chanduv23
07-04 08:50 AM
Chanduv thanks for your efforts. A correction: retrogression started in fall of 2004
I picked this from another post here in IV. Maybe we must have a sticky template so that everyone uses that template.
I picked this from another post here in IV. Maybe we must have a sticky template so that everyone uses that template.
wallpaper Seat Ibiza FR
vkrishn
07-21 11:23 AM
More than the money, these guys are plain stalkers! They don't leave you even if you are not interested and even after blindly telling them right on their face. Anywhere you go, Costco, Walmrt, Indian grocery stores, Malls these guys are right behind you. Next time i am calling COPS and i am going to report these guys.
Enough of leaving it or taking it lightly becasue of so called "your countrymen" stuff.
what a PITA!
Enough of leaving it or taking it lightly becasue of so called "your countrymen" stuff.
what a PITA!
gvenkat
02-13 02:42 PM
What ever gave you the idea that EB ROW only wait for 3 years?
i said on an average.. and that is the fact.. ROW is way better off than India/China... there are always exceptions...
i said on an average.. and that is the fact.. ROW is way better off than India/China... there are always exceptions...
2011 Seat Ibiza. 2010 Seat Ibiza FR
samay
07-28 04:25 PM
question for lawyer.
please find my details and dates as per below. my questions are as below.
thank you
First H1b approval Date:08/28/2001
First H1b Stamp: 12/04/2001
first H1 transfer:notice date: 05/16/2002
first H1 Transfer approval date:09/25/2002
second H1 Transfer Notice Date:03/20/2004
Second H1 Transfer Approval Date: 09/10/2004
First Permanant Labor Apply date: 02/28/2005
H1 Extention on second H1 transfer:04/01/2007 to 03/31/2010
Filled I-140 in March 2005 after Labor approval from backlog centre.
filled I-485 in July 2007.
Got RFE on Ability to Pay in sep 2007
Filled Motion to reopen which got denied.
Another Company filled Labor in March 2008.
Labor got approved in May 2008.
Filling I-140 in primium ?????
question:
H1 expiring in March 2010. will my H1b get extended based on the new Labor even if the labor was filled after the six years limit?
do you think filling I-140 in primium will help in this situation?
Does the out come of I-140 affect any other new application from another or same employer?
Your case is a bit complicated and to answer your question I will have to look at your papers and the reason why your motion to reopen was denied. If you want a consult with me please take an appointment by going through Pappu. Thanks.
please find my details and dates as per below. my questions are as below.
thank you
First H1b approval Date:08/28/2001
First H1b Stamp: 12/04/2001
first H1 transfer:notice date: 05/16/2002
first H1 Transfer approval date:09/25/2002
second H1 Transfer Notice Date:03/20/2004
Second H1 Transfer Approval Date: 09/10/2004
First Permanant Labor Apply date: 02/28/2005
H1 Extention on second H1 transfer:04/01/2007 to 03/31/2010
Filled I-140 in March 2005 after Labor approval from backlog centre.
filled I-485 in July 2007.
Got RFE on Ability to Pay in sep 2007
Filled Motion to reopen which got denied.
Another Company filled Labor in March 2008.
Labor got approved in May 2008.
Filling I-140 in primium ?????
question:
H1 expiring in March 2010. will my H1b get extended based on the new Labor even if the labor was filled after the six years limit?
do you think filling I-140 in primium will help in this situation?
Does the out come of I-140 affect any other new application from another or same employer?
Your case is a bit complicated and to answer your question I will have to look at your papers and the reason why your motion to reopen was denied. If you want a consult with me please take an appointment by going through Pappu. Thanks.
more...
lazycis
02-13 11:26 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).
Rajiv S. Khanna: $660/hour
Attorneys: $320/hour
http://www.immigration.com/ourservice/hourly_charges.html
Rajiv S. Khanna: $660/hour
Attorneys: $320/hour
http://www.immigration.com/ourservice/hourly_charges.html
snathan
01-24 05:42 PM
If most members are opposing the memo that is fine for me. I will take neutral Stand. Anyhow best wishes for winning the lawsuit if you file and win
What good your stand is going to do and who cares it ?:confused:
What good your stand is going to do and who cares it ?:confused:
more...
gman
08-03 09:21 PM
I am EB3-ROW with PD of Feb 2006. My I-140 (filed as systems analyst) is approved and I filed my I4285 in Aug 16, 2007 (RD). I have approved EAD and AP good until Nov 21, 2008. I have been offered a job as Director of Software Development at another company in the same state. Because my I-485 has been pending for over 180 days I'm assuming I should be able to take the job under AC21. The new job seems a natural progression to my career (a promotion of course) but the USCIS has not issued definite guidelines on how to define a "similar" job. What's your advice on this? Should I take the job?
