isedkeem
12-10 01:25 PM
With all the porting nonsense going on eb2 will move backward and eb3 will inch forward slowly. We might end up with eb2 and eb3 in 2002. congrats to all the people who ported, the only thing you accomplished is you made sure eb2 does not progress (it does not mean you have have moved forward by porting, it just means that you have made sure you have prevented original eb2 guys from getting green card), the people who ported wont gain any benefit but they will make it worse for everyone, they have to file a second i140 which will take at least another 1 year to clear and after 1 year when the ported 140's clear the eb2 will go back to 2002. You have also accomplished another great feat, DOL is going to make it impossible to file eb2 in IT jobs so even genuine people are screwed. Before people start giving red dots and justifying there porting I have an message for you, your behavior is no different from the people who did labor substitution, the end result was DOL ended labor substitution and the result of all this porting is DOL has made it impossible to get eb2 even for genuine cases. Just because others are doing it does not mean you can do it, obviously it is wrong therefore dol removed labor substitution and now dol is making it impossible to get eb2 for IT jobs even for genuine cases. 90 % of people doing this porting are desi consulting employees, they wine and complain about desi consulting companies as blood suckers (justifiably) but they themselves are bloodsuckers on the EB2 community by doing this eb3 to eb2 porting.
Another reason for the slow movement is people getting married.. a spouse potentially accounts for yet another visa number and this adds to the unpredictability of the system. It gets even worse with non-US born kids.
Another reason for the slow movement is people getting married.. a spouse potentially accounts for yet another visa number and this adds to the unpredictability of the system. It gets even worse with non-US born kids.
wallpaper emo guys with lue eyes and
sweet_jungle
01-31 10:09 PM
any feedbacks on Terasoft at Illinois? are they on blacklist?
bomber
06-30 07:37 PM
This is a huge misconception in people.
Filing I485 when the dates are current does not mean you will get a greencard.
Only 30% will in 6 months if the dates stay current.
rest 70% will get in 1 year to 3 years or more based on FBI name checks.
Chew on this and educate your friends.
Everybody knows this.. I didn't quite understand what you meant to convey.
What I meant was that even if my I-485 is accepted(i did not say even if I get my GC)
Filing I485 when the dates are current does not mean you will get a greencard.
Only 30% will in 6 months if the dates stay current.
rest 70% will get in 1 year to 3 years or more based on FBI name checks.
Chew on this and educate your friends.
Everybody knows this.. I didn't quite understand what you meant to convey.
What I meant was that even if my I-485 is accepted(i did not say even if I get my GC)
2011 hot emo guys with lue eyes
When485
09-19 11:53 AM
I think its a wonderful and meaningful suggestion. we need to stress on the "LEGAL".
I get pricked when I read about contribution, bec I have not done so far as a single bread winner, I am struggling to pay the tuition fee of my Son who is in University. we are not able to get any loan or financial funding so far.. I will definitely contribute atleast a token amount in the immediate future
Thanks for the understanding
I get pricked when I read about contribution, bec I have not done so far as a single bread winner, I am struggling to pay the tuition fee of my Son who is in University. we are not able to get any loan or financial funding so far.. I will definitely contribute atleast a token amount in the immediate future
Thanks for the understanding
more...
Hermione
09-26 11:12 AM
Macaca (love your handle, by the way) - wait. All the editor is going to do as a result of these requests is to yank two sentences about the rally out of the article. IV rally does not belong in this article, so all you are going get is LESS publicity. Yes, the article was not factiually correct, but it is not major mischaracterization. It's OK. I'd rather take a CNN article with a slightly incorrect mentioning, then no mentioning.
Just my $0.02
The email should have info so that recipient can verify that rally was for EB GC issues and not H1B issues.
Say rally was organized by IV.
Put link to IV so they can check IV agenda.
Put link to Washington Post/NY Times article that correctly reported the rally.
Just my $0.02
The email should have info so that recipient can verify that rally was for EB GC issues and not H1B issues.
Say rally was organized by IV.
Put link to IV so they can check IV agenda.
Put link to Washington Post/NY Times article that correctly reported the rally.
like_watching_paint_dry
04-06 11:10 PM
If we come across a few cases we can explore options. Is there an appeal process? This can be in media and can help future cases. With few case examples, a legal opinion can also be sought if this is legal at POE.
In the absence of real cases, there is no way any action can be taken and it will stay as a forum rumor.
No no. This is very true. This happened to my friend's friend.
My friend's friend was visiting my friend and was traveling with his dog. The VO asked my friend's friend what his plan was with the dog. My friend's friend said he was just planning to stay with my friend and take the dog to walk in nearby park where he can poop in the grass and pee on a tire. The VO immediately called my friend and asked if he can take a US dog and have it poop in the park and pee on tire. My friend said yes! And the VO immediately deported my friend's friend along with dog!! :eek: My friend's friend very upset, not in shape to talk about it for 3 months.
IV should do something about this before too late! ;)
In the absence of real cases, there is no way any action can be taken and it will stay as a forum rumor.
No no. This is very true. This happened to my friend's friend.
My friend's friend was visiting my friend and was traveling with his dog. The VO asked my friend's friend what his plan was with the dog. My friend's friend said he was just planning to stay with my friend and take the dog to walk in nearby park where he can poop in the grass and pee on a tire. The VO immediately called my friend and asked if he can take a US dog and have it poop in the park and pee on tire. My friend said yes! And the VO immediately deported my friend's friend along with dog!! :eek: My friend's friend very upset, not in shape to talk about it for 3 months.
IV should do something about this before too late! ;)
more...
desi485
03-15 11:11 PM
I agree with you completely ! I wish and pray Interfilers and labor substitution applicants rot in hell.
You are a frustrated fool.
I have a friend who despite eligible for eb2, his employer filed in eb3 without his knowledge. He only came to know about this after 3 years after his labor got approved and got I-140 approved. The employer didn't provide him any papers for labor cert but somehow he got hold of his I-140 notice approval. He changed his job now and filed eb2 with new employer. I see no reason why he should not do interfile.
You are frustrated because of retrogression. Why don't you curse others, not those little less fortunate, from so called retrogressed countries? I have seen people in my organization coming from ROW countries and getting complete GC in less than 15 months. You should really get frustrated with country quota, not with your fellow sufferers.
think before you act like a fool. Say honestly that you never tried any legally available shortcut in your life.
You are a frustrated fool.
I have a friend who despite eligible for eb2, his employer filed in eb3 without his knowledge. He only came to know about this after 3 years after his labor got approved and got I-140 approved. The employer didn't provide him any papers for labor cert but somehow he got hold of his I-140 notice approval. He changed his job now and filed eb2 with new employer. I see no reason why he should not do interfile.
You are frustrated because of retrogression. Why don't you curse others, not those little less fortunate, from so called retrogressed countries? I have seen people in my organization coming from ROW countries and getting complete GC in less than 15 months. You should really get frustrated with country quota, not with your fellow sufferers.
think before you act like a fool. Say honestly that you never tried any legally available shortcut in your life.
2010 emo guys with lue eyes and
amitjoey
07-05 05:31 PM
Guys, please contribute to IV. I just did today, and believe me, you will feel better for doing so...
This is not just for you and me, but also for those who will come after us. Also, this is not a battle just to sue USCIS/DOS, but a war we need to fight on multiple fronts:
1) First and foremost, we the immigrant community need to join hands and fight as one cohesive group.
2) Sue the government agencies for damages/violation of law/precedents due to the revised visa bulletin
3) Get this matter the attention it deserves in the media
4) Try and get congress to intervene in this matter, and also introduce and pass legislation that will fix the broken employment based immigration system
5) Request corporate sponsorship. Since employers spent money on this fiasco as well, they will have a vested interest in pursuing this as well.
The main thing, however, is funds. IV needs funds to fight for us. Each of us has already spent 100's (many even 1000's) of $ trying to get ready to file our I-485's. So even if 10,000 members contribute just $100 each, it will be $1 mil. I am sure each of us can at least spare that much. It is a small price to pay for liberation from this GC mess for all of us....
With ~15,000 members already, and hopefully some serious $$$$$$ raised, IV will be a force to be reckoned with. No one will be able to treat us with such disdain ever again...
Awesome! you said it!!
This is not just for you and me, but also for those who will come after us. Also, this is not a battle just to sue USCIS/DOS, but a war we need to fight on multiple fronts:
1) First and foremost, we the immigrant community need to join hands and fight as one cohesive group.
2) Sue the government agencies for damages/violation of law/precedents due to the revised visa bulletin
3) Get this matter the attention it deserves in the media
4) Try and get congress to intervene in this matter, and also introduce and pass legislation that will fix the broken employment based immigration system
5) Request corporate sponsorship. Since employers spent money on this fiasco as well, they will have a vested interest in pursuing this as well.
The main thing, however, is funds. IV needs funds to fight for us. Each of us has already spent 100's (many even 1000's) of $ trying to get ready to file our I-485's. So even if 10,000 members contribute just $100 each, it will be $1 mil. I am sure each of us can at least spare that much. It is a small price to pay for liberation from this GC mess for all of us....
With ~15,000 members already, and hopefully some serious $$$$$$ raised, IV will be a force to be reckoned with. No one will be able to treat us with such disdain ever again...
Awesome! you said it!!
more...
shreekhand
05-14 12:28 AM
Unfortunately one needs to have a GC or be a USC in order to be eliglible for FAFSA or any federal financial aid.
hair hot emo guys with lue eyes
stucklabor
07-24 01:52 PM
The law 245 (c) clearly states that the status of the applicant may be adjusted to that of permanent resident only if the visa number is available.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
What part of "an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed" do you not understand?
And my comments about "The law is the law" and "There is no room for interpretation" refers only to this situation. It is clear as lagoon water that an immigrant visa needs to be available to the applicant at the time that the application is filed. As I said, any attempt to convince USCIS otherwise is a waste of time.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
What part of "an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed" do you not understand?
And my comments about "The law is the law" and "There is no room for interpretation" refers only to this situation. It is clear as lagoon water that an immigrant visa needs to be available to the applicant at the time that the application is filed. As I said, any attempt to convince USCIS otherwise is a waste of time.
more...
FucTheGC
06-06 02:44 PM
My 485 packet went to Nebraska from where it was transferred to Texas. My I140 was approved from Texas too.
Mine is so similar to yours !! Jan 27 instead of Jan 29 and July 2 instead of Jul 13. VA instead of OH. Hope mine will get cleared soon. But God only knows when. :)
Mine is so similar to yours !! Jan 27 instead of Jan 29 and July 2 instead of Jul 13. VA instead of OH. Hope mine will get cleared soon. But God only knows when. :)
hot hot emo guys with lue eyes
bfadlia
03-09 12:54 PM
As much as I hated it, being EB3 ROW with Jul05 pd, I feel it is good that they didn't randomly move the pd forward like last year then give gc to some random 2006, 2007 cases while there are plenty of 2004 and 2005 ROW people still waiting
more...
house hot emo guys with lue eyes
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:05 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
tattoo hot emo guys with lue eyes
skd
09-18 01:47 PM
This is MUCH worse than Dot-Com bubble, As Dot-Com bubble was just for IT industry, this financial sector, Housing Sector, Insurence Sector. And obviously IT as IT is service industry for all these.
So we don't know what will happen.
It took 3-4 years to recover from dot com bubble........now this is the blast of financial industry so lets see how long it will take to recover....
So we don't know what will happen.
It took 3-4 years to recover from dot com bubble........now this is the blast of financial industry so lets see how long it will take to recover....
more...
pictures hot emo guys with lue eyes
.soulty
02-23 05:43 PM
well, people seems to have forgotten about this battle...originally the date was 3 weeks after start..
...anyway since grinch aint around, ill make a date based around his original suggestion: say about 2 weeks
10th March
...anyway since grinch aint around, ill make a date based around his original suggestion: say about 2 weeks
10th March
dresses hot emo guys with lue eyes
nomi
12-12 02:25 PM
I agree. Who or which department of USCIS has the authority to decide they will disallow concurrent 140/485 filing? If that department has the authority to make such a decision they probably have the authority to
1. allow filing of 485 without visa number availability,
2. allow people to start thaie name check process once 140 is cleared and everyone is waiting for priority dates to become current.
There should be a way to find out who in USCIS comes up with these new rule suggestions. Where do all the proposed rule changes published? at the USCIS press release? May the actual press release has some information. There has got be to a way to find out from either press department or someone who or what part of USCIS makes these suggestions and then may be we can make send them out auggestions.
I totally agree with you. That`s what I am saying too. I am glad that you got my point instead of refering me to INT. There are ways and we have to find out. I think core team should guide us in right direction
thx.
1. allow filing of 485 without visa number availability,
2. allow people to start thaie name check process once 140 is cleared and everyone is waiting for priority dates to become current.
There should be a way to find out who in USCIS comes up with these new rule suggestions. Where do all the proposed rule changes published? at the USCIS press release? May the actual press release has some information. There has got be to a way to find out from either press department or someone who or what part of USCIS makes these suggestions and then may be we can make send them out auggestions.
I totally agree with you. That`s what I am saying too. I am glad that you got my point instead of refering me to INT. There are ways and we have to find out. I think core team should guide us in right direction
thx.
more...
makeup hot emo guys with lue eyes
pitha
07-13 09:03 PM
I dont know her intentions but she is helping our cause. If you want to vent your anger, there is USCIS and DOS
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
girlfriend hot emo guys with lue eyes
CT_Green
04-10 11:41 AM
My PD is Oct 2003
Waiting for 485 approval. FP done. Have EAD.
Waiting for 485 approval. FP done. Have EAD.
hairstyles hot emo guys with lue eyes
vagish
04-04 02:51 PM
The Durbin-Grassley bill would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B employees who are then outsourced to other companies. This is a method that some companies use to evade restrictions on hiring H-1Bs.
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
only if the bill passes in its current form with no amendments, which highly unlikely.
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
only if the bill passes in its current form with no amendments, which highly unlikely.
GC_SUCK
08-16 01:25 PM
I have no idea. The first time I called them was in May (couple of weeks after I did my fingerprints). And was told NC is clear and yet not picked up by any IO for review as they are processing 08/2006 RD cases and my RD is 03/2007. So I have to wait for my turn.
That's all I know.
That's all I know.
abd
09-14 05:00 PM
Looks like contacting senator/congressman is pissing off the IOs and they are issuing the RFEs. I wish now that I did not do either of these. But unfortunately I did so I guess I need to bear the consequences. So I should just expect RFE now. I know quiet a few people who wrote to Senators and got RFEs. I guess people in Jul/Aug really overwhelmed the TSC with Senator calls and now we have to face their wrath.
I didn't do anything. I was patiently waiting for my turn. It seems they picked my case for approval and sent RFE because of I-129 revoke which is standard process.
I didn't do anything. I was patiently waiting for my turn. It seems they picked my case for approval and sent RFE because of I-129 revoke which is standard process.
No comments:
Post a Comment