tikka
07-03 10:49 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
wallpaper scarlett johansson oscars 2011
ashatara78
03-10 04:38 PM
The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
alex99
04-10 10:35 AM
please participate
2011 johansson+hair+2011+oscars
Munna Bhai
09-19 06:14 AM
Thank you IV and all volunteers that made this rally happen. It was very well organized and I really enjoyed being part of it!!
I really liked Murthy's speech. Short and to the point. "Legal" is the key.
I also liked Mark's little comedy act.
(Wish more would have shown up to show their support, but I guess some people are content waiting 10 or more years for their GC.)
Suggestions for improvement to next time:
1. I liked that the Chinese group joined the rally, but I didn't like their speaker. He was only talking about Chinese and Indian joining forces, and then making some kind of joke about IC chips are only made by Indians and Chinese. It's ok if you want to be an Indian/Chinese-only group, it is your choice. But if you want to change something about your green cards, you will fail with that attitude. You need to attract and change things for EVERYONE, or no one will listen to you. (If you want IV to be for everyone, IV needs to be more clear on that. There are so many Indians on the forums that ppl might think it is only for Indians.)
2. Minor things... Good job on the signs(!), but there were too many of them. Half would be enough. People had trouble focus on them.
Also, keep the message short. Max a few words. No one can, in a few seconds, read a moving sign containing 4 lines of text with 5 words on each, on an unknown subject. The poor people who tried to read them looked like near-sighted old men. Short and big letters is better. "Shorter wait for legals"
rather than
"Reduce the backlog for highly-skilled legal immigrants so we can live the American dream and not wait for 10 years"
But all in all, I was amazed how well everything was planned. The state flags was a nice touch. Flowers too. Water for the participants. Great! Even the nice DC cops blocking the roads for us seemed very happy with us. Following the law is what legals do...
This is correct!! I think, too many banners will distract..great feedback
I really liked Murthy's speech. Short and to the point. "Legal" is the key.
I also liked Mark's little comedy act.
(Wish more would have shown up to show their support, but I guess some people are content waiting 10 or more years for their GC.)
Suggestions for improvement to next time:
1. I liked that the Chinese group joined the rally, but I didn't like their speaker. He was only talking about Chinese and Indian joining forces, and then making some kind of joke about IC chips are only made by Indians and Chinese. It's ok if you want to be an Indian/Chinese-only group, it is your choice. But if you want to change something about your green cards, you will fail with that attitude. You need to attract and change things for EVERYONE, or no one will listen to you. (If you want IV to be for everyone, IV needs to be more clear on that. There are so many Indians on the forums that ppl might think it is only for Indians.)
2. Minor things... Good job on the signs(!), but there were too many of them. Half would be enough. People had trouble focus on them.
Also, keep the message short. Max a few words. No one can, in a few seconds, read a moving sign containing 4 lines of text with 5 words on each, on an unknown subject. The poor people who tried to read them looked like near-sighted old men. Short and big letters is better. "Shorter wait for legals"
rather than
"Reduce the backlog for highly-skilled legal immigrants so we can live the American dream and not wait for 10 years"
But all in all, I was amazed how well everything was planned. The state flags was a nice touch. Flowers too. Water for the participants. Great! Even the nice DC cops blocking the roads for us seemed very happy with us. Following the law is what legals do...
This is correct!! I think, too many banners will distract..great feedback
more...
BumbleBee
08-02 02:32 PM
Hi Guys I'm pretty new in all this and i've been following this discussion and perhaps someone can help me.... here is the question.... Do I have a visa number available ?? If so why am I waiting that long??
here is my story:
i'm EB3 world - got my labor pd is 05/2002, and I concurrent filled I-485/I-140 on 05/2003.... already made 2 fingerprints..... I-140 was approved on 12/2005 (TSC).... i renew my EAD every year since I filled.
if what you guys are saying is correct that in order to accept the I-485 to be filled USCIS need to have a visa number available to the applicant.... y am I still waiting?? :confused:
thanks for the help and i'm sorry in advance for my lack of knowledge :)
When you filed your I-485, there were VISA numbers, which in theory could have been used to grant you GC( I-485 approval ). But, they didn't act quick enough on your case to approve it, instead they worked on other cases and approved those, meanwhile, they got thousands more request for GC(Visa number ), and they started giving it based on priority date.
Had they known there will be thousands of applications of older priority date, they wouldn't have accepted your application, as they can not approve it. But they didn't know, hence accepted the application. Now, it would just sit there till more numbers are availble and everybody who has priority date before you gets GC.
Everybody who has priority date prior to your priority date is technically ahead of you, even though they have not been able to file their I-485 yet, hence VISA number would go to them first :D
Anybody who hasn't yet filed 485, willl have to wait till the VISA bulletin passed thier PD.
BumbleBee
here is my story:
i'm EB3 world - got my labor pd is 05/2002, and I concurrent filled I-485/I-140 on 05/2003.... already made 2 fingerprints..... I-140 was approved on 12/2005 (TSC).... i renew my EAD every year since I filled.
if what you guys are saying is correct that in order to accept the I-485 to be filled USCIS need to have a visa number available to the applicant.... y am I still waiting?? :confused:
thanks for the help and i'm sorry in advance for my lack of knowledge :)
When you filed your I-485, there were VISA numbers, which in theory could have been used to grant you GC( I-485 approval ). But, they didn't act quick enough on your case to approve it, instead they worked on other cases and approved those, meanwhile, they got thousands more request for GC(Visa number ), and they started giving it based on priority date.
Had they known there will be thousands of applications of older priority date, they wouldn't have accepted your application, as they can not approve it. But they didn't know, hence accepted the application. Now, it would just sit there till more numbers are availble and everybody who has priority date before you gets GC.
Everybody who has priority date prior to your priority date is technically ahead of you, even though they have not been able to file their I-485 yet, hence VISA number would go to them first :D
Anybody who hasn't yet filed 485, willl have to wait till the VISA bulletin passed thier PD.
BumbleBee
vinzak
11-11 12:45 PM
We can all send a copy to the ombudsmand and DOS.
I will be discussing this with my congressperson in a couple of weeks. Can any of you contact your congressperson and have them help you regarding quarterly spillover? Use the draft to take to your local congressman.
I'm willing to send this to all the congressman/senators in Texas. Since I'm new to this game, is email better or snail mail? Or is personal contact expected?
Thanks.
I will be discussing this with my congressperson in a couple of weeks. Can any of you contact your congressperson and have them help you regarding quarterly spillover? Use the draft to take to your local congressman.
I'm willing to send this to all the congressman/senators in Texas. Since I'm new to this game, is email better or snail mail? Or is personal contact expected?
Thanks.
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:25 PM
nixstor,
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Well, Thats what I have said before as well. Its like setting the order card flag to "yes" on 60K cases with older PD's. I do not know from where Jay Solomon got the tip off about lapse of name checks, unless they are trying to make this a big issue through all possible means. There have been stories flying around that they by passed on security checks, which I thought your original post conveyed. Most of the 485's they approved have been the one's with PD's from 2003 and 2004 initially. If there are a few from the pile that were of later PD's, I don't think its a big issue. The lack of communication and implementation/interpretation at their whims and fancies has resulted in the situation at hand for every one involved in the chain. I am very very positive that the OB's office has nothing do with this and USCIS is not worried about the postmortem conducted by OB.
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Well, Thats what I have said before as well. Its like setting the order card flag to "yes" on 60K cases with older PD's. I do not know from where Jay Solomon got the tip off about lapse of name checks, unless they are trying to make this a big issue through all possible means. There have been stories flying around that they by passed on security checks, which I thought your original post conveyed. Most of the 485's they approved have been the one's with PD's from 2003 and 2004 initially. If there are a few from the pile that were of later PD's, I don't think its a big issue. The lack of communication and implementation/interpretation at their whims and fancies has resulted in the situation at hand for every one involved in the chain. I am very very positive that the OB's office has nothing do with this and USCIS is not worried about the postmortem conducted by OB.
2010 Scarlett Johansson Debuts Red
CSPAvictim
07-09 06:30 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.