Thanks,
Thanks,
2010 Seat Ibiza 2010 Tags:
breddy2000
07-25 02:17 PM
They can waste numbers and come up with excuses. But because of criticism from Ombudsman, Congress, etc it looks like they are trying to shape up. They can adjudicate 30 k petitions are more in 2 months if they are committed to. We could get an idea, if there is a deluge of approvals in the first half of August.
Do you guys remember how many visas USCIS processed within the Last few days of June 2007 ( I remember it was around 20k) just to make sure they exhaust the Visa numbers and rollback the Visa Bulletin?
If it's possible for them to complete as many applications within a short span of time,it means they are capable of processing the applications faster...
Now due to more hiring they might process all the available visas by the end of the year.
Not that I'm having hopes of me getting 485 approved based on my PD, but just to put things in perspective....
We'll see once we hit Aug 1st......
Do you guys remember how many visas USCIS processed within the Last few days of June 2007 ( I remember it was around 20k) just to make sure they exhaust the Visa numbers and rollback the Visa Bulletin?
If it's possible for them to complete as many applications within a short span of time,it means they are capable of processing the applications faster...
Now due to more hiring they might process all the available visas by the end of the year.
Not that I'm having hopes of me getting 485 approved based on my PD, but just to put things in perspective....
We'll see once we hit Aug 1st......
more...
hopefulgc
02-12 08:40 PM
Poll results thus far: 201Yes 36No
Wow.. guess who is unpopular around these parts :)
As suggested by many, its time to find out what we can get together as far as commitment goes.
I am a lowly member. While I have raised this issue, I think there is definitely someone else here better than me at leading this issue & getting people together. So if the moderators can allow members willing to step forward and help out with this, to have edit permissions on this thread, that would be help
We may have different school of thoughts, but we are all still IV. No matter what we do, it is more important for us to be united and not let an issue like this cleave us. It would be nice to hear where the IV leadership stands on this and what kind of support can be expected.
Can the moderators please modify the poll to be the following or add another poll to this thread. I don't seem to have the requisite permissions.
Q) Do you commit to participate in a class action lawsuit against USCIS
Options:
1) I am willing to commit $10-$20 needed for the initial consultation ($600-$1000)
2) Yes. I am willing to commit $500
3) Yes. I'm willing to be a plaintiff ( full name and full contact info required)
4) Yes. I'm willing to commit $500 and become a plaintiff as well
5) No. I don't think it will work
More info:
----------------------------------------------
What: Lawsuit against USCIS
Why: Possibly the only near term solution to retrogression. 218,759 visas are available for recapture and those numbers were lost due to systematic agency delays and bad policies (i.e. name check). The terms of settlement would include RECAPTURE OF LOST VISAS along with recovery of cost of litigation. Apparently, about 50 asylees have filed a similar lawsuit to challenge the retrogression in their category.
Who: All thos who are willing to make this change. You indicate your willingness and support by saying 'Yes' in the poll above. The poll above is just a headcount. We are hoping we can count on you for support.
How: We can kick this off with an initial consultation with an attorney. A $$ collection will soon be organized depending on the support expressed in the poll.
Can we do it? Yes... If we can come to this great country with just 2 bags in our hands and create a life for us here... we can totally do this.
NOTE: IV core forever rocks in our books for what they did relating to July 2nd. IV's agenda cannot be discounted. We are all part of IV and it would be very nice to get direction from them on how can take this further correctly. We will see members who do not agree with our point of view. The least we can do is attempt to understand their point of view.
Great info posted by member lazycis related to this:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=222939#post222939
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_annualrpt07__June_11_2007_section3e_untimel yprocessing.pdf
Original Post follows:
----------------------------------------------
Clear up your mind for a little while and consider this:
The whole working world lives by on one simple rule ..... GETTING PEOPLE OFF YOUR BACK.
The bigger PITA (pain-in-the-ass) you are... the higher is the priority you get.
