm girl - vector
logiclife
01-31 02:15 PM
[QUOTE=logiclife]Unpaid bench means you are "Out of Status". Not illegal.
I don't agree at all with this statement. People can go on a unpaid maternity leave and still maintain status.
Out of status is anyway no better than illegal.
Look. Here's the deal.
Whether you are on unpaid bench while looking for a project, or on unpaid maternity leave or on unpaid vacation. Missing paystubs means you are out of status. Period. Probably for maternity leave, you can have unpaid days off but still you may be issued paystubs of 0-dollar in which case it might be ok. I dont know about unpaid maternity leave.
The problem arises at the time of H1 transfer. And here is the classic situation:
You are looking for a project on an unpaid bench. You've been unpaid for 2 months. Then you find a project but thru another employer(bodyshop). Then you join that project and change your employer and file for H1 transfer. When you file for H1 transfer, since you are missing paystubs from previous employer for 2 months, due to unpaid bench, there is a "Gap" in employment. USCIS considers missing paystubs as out of status and then sends an inquiry about the H1 transfer. So you are in hanging status. Then you shell out a couple of thousand dollars to an attorney to reply to that inquiry about the gap to USCIS with whatever crap fits into that. Most of the cases, USCIS approves the petition with I-94. Sometimes it approves without I-94 therby forcing you to travel out of country and come back.
So the unpaid bench is a really issue if you have to change your employer at the end of the bench time. If you continue with the same employer after your unpaid bench, then yes, you are out of status but it doesnt create problems.
I don't agree at all with this statement. People can go on a unpaid maternity leave and still maintain status.
Out of status is anyway no better than illegal.
Look. Here's the deal.
Whether you are on unpaid bench while looking for a project, or on unpaid maternity leave or on unpaid vacation. Missing paystubs means you are out of status. Period. Probably for maternity leave, you can have unpaid days off but still you may be issued paystubs of 0-dollar in which case it might be ok. I dont know about unpaid maternity leave.
The problem arises at the time of H1 transfer. And here is the classic situation:
You are looking for a project on an unpaid bench. You've been unpaid for 2 months. Then you find a project but thru another employer(bodyshop). Then you join that project and change your employer and file for H1 transfer. When you file for H1 transfer, since you are missing paystubs from previous employer for 2 months, due to unpaid bench, there is a "Gap" in employment. USCIS considers missing paystubs as out of status and then sends an inquiry about the H1 transfer. So you are in hanging status. Then you shell out a couple of thousand dollars to an attorney to reply to that inquiry about the gap to USCIS with whatever crap fits into that. Most of the cases, USCIS approves the petition with I-94. Sometimes it approves without I-94 therby forcing you to travel out of country and come back.
So the unpaid bench is a really issue if you have to change your employer at the end of the bench time. If you continue with the same employer after your unpaid bench, then yes, you are out of status but it doesnt create problems.
hairstyles A cartoon farmer girl smiling.
panvel123
09-11 11:31 AM
HR 5882 was approved by sub-committee last month and is currently awaiting markup by house judiciary committee, once the markup is done it may be sent to the floor of congress for debate and vote
sugaur
08-21 11:01 PM
Have the chubby guy u take care of contact the local congressman/senator/newspaper and tell them a sob story about how no one will take care of him except you and maybe you will get lucky.
One thing you can do, when you are deported, take the porky along. Less expense for the US health care.:D
One thing you can do, when you are deported, take the porky along. Less expense for the US health care.:D
delax
07-14 07:14 PM
Murthy sent the letter after LOGICLIFE declared that something GOOD is likely or on the way.... IV is doing the job and she is getting the fruit (money)by just publishing it. When the lawsuit issue came up she took U-turn saying its AILA's job...
When i first came to US , i worked with a guy who used to Publish the results of my hardwork without even mentioning my name and get promotion. When i went to him for my promotion he said this year's promotion quota has exhausted .
Anyway i left that company and those kind thiefs ( who steal credit for other work) long back but the distressing memory of exploitation hasn't left my mind.
To a few of my misguided friends who seem to not understand the distinction between a lobbying outfit whose goal is to change existing law to better suit reality and a law firm whose goal is to work within existing law. As self-proclaimed proponents of "Gandhigiri" - I see its principles not being applied when dealing with each other. Is Gandhigiri meant only to show USCIS. Would the Mahatma have said the same things mentioned above before asking himself a few questions. I dont think we can question the motives and intention of anybody before fully knowing the facts. As a client of Murthy Law Firm here is a fact:
On her call last week for her clients, she mentioned that the Murthy Law Firm is one of the biggest financial contributor to AILF - who by the way are ready to file the class action lawsuit. If the lawsuit is successfull and given AILF's funding source - will you exclude yourself from the potential benefit because Murthy's funds were used to support the litigation - who's piggybacking now.
Again - Its not one against the other - Please bear in mind the DUE PROCESS of LAW has been violated by USCIS resulting in a curtailment of your substantive rights (EAD, Parole, AC21 etc). I would not care who fights on my behalf so long as the outcome is to correct the earlier mistake.
If you feel that she does not work for immigrants you have no locus standi to avail of ANY BENEFIT from the lawsuit and as a true proponent of "Gandhigiri" you should VOLUNTARILY exclude yourself from any such potential benefit. :)
I know the Mahatma would have done the same thing.
When i first came to US , i worked with a guy who used to Publish the results of my hardwork without even mentioning my name and get promotion. When i went to him for my promotion he said this year's promotion quota has exhausted .
Anyway i left that company and those kind thiefs ( who steal credit for other work) long back but the distressing memory of exploitation hasn't left my mind.
To a few of my misguided friends who seem to not understand the distinction between a lobbying outfit whose goal is to change existing law to better suit reality and a law firm whose goal is to work within existing law. As self-proclaimed proponents of "Gandhigiri" - I see its principles not being applied when dealing with each other. Is Gandhigiri meant only to show USCIS. Would the Mahatma have said the same things mentioned above before asking himself a few questions. I dont think we can question the motives and intention of anybody before fully knowing the facts. As a client of Murthy Law Firm here is a fact:
On her call last week for her clients, she mentioned that the Murthy Law Firm is one of the biggest financial contributor to AILF - who by the way are ready to file the class action lawsuit. If the lawsuit is successfull and given AILF's funding source - will you exclude yourself from the potential benefit because Murthy's funds were used to support the litigation - who's piggybacking now.
Again - Its not one against the other - Please bear in mind the DUE PROCESS of LAW has been violated by USCIS resulting in a curtailment of your substantive rights (EAD, Parole, AC21 etc). I would not care who fights on my behalf so long as the outcome is to correct the earlier mistake.
If you feel that she does not work for immigrants you have no locus standi to avail of ANY BENEFIT from the lawsuit and as a true proponent of "Gandhigiri" you should VOLUNTARILY exclude yourself from any such potential benefit. :)
I know the Mahatma would have done the same thing.