vagish
04-02 03:22 PM
this is not the new trend, back in year 2000 to 2003 , when massive layoffs were going on , it has been prevelant since then. Also if this illegal , how about people who got laid off in those years and never went bak home sitting on bench for a year, if you start to fish around, you will find lots and lots of people
had trouble in maintaining their status in the past.
Fake resume is the fact which has been there for so many years, be it for masters or for just B.E graduates.
thanks
had trouble in maintaining their status in the past.
Fake resume is the fact which has been there for so many years, be it for masters or for just B.E graduates.
thanks
wallpaper mY pEacE amp; lOve cOllaGe!!!
trueguy
04-06 05:55 PM
Do you know the POE?
walking_dude
10-28 11:46 PM
I sent mine. Did you send yours?
2011 Peace, Love and
ajthakur
07-15 07:08 PM
I spoke with my ex employer. He never did revoke the 140. He is also willing to provide an EVL. I can join him once I get GC. I felt sorry for having left him earlier.Talk to an attorney soon then.
more...
moonlight
06-20 12:39 PM
I doubt about illegal of taking color copy of driver license.
If it is why would lawyers ask for it. My lawyer asked for color copy.
If it is why would lawyers ask for it. My lawyer asked for color copy.
nixstor
07-04 09:33 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
more...
sathyaraj
03-12 06:20 PM
Hi BharatPremi:
Thank you so much for your reply. I do not have any speeding tickets also. I have clean history so far. I am hoping that this will be cleared by this week so that I can join them by 03/24
Regards
SathyaRaj
I am assuming here that you referred Background Check done by future employer as a part of employment offer before granting you the final offer. In that case mostly your employer might have contracted that to third party. And if that would have been the case then it solely depends upon where you resides now and how many states you have moved so far from the date of first entry in uSA and what kind of new implementation all those states may have. Some states even gives "Red Flag" for traffic violation such as speeding. What happens is that, that third party would see only "red flag" and would not come to know about underlying cause of the "red flag". So as a process that third party first come to your future employer notifying about this " red flag". Then your employer decides to query that further having signature from you and would notify third party to dig further and then third party will go to state police to know the underlying cause and state police will work on that by taking fee and and some point of time it will say " hey he had traffic violation". So it may eat up 3 to 4 months to finish the whole cycle and ball is in your employer's court whether to hire you or wait to hire till then. Most companies hire without wasting time and afterwards if something really serious feedback comes in will boot you otherwise you will be fine.
Thank you so much for your reply. I do not have any speeding tickets also. I have clean history so far. I am hoping that this will be cleared by this week so that I can join them by 03/24
Regards
SathyaRaj
I am assuming here that you referred Background Check done by future employer as a part of employment offer before granting you the final offer. In that case mostly your employer might have contracted that to third party. And if that would have been the case then it solely depends upon where you resides now and how many states you have moved so far from the date of first entry in uSA and what kind of new implementation all those states may have. Some states even gives "Red Flag" for traffic violation such as speeding. What happens is that, that third party would see only "red flag" and would not come to know about underlying cause of the "red flag". So as a process that third party first come to your future employer notifying about this " red flag". Then your employer decides to query that further having signature from you and would notify third party to dig further and then third party will go to state police to know the underlying cause and state police will work on that by taking fee and and some point of time it will say " hey he had traffic violation". So it may eat up 3 to 4 months to finish the whole cycle and ball is in your employer's court whether to hire you or wait to hire till then. Most companies hire without wasting time and afterwards if something really serious feedback comes in will boot you otherwise you will be fine.
2010 Peace and Love - Collage,
neverbefore
07-29 02:27 AM
Please let me know how to close this thread?
Feeling the heat? Why not take a dip in a pail of your "Pale Beer"? :D
Feeling the heat? Why not take a dip in a pail of your "Pale Beer"? :D
more...
CADude
11-20 11:51 PM
Good though...
Guys.
Please do not mind, my writing this - I honestly think we should stop writing insensible comments like "sick people getting frustrated" and the like...
IV is a professional not for profit outfit, with a set agenda. We should work together towards achieving our goal, through legal, available channels.
If things work out - great! If they don't, it's disappointing but not the end of the world.
People who chose to stay and wait longer for their Permanent Residency will do so; those who cannot (for whatever reasons) will find other alternatives...
Let's not make this a platform for venting out our frustrations.
Guys.
Please do not mind, my writing this - I honestly think we should stop writing insensible comments like "sick people getting frustrated" and the like...
IV is a professional not for profit outfit, with a set agenda. We should work together towards achieving our goal, through legal, available channels.
If things work out - great! If they don't, it's disappointing but not the end of the world.
People who chose to stay and wait longer for their Permanent Residency will do so; those who cannot (for whatever reasons) will find other alternatives...
Let's not make this a platform for venting out our frustrations.
hair peace and love collage.
GCapplicant
07-02 11:32 AM
Let's try this.
more...
coolmanasip
07-24 10:08 AM
60 days...period of authorized stay.....check with the international advisor in school......
hot peace and love collage.
alisa
01-23 06:33 AM
I agree, at some point, things break even, because people will frankly get fed up and leave. That point will be somewhere between 10-20 years. And we will then be congratulating the two or three Indians who wait this out.
This was just an attempt to model in the absence of reliable information, and to try and get as reliable information as can possible be got. I wish we could get more data and links here than we currently have (just one I think.)
The modelling on this thread shows wait times of 15-20 years for India, about 5 years for ROW, and somewhere in between for China (I think China will be closer to ROW than India just because their backlogs for 2001 and 2002 were one fourth that of India.)
The purpose of the exercise was to estimate wait times based on some solid data. Who is getting screwed, and by how much. (Looks like, the answer to 'who' is Indians, and the answer to 'how much' is 'A lot'.)
People will naturally not wait for 20 years to get a greencard. Either things will be fixed, or people will start leaving.
I think thigns break even at some point. It is so frustrating that it becomes no longer attractive to pursue GC (If we have not already reached that point).
You got to be open to change to survive, be it a person or a country. No point in predicting death before GC or any such extreme cases. It will definetely take as long as it needs. Its basic capitalism at best , supply and demand. You can't beat that.
Nothing wrong in trying to change the course though.
This was just an attempt to model in the absence of reliable information, and to try and get as reliable information as can possible be got. I wish we could get more data and links here than we currently have (just one I think.)
The modelling on this thread shows wait times of 15-20 years for India, about 5 years for ROW, and somewhere in between for China (I think China will be closer to ROW than India just because their backlogs for 2001 and 2002 were one fourth that of India.)
The purpose of the exercise was to estimate wait times based on some solid data. Who is getting screwed, and by how much. (Looks like, the answer to 'who' is Indians, and the answer to 'how much' is 'A lot'.)
People will naturally not wait for 20 years to get a greencard. Either things will be fixed, or people will start leaving.
I think thigns break even at some point. It is so frustrating that it becomes no longer attractive to pursue GC (If we have not already reached that point).
You got to be open to change to survive, be it a person or a country. No point in predicting death before GC or any such extreme cases. It will definetely take as long as it needs. Its basic capitalism at best , supply and demand. You can't beat that.
Nothing wrong in trying to change the course though.
more...
house Army Girl Love Peace
suriajay12
02-19 07:21 AM
And who do you think is going to process the paperwork for illegals? ... guess again, the same agency that is processing for Legal would-be-could-be immigrants. So how is it not going to increase processing time which would ultimately result in further delay?
Moreover, it doesn't matter wether their is delay or not. Simply, putting illegals in front of legals is ethically, morally and legally wrong!!
There is a difference.. In this case (>5 years), it will also include clauses or something that will not jeopardize your status. Compare requirements we have to meet in different stages and in this case. In LC, 140... you are at the mercy of many agencies, including mood of the officier who looks at your case, economic conditions, your employer, etc etc.. endless list . In this case you are just dependent upon yourself and if you can prove you were in the US for >5 years in whatever ways you can, then you are good. I know some who dont meet this 5 years may be disappointed, but they must find a way to include themselves if they can make sense. But not just cut the line.
To prove >5 year legally in US is fully on you.. which is VERY good. Support it.
Moreover, it doesn't matter wether their is delay or not. Simply, putting illegals in front of legals is ethically, morally and legally wrong!!
There is a difference.. In this case (>5 years), it will also include clauses or something that will not jeopardize your status. Compare requirements we have to meet in different stages and in this case. In LC, 140... you are at the mercy of many agencies, including mood of the officier who looks at your case, economic conditions, your employer, etc etc.. endless list . In this case you are just dependent upon yourself and if you can prove you were in the US for >5 years in whatever ways you can, then you are good. I know some who dont meet this 5 years may be disappointed, but they must find a way to include themselves if they can make sense. But not just cut the line.
To prove >5 year legally in US is fully on you.. which is VERY good. Support it.
tattoo 04. peace, love,harmony, etc.
keshtwo
07-09 04:46 PM
what made you think so ?Do you think they are violating the law and allocating more than 7% to other countries?
Spillover means India, china and mexico get more than 7% for one year, dont it?
Spillover means India, china and mexico get more than 7% for one year, dont it?
more...
pictures love collage 1 Myspace Layout
californian_GC
01-16 12:11 PM
I signed up through my BOA account. I made $20 recurring payments for the next 12 months.
dresses Noel Snowflake Holiday Collage
suriajay12
02-19 06:56 AM
How exactly are illegals going to prove that they have been here for more than 5 years?
I think this is a good one. It supports legal immigrants.
I dont agreee with this dvb guy. 5 years legally is lots of time. And I now know people who are 10-15 years here. He will want to say the same tthing even in that case. Instead learn to rationalize and make sure if one thinks one is eligivle, then see how one can get included.crab behavior, the one at bottom pulls down the one thats climbing up. Finally both end at dinner table.
I think this is a good one. It supports legal immigrants.
I dont agreee with this dvb guy. 5 years legally is lots of time. And I now know people who are 10-15 years here. He will want to say the same tthing even in that case. Instead learn to rationalize and make sure if one thinks one is eligivle, then see how one can get included.crab behavior, the one at bottom pulls down the one thats climbing up. Finally both end at dinner table.
more...
makeup peace and love collage.
fcres
07-24 05:22 PM
I deleted my original post since you answered:-) thanks!
This brings up an interesting possibility for me. My first I-140 has been approved over email (awaiting physical receipt), although the Successor in Interest I-140 is pending.
Does the I-140 receipt always contain the A#? I will have to wait to see the physical receipt notice!
What i have heard is that the recent I140 approvals (2006/07) contains A#.
This brings up an interesting possibility for me. My first I-140 has been approved over email (awaiting physical receipt), although the Successor in Interest I-140 is pending.
Does the I-140 receipt always contain the A#? I will have to wait to see the physical receipt notice!
What i have heard is that the recent I140 approvals (2006/07) contains A#.
girlfriend peace love and happiness collage shoe by once_upon_a_dream
psk79
07-18 07:38 AM
Hi Guys,
Please post any July 2nd cases on this thread so that we all know if there really are any rejections. All I heard in the past few days was "A friend of mine got rejected on 2nd... My friend's friend got his rejected..Somebody got rejected..."
I didn't see a single post from anyone who got their OWN 485 REJECTED when they filed on July 2nd.
So please post your information as to when your app is received at USCIS.
Mine reached USCIS on July 2, 2007 @ 10AM via FEDEX.
Thanks.
Please post any July 2nd cases on this thread so that we all know if there really are any rejections. All I heard in the past few days was "A friend of mine got rejected on 2nd... My friend's friend got his rejected..Somebody got rejected..."
I didn't see a single post from anyone who got their OWN 485 REJECTED when they filed on July 2nd.
So please post your information as to when your app is received at USCIS.
Mine reached USCIS on July 2, 2007 @ 10AM via FEDEX.
Thanks.
hairstyles Asaalamu Aleikum Wa
chanduv23
11-14 10:13 AM
Totally agree, very nicely put. They will hear - listen if we present ideas that are pertinent to the existing situation. Nothing more pertinent than the housing mess. No one cares about old jaded ideas like "high talent" etc.
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
Why do u limit urself to just sending letters. Whhy can't you approach Zoe's office, why can't you take the lead?
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
Why do u limit urself to just sending letters. Whhy can't you approach Zoe's office, why can't you take the lead?
yabadaba
02-21 03:19 PM
singhsa...all number and predictions get thrown out of the window when it comes to indians. we find the most innovative ways of jumping ahead in line.
i remember a few months back I had checked on and there were approximately 200 people with an earlier priority date than mine 09/2005. now there are 700.
I agree the BEC freed up many people but a bulk of these cases are priority dates porting and labor substitution.
so you can download and analyze the labor certfications from flcdatacenter (or look at my earliest posts..when u search posts by user) but the fact of the matter is that there is no predictability to the queue because we specialize in jumping ahead
i remember a few months back I had checked on and there were approximately 200 people with an earlier priority date than mine 09/2005. now there are 700.
I agree the BEC freed up many people but a bulk of these cases are priority dates porting and labor substitution.
so you can download and analyze the labor certfications from flcdatacenter (or look at my earliest posts..when u search posts by user) but the fact of the matter is that there is no predictability to the queue because we specialize in jumping ahead
srikondoji
08-03 07:35 AM
It is not possible to revert back to the system where we were allowed to concurrently file I-140/I-485.
The only practical thing that can fought for and achieved is increase in number of visa numbers per year and faster processing.
Even, if visa numbers are current, they will not accept concurrent filing.
just my 2 paise.
The only practical thing that can fought for and achieved is increase in number of visa numbers per year and faster processing.
Even, if visa numbers are current, they will not accept concurrent filing.
just my 2 paise.