As a community we will need to become a PR nightmare for govt. officals... simply being an inconvenience is not going to cut it... we will have to become a "a cactus that is stuck in the colon".
USCIS says EBs are retrogressed because there are XXXXX people in the queue. Why is the queue so long? Because they wasted numbers in the past and kept the queue long. This is pure operational inefficiency that is resulting in monetary, emotional and mental loss to about a million people.
This is a valid ground for a class action lawsuit.
By filing this suit, we will become the "cactii in the colon" that they will have to address. And you know what the easy out of court settlement will be..... RECAPTURE!
We will keep lobbying and crying as we usually do.. But this thing has a far better shot than anything else.
Wow.. guess who is unpopular around these parts :)
As suggested by many, its time to find out what we can get together as far as commitment goes.
I am a lowly member. While I have raised this issue, I think there is definitely someone else here better than me at leading this issue & getting people together. So if the moderators can allow members willing to step forward and help out with this, to have edit permissions on this thread, that would be help
We may have different school of thoughts, but we are all still IV. No matter what we do, it is more important for us to be united and not let an issue like this cleave us. It would be nice to hear where the IV leadership stands on this and what kind of support can be expected.
Can the moderators please modify the poll to be the following or add another poll to this thread. I don't seem to have the requisite permissions.
Q) Do you commit to participate in a class action lawsuit against USCIS
Options:
1) I am willing to commit $10-$20 needed for the initial consultation ($600-$1000)
2) Yes. I am willing to commit $500
3) Yes. I'm willing to be a plaintiff ( full name and full contact info required)
4) Yes. I'm willing to commit $500 and become a plaintiff as well
5) No. I don't think it will work
More info:
----------------------------------------------
What: Lawsuit against USCIS
Why: Possibly the only near term solution to retrogression. 218,759 visas are available for recapture and those numbers were lost due to systematic agency delays and bad policies (i.e. name check). The terms of settlement would include RECAPTURE OF LOST VISAS along with recovery of cost of litigation. Apparently, about 50 asylees have filed a similar lawsuit to challenge the retrogression in their category.
Who: All thos who are willing to make this change. You indicate your willingness and support by saying 'Yes' in the poll above. The poll above is just a headcount. We are hoping we can count on you for support.
How: We can kick this off with an initial consultation with an attorney. A $$ collection will soon be organized depending on the support expressed in the poll.
Can we do it? Yes... If we can come to this great country with just 2 bags in our hands and create a life for us here... we can totally do this.
NOTE: IV core forever rocks in our books for what they did relating to July 2nd. IV's agenda cannot be discounted. We are all part of IV and it would be very nice to get direction from them on how can take this further correctly. We will see members who do not agree with our point of view. The least we can do is attempt to understand their point of view.
Great info posted by member lazycis related to this:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=222939#post222939
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_annualrpt07__June_11_2007_section3e_untimel yprocessing.pdf
Original Post follows:
----------------------------------------------
Clear up your mind for a little while and consider this:
The whole working world lives by on one simple rule ..... GETTING PEOPLE OFF YOUR BACK.
The bigger PITA (pain-in-the-ass) you are... the higher is the priority you get.
As a community we will need to become a PR nightmare for govt. officals... simply being an inconvenience is not going to cut it... we will have to become a "a cactus that is stuck in the colon".
USCIS says EBs are retrogressed because there are XXXXX people in the queue. Why is the queue so long? Because they wasted numbers in the past and kept the queue long. This is pure operational inefficiency that is resulting in monetary, emotional and mental loss to about a million people.
This is a valid ground for a class action lawsuit.
By filing this suit, we will become the "cactii in the colon" that they will have to address. And you know what the easy out of court settlement will be..... RECAPTURE!
We will keep lobbying and crying as we usually do.. But this thing has a far better shot than anything else.
hair Seat Ibiza 1.4 Stylance 5dr
whatamidoinghere
02-13 10:47 PM
I am following this discussion and it is interesting. Here is what I get so far.
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
Another thing that is hard to understand is that if EB3 ROW is getting all the unused visas, how did EB2 move forward two years in 2006? It was moving 6 months at a time till May-06. Did USCIS change the way they interpret the law in May-06? That would be weird, they should have done it when they declared in Nov-05 bulletin that AC21 provisions are not expected to apply.
It is possible that USCIS is allocating unused EB2 visas to EB2 India and China after all, and it is not moving forward only because of backlogged EB2 Labors getting approved. We will know for sure in a few months. There are still several 2001 EB2 Non-RIR cases in the backlog as per
http://www..com/usa-immigration-trackers/dallas-backlog-tracker/
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
Another thing that is hard to understand is that if EB3 ROW is getting all the unused visas, how did EB2 move forward two years in 2006? It was moving 6 months at a time till May-06. Did USCIS change the way they interpret the law in May-06? That would be weird, they should have done it when they declared in Nov-05 bulletin that AC21 provisions are not expected to apply.
It is possible that USCIS is allocating unused EB2 visas to EB2 India and China after all, and it is not moving forward only because of backlogged EB2 Labors getting approved. We will know for sure in a few months. There are still several 2001 EB2 Non-RIR cases in the backlog as per
http://www..com/usa-immigration-trackers/dallas-backlog-tracker/
more...
fairman
08-15 04:08 PM
The question doesn't arise because he is SRK or APJ or in future Manmohan singh. The point is does it take TWO HOURS to find the identity of the person. How did you feel when you were questioned for an hour at the POE even after staying here for 9 years and stay in US legally and paying taxes etc.. can't they have better immigration procedures in place to identify legal from illegal (LIKE biometric finger printing, etc). They have this sophisticated computer information network.. if you give your SSN they can find any data they want.. about your employer, about your pay roll, your taxes etc.. then why this delay at POE to idenfity geniune people from entering US. These actions look totally racist to me. Don't you think these (US) people know how to improve this system.. they can but there is no will to do so.. Just look at priority dates how they swing +5 years to -5 years every year (2000 to 2005). It looks like someone just picks any year between 2000 to 2005 based on his mood. Can't this developed country have a software system to predict visa number availability or to predict how the dates should advance and by how much... this is want really sucks.. this so called developed country doesn't have a system in place for immigration issues.. Just look at the people who got their green cards who's priority dates were 2006 and people from 2002 or 2003 are still waiting.. how can their system (software) allow people with older dates to wait while someone with PD 2006 get their GC.. Things can be better managed and controlled with total transperancy but there is no WILL to do so.. i am not sure if IV can play any role in pushing some reforms to have a better system in place. There was another thread discussing about IO officers visting to employee office to find geniune applications and for more details.. this is simple waste of money and resources with SSN can give you almost 90% of the details.... overall the frustration is about the System and not about SRK or APJ.
USCIS software system is quite old !
USCIS software system is quite old !
hot Seat Ibiza Fr TDi Pd 3dr
lazycis
02-14 12:19 PM
No one can prove that USCIS intentionally took decisions so that they waste the visas.
Well, I can prove it based on the recent name check memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't IJ able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along! Why did not they removed name check after they wasted 80k+ visas in FY 2003? Did not they know about it? Was it not intentional?
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
See also most recent Mocanu ruling
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
"USCIS’s name check requirement has (1) never been authorized by Congress; (2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and (3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions "
Why should people suffer because of government screw up?
Well, I can prove it based on the recent name check memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't IJ able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along! Why did not they removed name check after they wasted 80k+ visas in FY 2003? Did not they know about it? Was it not intentional?
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
See also most recent Mocanu ruling
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
"USCIS’s name check requirement has (1) never been authorized by Congress; (2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and (3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions "
Why should people suffer because of government screw up?
more...
house Seat Ibiza 1.8 20V TURBO FR
msp1976
02-18 10:12 PM
I understand that there is concern about people from visitor visa category (Tourist B1 B2)would be filing for green cards and that shall cause the retrogression to be perpetual...a few adjustments to the applicable statute can rectify that...
tattoo Seat Ibiza FR
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:31 AM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
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.
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
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.
more...
pictures Black / SEAT Ibiza FR TDi
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)
dresses Originally Posted by Ibiza Evo
desi3933
06-15 12:40 PM
I believe in luck in the GC process. Before 2005 PERM process, many folks applied in states where Labor was fast. They were able to get greencards within a couple of years while others were stuck in Labor Backlog centers (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=50). Some cleared all hurdles and got stuck in namechecks for years. Until 2007 Namecheck was a big scare. (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=61)
Many people could not file in July 07 for various reasons. Some people were born in India but were brought up in other country. Even they are stuck. Some people decided to rise in their careers and changed jobs on H1. While they did rise, but lost in the grreencard PD race.
So definitely luck pays its role.
I agree that luck plays a major role.
Just last year, there were many GC approvals for PD of 2006. For them, start-to-end GC process was just 2 years. Now someone with EB2 2006, the scenario does not look that promising.
______________________
US citizen of Indian origin
Many people could not file in July 07 for various reasons. Some people were born in India but were brought up in other country. Even they are stuck. Some people decided to rise in their careers and changed jobs on H1. While they did rise, but lost in the grreencard PD race.
So definitely luck pays its role.
I agree that luck plays a major role.
Just last year, there were many GC approvals for PD of 2006. For them, start-to-end GC process was just 2 years. Now someone with EB2 2006, the scenario does not look that promising.
______________________
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
makeup girlfriend 2009 Seat Ibiza
sledge_hammer
02-04 10:30 AM
:(
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
There is already a thread that addresses this issue -
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3073
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
There is already a thread that addresses this issue -
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3073
girlfriend Seat Ibiza Cupra Bocanegra
Kushal
07-27 01:59 PM
Really... Millions... Have you checked the disclaimer in your lit pack under the 6-4-3 plan. A typical IBO makes $115 a month... Amway / BWW was forced to put this statement because of a lawsuit brought by Amway Diamonds and Double Diamonds... You can google...
I know you will now state that "you don't want to be an average... an average corporate employee makes $30K.. etc.. etc.." (Straight from Brad Duncan's CD) I have used it myself hundreds of times on the prospects...
By the way did you call IRS to check.. or you are just believing what Kanti / Kumar / Raj or any other Diamond told you.. Oh another thing that they regularly mention in their trainings "IRS and USCIS don't share data so IRS won't know if you are on H1 or not"... USCIS can ask for your Tax returns before granting Green Card...
May be you have not received 1099 from Amway yet but the 1099 income on 1040 goes under a separate head "Self Employment"...
I know you will respond with some nasty stuff but I urge you to take the emotional hat off and think rationally (which I know is very hard as I had faced the same things) about the direction that Amway is taking... especially in Indian community... Do you see many Indian faces these days in the Amway's Inspire magazine or new Rubys, Emeralds, or Diamonds...
This is a good way to make some residual income (I still get monthly check 4 years after stopping to build it) but millions??? Not many EDCs and Diamonds make that money if you exclude the money from CDs, Books, CommuniKate etc..
Good luck!
I get good monthly checks every month (more then $115), and they don't seem to bounce either. And good thing it increases. Don't need to google anything while I can get from credible sources.
I know you will now state that "you don't want to be an average... an average corporate employee makes $30K.. etc.. etc.." (Straight from Brad Duncan's CD) I have used it myself hundreds of times on the prospects...
By the way did you call IRS to check.. or you are just believing what Kanti / Kumar / Raj or any other Diamond told you.. Oh another thing that they regularly mention in their trainings "IRS and USCIS don't share data so IRS won't know if you are on H1 or not"... USCIS can ask for your Tax returns before granting Green Card...
May be you have not received 1099 from Amway yet but the 1099 income on 1040 goes under a separate head "Self Employment"...
I know you will respond with some nasty stuff but I urge you to take the emotional hat off and think rationally (which I know is very hard as I had faced the same things) about the direction that Amway is taking... especially in Indian community... Do you see many Indian faces these days in the Amway's Inspire magazine or new Rubys, Emeralds, or Diamonds...
This is a good way to make some residual income (I still get monthly check 4 years after stopping to build it) but millions??? Not many EDCs and Diamonds make that money if you exclude the money from CDs, Books, CommuniKate etc..
Good luck!
I get good monthly checks every month (more then $115), and they don't seem to bounce either. And good thing it increases. Don't need to google anything while I can get from credible sources.
hairstyles 2010 Seat Ibiza FR TDI SC
whatamidoinghere
02-22 04:26 AM
Looks like lot of data is available for us to crunch on:
Labor certifications from 2000 to 2006
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
H1Bs issued from 2002 to 2006
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CaseH1B.aspx
Hopefully using this data we can get some rough prediction on cutoff date movement. I'm going to spend the coming weekend on this.
Labor certifications from 2000 to 2006
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
H1Bs issued from 2002 to 2006
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CaseH1B.aspx
Hopefully using this data we can get some rough prediction on cutoff date movement. I'm going to spend the coming weekend on this.
logiclife
01-01 01:08 AM
Here is the contact info of this author.
http://www.flight-capital.com/contact.html
His email is dh@flight-capital.com. The phone numbers are for his sales office of his book. I came to know about this guy from cable news show, I guess it was MSNBC, cant be sure.
I have already written a letter to this guy asking for help/suggestions. I will send a copy of that email to you too.
This man is legit. I found something more on this guy:
This is from : http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=14488§or=QAndA&subsector=PolicyMakersAndPundits#
In Flight Capital, Mr. Heenan says that 1,000 people a day leave the U.S. to return to their home countries. While few countries monitor the quantity and quality of talent that has exited and returned, he says these are the talented people who help drive the pace of innovation in tech centers like California�s Silicon Valley. �In the global war for top talent, our competitors aren�t taking prisoners,� he writes.In his travels and research, Mr. Heenan interviewed repatriates in eight countries, including Ireland, Iceland, India, Singapore, China, Taiwan, Israel, and Mexico. Eight of the 11 Americans who shared Nobel prizes in physics and chemistry in the past three years were born elsewhere, and nearly 40 percent of Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate students are from abroad, notes Mr. Heenan, who has taught at the University of Pennsylvania�s Wharton School and Columbia University.
http://www.flight-capital.com/contact.html
His email is dh@flight-capital.com. The phone numbers are for his sales office of his book. I came to know about this guy from cable news show, I guess it was MSNBC, cant be sure.
I have already written a letter to this guy asking for help/suggestions. I will send a copy of that email to you too.
This man is legit. I found something more on this guy:
This is from : http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=14488§or=QAndA&subsector=PolicyMakersAndPundits#
In Flight Capital, Mr. Heenan says that 1,000 people a day leave the U.S. to return to their home countries. While few countries monitor the quantity and quality of talent that has exited and returned, he says these are the talented people who help drive the pace of innovation in tech centers like California�s Silicon Valley. �In the global war for top talent, our competitors aren�t taking prisoners,� he writes.In his travels and research, Mr. Heenan interviewed repatriates in eight countries, including Ireland, Iceland, India, Singapore, China, Taiwan, Israel, and Mexico. Eight of the 11 Americans who shared Nobel prizes in physics and chemistry in the past three years were born elsewhere, and nearly 40 percent of Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate students are from abroad, notes Mr. Heenan, who has taught at the University of Pennsylvania�s Wharton School and Columbia University.
shensh
02-15 11:33 AM
No, the intention behind the 7% limit is to protect levels of European immigration and address racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world. This was also the intent behind the diversity lottery - notice the consternation that the diverisity lottery is primarily benefiting non-Europeans.
What is the basis of your claim my friend? What is the "racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world"? Do you know that "traditional" European country such as UK is not even qualified for Diversity visa?
Please do not spread fear based on your narrow understanding of the law. UN is right in pointing out that every law has and should have an equalizer.
Please read this from US Dept of State:
"Diversity visas are intended to provide an immigration opportunity for persons from countries other than the countries that send large numbers of immigrants to the U.S. The law states that no diversity visas shall be provided for natives of "high admission" countries. The law defines this to mean countries from which a total of 50,000 persons in the Family-Sponsored and Employment-Based visa categories immigrated to the United States during the period of the previous five years. Each year, the USCIS adds the family and employment immigrant admission figures for the previous five years in order to identify the countries whose natives will be ineligible for the annual diversity lottery."
What is the basis of your claim my friend? What is the "racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world"? Do you know that "traditional" European country such as UK is not even qualified for Diversity visa?
Please do not spread fear based on your narrow understanding of the law. UN is right in pointing out that every law has and should have an equalizer.
Please read this from US Dept of State:
"Diversity visas are intended to provide an immigration opportunity for persons from countries other than the countries that send large numbers of immigrants to the U.S. The law states that no diversity visas shall be provided for natives of "high admission" countries. The law defines this to mean countries from which a total of 50,000 persons in the Family-Sponsored and Employment-Based visa categories immigrated to the United States during the period of the previous five years. Each year, the USCIS adds the family and employment immigrant admission figures for the previous five years in order to identify the countries whose natives will be ineligible for the annual diversity lottery."