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.
more...
hsingh82
06-11 09:36 AM
Reply I received:
Thank you for contacting my offices. Your correspondence has been received, and we will respond to you as quickly as possible. A copy of your message is attached below for your records.
If you need immediate assistance regarding an urgent problem you are experiencing with the federal government, visit the "Help With Federal Agencies" section of the website for details on how to proceed so that your difficulties are brought to my attention as soon as possible.
If you are seeking information or services from my offices that are NOT related to my Legislative duties, please visit my "Services For Texans" section for more information.
Warmest Regards,
U.S. Senator John Cornyn
Thank you for contacting my offices. Your correspondence has been received, and we will respond to you as quickly as possible. A copy of your message is attached below for your records.
If you need immediate assistance regarding an urgent problem you are experiencing with the federal government, visit the "Help With Federal Agencies" section of the website for details on how to proceed so that your difficulties are brought to my attention as soon as possible.
If you are seeking information or services from my offices that are NOT related to my Legislative duties, please visit my "Services For Texans" section for more information.
Warmest Regards,
U.S. Senator John Cornyn
hair Scarlett-Johansson-oscars-2011
snathan
02-24 12:17 PM
i'm on L1B visa.I came to US on L1B in 2005 with one year petition and got extension
for 3 years. meanwhile i left to India in June 2007. And then i came back with new L1B petiotion in Oct 2007 which is valid till Sep-2010.Now my question is
1) Is my L1B stay reached to maximum or do i still have 2 years left with my new L1B.
2) If i apply for H1 this year how many years of stay i'll get with H1B.
Please help me with this madam as soon as possible.
Thanks in Advance.
If you apply for H1B, you will only whatever left in L1B and not six years.
for 3 years. meanwhile i left to India in June 2007. And then i came back with new L1B petiotion in Oct 2007 which is valid till Sep-2010.Now my question is
1) Is my L1B stay reached to maximum or do i still have 2 years left with my new L1B.
2) If i apply for H1 this year how many years of stay i'll get with H1B.
Please help me with this madam as soon as possible.
Thanks in Advance.
If you apply for H1B, you will only whatever left in L1B and not six years.
more...
srinivasj
03-11 11:11 PM
now looks like dates would move only after july..
hot scarlett johansson oscars 2011
rajuram
11-11 10:33 PM
With democrats in control, at the very minimum we should try to push recapture of lost visa numbers. Tie that with the ability of immigrants to buy houses, we could have a game winner...
more...
house Scarlett Johansson in Dolce
eilsoe
02-16 06:52 PM
I'll have a WIP screen up in a few minutes.. and then it's off to bed :sleep:
tattoo Red carpet arrivals scarlett
delhirocks
07-02 10:35 PM
Signed up for $50 monthly contribution today. Contributed since June 1st = $120. Hope this small contribution will be helpful in this endeavor.
more...
pictures Scarlett Johansson | Pictures
tonyHK12
04-01 09:19 AM
/\/\/\
dresses scarlett johansson oscars
little_willy
09-18 11:44 PM
I was there and am proud to be part of such dedicated individuals:) It was great to catch up with Aman, pappu, logiclife etc. Most of the congressmen's office I met were of the view that it is high time we come out in open and fight for our cause. One legal aide explained me how ignorant most of the lawmakers are when it comes to legal vs illegal immigrants. This rally will be an eyeopener for few of them for sure.
Those who missed, I can assure you that Immigration voice is moving in the right direction. With a leader like Aman and unrelenting individuals like Jay(logiclife) and Himanshu(pappu), we can hope to achieve great things.
For individuals who had to excuse themselves from the rally or from any contribution, my question is, when the high profile attorneys and lawmakers believe that we can make a huge impact, why, you being the beneficiary of the very cause and were able to file 485 because of IV's efforts, fail to understand that we could make a difference. It is high time you participate in this effort.
Those who missed, I can assure you that Immigration voice is moving in the right direction. With a leader like Aman and unrelenting individuals like Jay(logiclife) and Himanshu(pappu), we can hope to achieve great things.
For individuals who had to excuse themselves from the rally or from any contribution, my question is, when the high profile attorneys and lawmakers believe that we can make a huge impact, why, you being the beneficiary of the very cause and were able to file 485 because of IV's efforts, fail to understand that we could make a difference. It is high time you participate in this effort.
more...
makeup scarlett johansson oscars hair
EB3_SEP04
05-26 06:15 PM
Just out of curiosity.
You were not asked to show any documents (your friend was)?
May be because your son is a US Citizen...
My wife thought the same but I don't think my son's citizenship has played any role. The officer's conversation was only with the DRIVER. All the questions were directed at my buddy(driver). he said he could have fined him even for the passengers' inability to prove the status.
So i am wondering if the rule/law dictates that only the driver should be questioned unless it's a commercial/public transportation.
During my last H1 stamping in Mumbai over 3 yrs ago, officer's third question was if we have a US citizen child and we said yes then there was a brief pause and he said "Congrats, your visa is granted and your passports will be mailed".
so if i must vote yes or no on whether son's citizenship works in our favor then i'd say "Yes".
There's no doubt US govt "cares a lot" about their citizens, that'd probably be the reason i would want to be a US citizen even at the price of giving up Indian citizenship :)
You were not asked to show any documents (your friend was)?
May be because your son is a US Citizen...
My wife thought the same but I don't think my son's citizenship has played any role. The officer's conversation was only with the DRIVER. All the questions were directed at my buddy(driver). he said he could have fined him even for the passengers' inability to prove the status.
So i am wondering if the rule/law dictates that only the driver should be questioned unless it's a commercial/public transportation.
During my last H1 stamping in Mumbai over 3 yrs ago, officer's third question was if we have a US citizen child and we said yes then there was a brief pause and he said "Congrats, your visa is granted and your passports will be mailed".
so if i must vote yes or no on whether son's citizenship works in our favor then i'd say "Yes".
There's no doubt US govt "cares a lot" about their citizens, that'd probably be the reason i would want to be a US citizen even at the price of giving up Indian citizenship :)
girlfriend 2011 scarlett johansson,
mallu
02-27 09:35 PM
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4398
So, those who done their FP in July 2007 or afterwards will have their FP refreshed. So they don't need to go for FP once the previous FP expires. All those who did FP prior to July 2007 will have to go to ASC for FP .
So, those who done their FP in July 2007 or afterwards will have their FP refreshed. So they don't need to go for FP once the previous FP expires. All those who did FP prior to July 2007 will have to go to ASC for FP .
hairstyles Seen At - The 2011 Academy
gc_chahiye
08-15 05:33 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!
India did have tons of approvals, but I believe most were EB3 (18K) so thats gone to U. These are just a small number of unused visas that were presumably returned. October and there-on dates are a real reflection of USCIS backlog etc. (see the arbitrary use of Jan 2007 for EB1 in this VB)
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!
India did have tons of approvals, but I believe most were EB3 (18K) so thats gone to U. These are just a small number of unused visas that were presumably returned. October and there-on dates are a real reflection of USCIS backlog etc. (see the arbitrary use of Jan 2007 for EB1 in this VB)
Jaime
09-10 02:37 PM
Hey Andy, yes, join us on the 18th! We can help with your airfare, and even better if you can bring your wife and kids!!!!
angelfire76
02-13 04:07 PM
His views are distorted.
Can Americans go to India on H1B or similar visa to get work? No? Well, so think about it.
They can get a work permit to work in India. The only requirement is that they have to sign on a police register every month or so. This is because Indian Immigration still has not yet computerized all their records due to little to no demand.
Companies like Infosys and Wipro do hire MBAs and Engineering undergrad students to train in their India offices to understand their business model.
Wait a minute, you are from Germany, a historically xenophobic state. :rolleyes:
Can Americans go to India on H1B or similar visa to get work? No? Well, so think about it.
They can get a work permit to work in India. The only requirement is that they have to sign on a police register every month or so. This is because Indian Immigration still has not yet computerized all their records due to little to no demand.
Companies like Infosys and Wipro do hire MBAs and Engineering undergrad students to train in their India offices to understand their business model.
Wait a minute, you are from Germany, a historically xenophobic state. :rolleyes:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar