radosav
10-04 01:47 PM
I-485 RD July 27 at Texas
I-140 AD May 25, 06 at Texas, LUD on I-140 July 28, 07
all checks (for I-485 & I-765) cashed Oct 3, 07 at California
Both I-485 cases transfered back to Texas on Oct 2, 07
I-765 shows received date as Oct 1, 07 and will stay at California. Does that mean I need to count 11 weeks from that date? And not from the date when packet was received in July?
I-140 AD May 25, 06 at Texas, LUD on I-140 July 28, 07
all checks (for I-485 & I-765) cashed Oct 3, 07 at California
Both I-485 cases transfered back to Texas on Oct 2, 07
I-765 shows received date as Oct 1, 07 and will stay at California. Does that mean I need to count 11 weeks from that date? And not from the date when packet was received in July?
wallpaper Selena Gomez amp; The Scene
walking_dude
12-12 04:12 PM
I'm not surprised if there are Eb2 prior to 2000. Almost every employer substituted every LC they could subsitute just before the deadline to end Substitution. Some estimates put it at 175,000. So I'm not surprised it there are hidden Eb2s who have PDs prior to 2000 !
Of course, none of them will come here and claim it !
Of course, none of them will come here and claim it !
anyluck?
09-15 01:23 PM
Obama told he will atleast discuss on CIR after health care. He knows well that Health care bill will take long time to resolve, so that he can escape. One way or other he will not do anything.
2011 selena gomez who says video
Jaime
08-06 12:12 PM
Yeah, why not? As long as Legals ALSO get green cards!
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
more...
rjgleason
June 18th, 2005, 03:11 PM
No.1 is my favorite.....I like that (so it seems to me) that the emphasis is on the sky, which has suberb coloring........Wish I was into photography when I was living in SFO......I'd still be there, borrowing your 600mm. (and having a good friend!)
Rajeev
10-12 09:50 AM
The maximum duration allowed on L1B is 5 years where as on L1A, it is 7 years. On H1B it is 6 years. Duration spent on L1 is counted with the duration spent on H1 and vice versa.
The maximum time allowed on H1B is 6 years, this includes the time you spent on L1. This is the reason why you have been given H1B that is only valid for 1 year.
On a side note, the maximum time allowed on L1 is 5 years - you had to go back to India since you have spent the maximum allowable time on that visa.
Now, there are two ways to extend your stay beyond the initial 5/6 yrs granted on H1 or L1 visas.
1. For both L1 and H1Bs: Go back to your country (India) for 1 yr after your initial term expires. After 1 yr stay in your home country, you will be eligible for "another cycle" of L1/H1. So, for L1 you will get another 5 yrs, and H1B another 6 yrs.
2. Another way to extend your H1B is to start your Green card process (file your labor, and then your 140). Once your labor is pending for > 1 yr, or your 140 is approved, you will be eligible for 1 yr or 3 yr H1B extensions. This does not apply to L1s.
Here is what I would suggest for your case:
Best case scenario: Wait until your 1 yr clock resets, apply for fresh L1A (multi national manager). Once you are in the USA, convince your company to file for your green card in EB1 - multi national manager. The EB1 is almost always current, you can get your GC pretty soon.
This is the best case scenario that I can envision for you.
Alternatively,you can come back immediately on H1, apply for your PERM and 140, and then get unlimited extensions based on your GC being pending.
You can also wait until your 1 yr clock resets and then enter on H1 in Feb 2008, where by you might be able to claim 5 more years on H1B extensions ( a total of fresh 6 yrs on your current H1B). eventually, you will have to file for your PERM and 140 and then get extensions beyond the 6 yrs. I think you will need to file a petition with USCIS indicating the H1B clock reset.
Merely applying for L1A will not invalidate your H1. however, entering on L1A will invalidate your H1b (you can only hold one visa at a time - L1 or H1B). BTW... I guess you can not enter on L1 until you reset your 1 yr clock.
If I were you,I would seriously consider entering on L1A and then filing for EB1 GC. This is the quickest possible route for your GC. Unless, ofcourse, you do not want to be with the company for another year or so because your relationship with the employer is strained.
The maximum time allowed on H1B is 6 years, this includes the time you spent on L1. This is the reason why you have been given H1B that is only valid for 1 year.
On a side note, the maximum time allowed on L1 is 5 years - you had to go back to India since you have spent the maximum allowable time on that visa.
Now, there are two ways to extend your stay beyond the initial 5/6 yrs granted on H1 or L1 visas.
1. For both L1 and H1Bs: Go back to your country (India) for 1 yr after your initial term expires. After 1 yr stay in your home country, you will be eligible for "another cycle" of L1/H1. So, for L1 you will get another 5 yrs, and H1B another 6 yrs.
2. Another way to extend your H1B is to start your Green card process (file your labor, and then your 140). Once your labor is pending for > 1 yr, or your 140 is approved, you will be eligible for 1 yr or 3 yr H1B extensions. This does not apply to L1s.
Here is what I would suggest for your case:
Best case scenario: Wait until your 1 yr clock resets, apply for fresh L1A (multi national manager). Once you are in the USA, convince your company to file for your green card in EB1 - multi national manager. The EB1 is almost always current, you can get your GC pretty soon.
This is the best case scenario that I can envision for you.
Alternatively,you can come back immediately on H1, apply for your PERM and 140, and then get unlimited extensions based on your GC being pending.
You can also wait until your 1 yr clock resets and then enter on H1 in Feb 2008, where by you might be able to claim 5 more years on H1B extensions ( a total of fresh 6 yrs on your current H1B). eventually, you will have to file for your PERM and 140 and then get extensions beyond the 6 yrs. I think you will need to file a petition with USCIS indicating the H1B clock reset.
Merely applying for L1A will not invalidate your H1. however, entering on L1A will invalidate your H1b (you can only hold one visa at a time - L1 or H1B). BTW... I guess you can not enter on L1 until you reset your 1 yr clock.
If I were you,I would seriously consider entering on L1A and then filing for EB1 GC. This is the quickest possible route for your GC. Unless, ofcourse, you do not want to be with the company for another year or so because your relationship with the employer is strained.
more...
aristotle
04-05 06:52 PM
You can get an extension using A's 140 only if it was not revoked.
Perm.. I was exactly in the same boat as u were but I went ahead and changed the job from company A to company B and got 3 year extension till 10/09. Then I went to India and got the visa stamped till 10/09. My new employer i.e. company B has now started processing my GC again.. Now, let us see if I can port my PD of 12/05 with company B.
My question is if I decide to move again to company C [Not gonna do] or my new employer i.e. company B fires me [U never know] i.e. in case if I do not have labor or 140 done with my new employer i.e. company B and say I ran out of H1B at the end of 10/09, then can I get further 3 year extension with company B or new company C on approved 140 from previous employer i.e. Company A?
Thanks!!
Perm.. I was exactly in the same boat as u were but I went ahead and changed the job from company A to company B and got 3 year extension till 10/09. Then I went to India and got the visa stamped till 10/09. My new employer i.e. company B has now started processing my GC again.. Now, let us see if I can port my PD of 12/05 with company B.
My question is if I decide to move again to company C [Not gonna do] or my new employer i.e. company B fires me [U never know] i.e. in case if I do not have labor or 140 done with my new employer i.e. company B and say I ran out of H1B at the end of 10/09, then can I get further 3 year extension with company B or new company C on approved 140 from previous employer i.e. Company A?
Thanks!!
2010 The Selena quot;Who Saysquot; video is
visafreedom
07-03 11:15 AM
Well, here are the thoughts.
American Govt only listens when it sees an economic impact. Get thousands of such workers to not work a day, I am sure it would mean a huge economic impact. This is sending a signal that we dont tolerate this "pseudo-slavery" and that today we dont work a day but tomorrow we will be forced to leave this country (I know already several people who have done that and it is becoming more and more common for people to abstain from coming to this land of opportunity as the system is now less favorable)
If hundreds of thousands dont go to work, congress, corporates, press - the whole gamut would become sensitive to the issue. This is one way you can get them to lobby for our demands.
Taking out rally is also a very good way of doing it however if you did this in one place, the turnout will not be as impressive. Doing it in multiple cities needs an organization.
Bottomline, whatever you do, show solidarity, resolve, unity. That has never happened within this affected group of workers.
American Govt only listens when it sees an economic impact. Get thousands of such workers to not work a day, I am sure it would mean a huge economic impact. This is sending a signal that we dont tolerate this "pseudo-slavery" and that today we dont work a day but tomorrow we will be forced to leave this country (I know already several people who have done that and it is becoming more and more common for people to abstain from coming to this land of opportunity as the system is now less favorable)
If hundreds of thousands dont go to work, congress, corporates, press - the whole gamut would become sensitive to the issue. This is one way you can get them to lobby for our demands.
Taking out rally is also a very good way of doing it however if you did this in one place, the turnout will not be as impressive. Doing it in multiple cities needs an organization.
Bottomline, whatever you do, show solidarity, resolve, unity. That has never happened within this affected group of workers.
more...
suriajay12
05-13 07:11 AM
We're all impacted by retrogression and each person comes up with different reasons such as labor substitution or porting from EB3 to EB2 etc. I think that the unemployment rate is a key factor that might be influencing the movement of visa dates. With a double digit unemployment rate for US workers, why will the government want to give green cards to foreign workers.
Even if you get the green card, you could lose your job and apply for unemployment benefits. The US government does not want increase in the numbers of those claiming unemployment benefits or welfare programs. These benefits are not available to workers on temporary visas.Social security and medicare are also going to be tapped out within the next 10-20 years. These factors could have made them influence the USCIS/DOS to roll the dates back and make it U for all EB3 and to past 2000 for EB2 India. EB2 is current for other countries due to low demand.
Until the unemployment rate falls to reasonably low (in their view) levels, they have no inclination to act on immigration reform.
Notwithstanding the DOS explanation for the retrogression, there might be political factors in the background that are not made public.How do we know that this wasn't happening behind the scenes?
Its not unemployment, but swine flu thats responsible for this retrogression mess. They could imagine this flu will strike in 2009 and hence wanted to discourage people to come to US or to adjust status here. They know immigrants travel more than citizens out of country and to Mexico and hence more chance to get that virus to US.
Even if you get the green card, you could lose your job and apply for unemployment benefits. The US government does not want increase in the numbers of those claiming unemployment benefits or welfare programs. These benefits are not available to workers on temporary visas.Social security and medicare are also going to be tapped out within the next 10-20 years. These factors could have made them influence the USCIS/DOS to roll the dates back and make it U for all EB3 and to past 2000 for EB2 India. EB2 is current for other countries due to low demand.
Until the unemployment rate falls to reasonably low (in their view) levels, they have no inclination to act on immigration reform.
Notwithstanding the DOS explanation for the retrogression, there might be political factors in the background that are not made public.How do we know that this wasn't happening behind the scenes?
Its not unemployment, but swine flu thats responsible for this retrogression mess. They could imagine this flu will strike in 2009 and hence wanted to discourage people to come to US or to adjust status here. They know immigrants travel more than citizens out of country and to Mexico and hence more chance to get that virus to US.
hair selena gomez who says video
h1techSlave
04-10 02:34 PM
I went thru the tracker to see how many are there before Jan 2004 EB3-I. And the news is not good.
Out of the total cases of 27, 389 (All-no filtering), 757 is before Jan 2004 for EB3-I. That's a % of 2.764%.
Now, let us extrapolate this figure to find out the total remaining EB3-I cases. If we take that there are 400,000 pending EB cases, the count of Eb3-I prior to Jan 2004 would be: 400,000 * 2.764 = 11, 056 cases.
With a country quota of 3000 visas, it would take 11056/3000 = 3.69 years to clear this backlog.
Now a word on the potential visa date movement. I have noticed that there are many PDs in the latter months of 2003 - there are very few people with PDs before June 2003. This points to a very strong possibility of the DOS setting the EB3-I visa date as June/July/August 2003 in the coming months.
Out of the total cases of 27, 389 (All-no filtering), 757 is before Jan 2004 for EB3-I. That's a % of 2.764%.
Now, let us extrapolate this figure to find out the total remaining EB3-I cases. If we take that there are 400,000 pending EB cases, the count of Eb3-I prior to Jan 2004 would be: 400,000 * 2.764 = 11, 056 cases.
With a country quota of 3000 visas, it would take 11056/3000 = 3.69 years to clear this backlog.
Now a word on the potential visa date movement. I have noticed that there are many PDs in the latter months of 2003 - there are very few people with PDs before June 2003. This points to a very strong possibility of the DOS setting the EB3-I visa date as June/July/August 2003 in the coming months.
more...
ArunAntonio
10-17 01:07 PM
Sorry to Bump ... but I am going nuts.. am I doing something wrong in the way I am going about this?
hot selena gomez who says music
anilsal
12-21 12:00 AM
how can I get a copy of my approved I-140?....my lawyer won't give it to me...heck he won't even give me the case#
please help
Can't he not give you a copy of the I140 approval? That will have the case number. Something like, LINxxxxxxx
please help
Can't he not give you a copy of the I140 approval? That will have the case number. Something like, LINxxxxxxx
more...
house says video selena gomez
prdgl
06-17 06:19 PM
I was under the impression that the bill have already died and its very hard that they will get the bill this year. I myself haven't applied my LC yet.
After the seeing the June VB, I am deciding to move to another company which will file my LC ASAP because my current employer is dragging his feet.
can anyone tell me that I should wait or should go ahead and change employer to file my LC, because if the bill's May15th cut-off date becomes effective, then I will have moved for no reason (all is waste)
Your suggestions are highly valued.
Thanks
After the seeing the June VB, I am deciding to move to another company which will file my LC ASAP because my current employer is dragging his feet.
can anyone tell me that I should wait or should go ahead and change employer to file my LC, because if the bill's May15th cut-off date becomes effective, then I will have moved for no reason (all is waste)
Your suggestions are highly valued.
Thanks
tattoo selena gomez who says video
glus
12-09 12:47 PM
AP could be mailed but the applicant MUST be in the USA at the time of application.
According to my attorney, you can re-apply for AP from outside of the U.S. and have it delivered to a local consulate. This is a response from my attorney:
My question:
Can one apply for AP from overseas while AOS is still pending?
Answer from Attorney:
If the AOS is still pending you can do it yes. You can even have AP sent to
overseas consulate. Then it is just called PAROLE lol, as they are not
doing it in advance. Look at the I-131 and you will see about this and
possibilities. It should talk about it in instructions.
Best Regards,
According to my attorney, you can re-apply for AP from outside of the U.S. and have it delivered to a local consulate. This is a response from my attorney:
My question:
Can one apply for AP from overseas while AOS is still pending?
Answer from Attorney:
If the AOS is still pending you can do it yes. You can even have AP sent to
overseas consulate. Then it is just called PAROLE lol, as they are not
doing it in advance. Look at the I-131 and you will see about this and
possibilities. It should talk about it in instructions.
Best Regards,
more...
pictures selena gomez who says video.
whitecollarslave
03-06 02:41 PM
I'll urge people from especially from California and Texas send out the letters and call up their lawmakers...Despite the Anti-immigrant climate prevailing in the country, congresswoman Zoe Logfren was able to get her bill passed on wednesday....If we can proove to them that we are not asking new green card numbers and not ask for recapturing green card numbers, they'll certainly hear us, but we need to speak up...
Which bill? Passed where? More info please.
Which bill? Passed where? More info please.
dresses images selena gomez who says
joshraj
10-06 09:37 AM
Anyone with July 27 File Date, Please update receipt recd or not recd
more...
makeup 2011 2011 Selena Gomez Releases selena gomez who says video stills. tattoo
pathiren
03-29 07:56 PM
Chanduv,
I am sorry, but as far as I have known IV, IV has never exclusively or inclusively worked on student OPT/H1, but it is a coincidence that increase in student OPT might be a fallout of some of IV's actions. I dont see any point of asking students to join IV solely on this basis (OPT or H1 increase). Though, having graduated as a student in US, I totally agree to the point of asking students to join stating that GC is the final step in achieving their American Dream, where IV can make considerable impact.
I think the administrators should particulary keep a close watch on such posts related to OPT/H1 issues. These posts might be incorrectly interpreted and lead to deviatons from IV's cores agenda issues as well as division of resources. Unless, IV administrators are seriously thinking of changing their ideology and are willing to walk this path.
Nevertheless, I will keep on supporting IV with all my possible efforts. Cheers and Go IV!
HP
I am sorry, but as far as I have known IV, IV has never exclusively or inclusively worked on student OPT/H1, but it is a coincidence that increase in student OPT might be a fallout of some of IV's actions. I dont see any point of asking students to join IV solely on this basis (OPT or H1 increase). Though, having graduated as a student in US, I totally agree to the point of asking students to join stating that GC is the final step in achieving their American Dream, where IV can make considerable impact.
I think the administrators should particulary keep a close watch on such posts related to OPT/H1 issues. These posts might be incorrectly interpreted and lead to deviatons from IV's cores agenda issues as well as division of resources. Unless, IV administrators are seriously thinking of changing their ideology and are willing to walk this path.
Nevertheless, I will keep on supporting IV with all my possible efforts. Cheers and Go IV!
HP
girlfriend selena gomez who says video
Dhundhun
03-17 03:14 PM
Thanks. I'll try SSN based on AOS. If they refuse, I'll get EAD for my wife.
hairstyles selena gomez who says video. selena gomez who says video
humdesi
03-13 01:23 AM
There is a add on Sulekha ...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/add
transitive verb
1: to join or unite so as to bring about an increase or improvement <adds 60 acres to his land> <wine adds a creative touch to cooking>
2: to say further : append
3: to combine (numbers) into an equivalent simple quantity or number
4: to include as a member of a group <don't forget to add me in>
intransitive verb
1 a: to perform addition b: to come together or unite by addition
2 a: to serve as an addition <the movie will add to his fame> b: to make an addition <added to her savings>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/AD
Main Entry: 1ad
Pronunciation: \ˈad\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Date: 1841
1 : advertisement 2
2 : advertising
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/add
transitive verb
1: to join or unite so as to bring about an increase or improvement <adds 60 acres to his land> <wine adds a creative touch to cooking>
2: to say further : append
3: to combine (numbers) into an equivalent simple quantity or number
4: to include as a member of a group <don't forget to add me in>
intransitive verb
1 a: to perform addition b: to come together or unite by addition
2 a: to serve as an addition <the movie will add to his fame> b: to make an addition <added to her savings>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/AD
Main Entry: 1ad
Pronunciation: \ˈad\
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Date: 1841
1 : advertisement 2
2 : advertising
amsgc
06-15 11:40 PM
I just read the instructions on initial evidence on the I-485. Nowhere does it ask you for passport details - only for page with nonimmigrant visa, if obtained in the last one year.
Why are people asking questions about passport validity? What am I missing here - please enlighten.
Thank you.
Ams
Passport should be valid for more than 6 months for applying I 485.
If somebody can answer that would begreat
Why are people asking questions about passport validity? What am I missing here - please enlighten.
Thank you.
Ams
Passport should be valid for more than 6 months for applying I 485.
If somebody can answer that would begreat
dixie
08-21 08:49 PM
1. To be fair to all, Ask all h1b's to gain 2 - 3 years of US experience, before filing for GC. (2 years of Paystub at the minumum and or tax returns).
What sort of "fairness" do you hope to achieve by delaying new GC applicants ? Given the current pace of visa number availability, it is going to be 2015 or so before a 2006 PD for EB-3 becomes current and USCIS gets to it. Does that not already take care of "fairness" with respect to older applicants ?
For a new GC applicant who is looking at another 8-9 years wait to file 485 (I am one of them and there are plenty on this forum) it is more important than ever to lock a PD asap. Even assuming it is in larger interest of all of us, how will you educate an average lawmaker of all these intricacies ? We are having a tough time as it is distinguishing ourselves from the illegals.
What sort of "fairness" do you hope to achieve by delaying new GC applicants ? Given the current pace of visa number availability, it is going to be 2015 or so before a 2006 PD for EB-3 becomes current and USCIS gets to it. Does that not already take care of "fairness" with respect to older applicants ?
For a new GC applicant who is looking at another 8-9 years wait to file 485 (I am one of them and there are plenty on this forum) it is more important than ever to lock a PD asap. Even assuming it is in larger interest of all of us, how will you educate an average lawmaker of all these intricacies ? We are having a tough time as it is distinguishing ourselves from the illegals.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar