nervous-wreck
03-15 05:08 PM
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
wallpaper Let`s Dance Wallpapers
Becks
07-12 02:39 PM
I guess if you are assigned a visa number, they may put your case as pending new 140 approval. Ammendment may not take much time. So keep fingers crossed. Good Luck.
Guru, please help, my 140 is approved with my original employer who got acquired by a big fish. The Big Fish filed for a new 140 (they called it amendment I guess) and that is still pending. My priority date is Sep'05 EB2. Would I qualify to be lucky in the lottery game with this movement? Please help.
Guru, please help, my 140 is approved with my original employer who got acquired by a big fish. The Big Fish filed for a new 140 (they called it amendment I guess) and that is still pending. My priority date is Sep'05 EB2. Would I qualify to be lucky in the lottery game with this movement? Please help.
kouhsik69
03-09 01:30 PM
Where is the great predictor :D
Rao baba is in hibernation .................................:D
dask_1
EB3-I
pd Jan 2002
Rao baba is in hibernation .................................:D
dask_1
EB3-I
pd Jan 2002
2011 Dancing Wallpaper Download
mirage
02-03 11:28 AM
The Obama administration is boasting on 'Equality amongst unequals', I am going to ask as many lawmakers I can, where is the equality for us, why immigrants are not eqal, where are our human right ? where is our Liberty ? why a Fijian who reports to me got in the country last year and got his green card and I'm waiting for 6 years now...
more...
uma001
10-01 09:58 AM
I work at one of these companies & they applied for my GC.
1. This company only applies only after you get certain level of ranking in your year-end appraisal - disclosed during hiring process
2. You must complete x years of service.
3. Right now, economy is down & they won't apply if they feel that Labor application is going to get rejected; as it hurts their reputation & process.
I know one person in my company - whom company denied GC 'cos of Labor market but now they are starting the process of the person..(once law firm gave the green light)
So just saying - these companies don't apply - is not right.
Also, once everything is ok - you need to realize that sponsoring GC is approved by your manager as all the associated costs are allocated to his/her cost center; so company as such doesn't have issue with the cost.
Dont trust these kind of companies. if you don't get good rating in appraisal , you will be laid off .
1. This company only applies only after you get certain level of ranking in your year-end appraisal - disclosed during hiring process
2. You must complete x years of service.
3. Right now, economy is down & they won't apply if they feel that Labor application is going to get rejected; as it hurts their reputation & process.
I know one person in my company - whom company denied GC 'cos of Labor market but now they are starting the process of the person..(once law firm gave the green light)
So just saying - these companies don't apply - is not right.
Also, once everything is ok - you need to realize that sponsoring GC is approved by your manager as all the associated costs are allocated to his/her cost center; so company as such doesn't have issue with the cost.
Dont trust these kind of companies. if you don't get good rating in appraisal , you will be laid off .
10dulkar
08-15 05:18 PM
Expected news for EB3 folks
more...
ajay
04-13 10:12 AM
A very useful piece of information has been brought to our attention by shiankuraaf.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
2010 Lets-Dance-Wallpaper-001
gsc999
04-22 02:56 PM
Decipher and GSC999 have totally contradictory opinions . Not sure whom to believe here .:D . There seems to have been 2 sets of opinons here of the members who attended the rally.
---
I think you mean the conclusions we drew are different. Yes, as Congressman Gutierrez himself said yesterday. Some people, he was referring to Latinos who were opposing STRIVE, see STRIVE as glass half-empty. Others as half-full.
I will want to be in the latter category anyday.
The objective of the meeting was to show support for STRIVE, I think we acheived that. If your expectation was that there will only be IV members in the group and the congressman would focus exclusively on that issue. Sorry for the disappointment, welcome to politics. Lets learn from this.
Also, most members think that only anti-immigrants oppose STRIVE. That is not true. Undocumented immigrants also oppose STRIVE. When someone says ,"oh the whole thing was regarding undocumented," well yes but you have to go deeper. Within that group, there are people who oppose STRIVE.
---
I think you mean the conclusions we drew are different. Yes, as Congressman Gutierrez himself said yesterday. Some people, he was referring to Latinos who were opposing STRIVE, see STRIVE as glass half-empty. Others as half-full.
I will want to be in the latter category anyday.
The objective of the meeting was to show support for STRIVE, I think we acheived that. If your expectation was that there will only be IV members in the group and the congressman would focus exclusively on that issue. Sorry for the disappointment, welcome to politics. Lets learn from this.
Also, most members think that only anti-immigrants oppose STRIVE. That is not true. Undocumented immigrants also oppose STRIVE. When someone says ,"oh the whole thing was regarding undocumented," well yes but you have to go deeper. Within that group, there are people who oppose STRIVE.
more...
logiclife
01-18 01:12 PM
This thread has be closed but the discussion is continued on the newer thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2939
Thanks.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2939
Thanks.
hair Dragon Dance Wallpaper by
amitjoey
11-07 05:18 PM
bump
more...
Macaca
04-04 04:08 PM
IEEE-USA has recently changed their site. Earlier their title was H1B visa. Now the title is Immigration Reform.
IEEE has a huge number of Indian, Chinese and Korean members. I would not be surprsied if > 50% members are immigrants.
I have not heard that Programmer's Guild/Lou Dobbs supports IEEE-USA or vice-versa. Please let me know if you have a reference.
IEEE has a huge number of Indian, Chinese and Korean members. I would not be surprsied if > 50% members are immigrants.
I have not heard that Programmer's Guild/Lou Dobbs supports IEEE-USA or vice-versa. Please let me know if you have a reference.
hot Baby Dance Live Wallpaper
thirdworldman
03-09 10:56 PM
Oh yeah, I know my bench sucks.
more...
house Kings Hot Dancer Wallpaper
SunnySurya
07-28 11:39 AM
Obviously, you are trying to incite religious feelings. What are getting at , take up arms and start hurting our neighbors.
It is not the need of the hour, nor this forum is the place to express those needs.
By the way, I also heard about the blast in Turkey, Iraq , a shoting in TN etc..
If everyone start following your advice, soon instead of asking for a green card, we would need to ask for a ration card.
I think this blog is stating fact. You did not hear 23 blasts in 24 hrs 50 killed. If not, then God Bless You. It is a need of hour for Hindus to wake up from there deep slumber.
It is not the need of the hour, nor this forum is the place to express those needs.
By the way, I also heard about the blast in Turkey, Iraq , a shoting in TN etc..
If everyone start following your advice, soon instead of asking for a green card, we would need to ask for a ration card.
I think this blog is stating fact. You did not hear 23 blasts in 24 hrs 50 killed. If not, then God Bless You. It is a need of hour for Hindus to wake up from there deep slumber.
tattoo fairies dance Wallpaper
bigboy007
06-11 11:11 AM
See below what Anti Immigrants are doing. Each and everyone visits this site should sign what IV have given the link
The following makes no sense it is utter non-sense.
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON�T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders� office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely
Called up my friends, forwarded to dozens of my friends and asked them to forward.
The following makes no sense it is utter non-sense.
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON�T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders� office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely
Called up my friends, forwarded to dozens of my friends and asked them to forward.
more...
pictures prom dance Wallpaper
rpat1968
12-28 11:20 AM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
I am on H1B with approved I140 and I was able to open a College savings (529) plan for my daughter. I told them that I am a non resident alien and my GC is in process. Also I was able to get Life and Variable Life insurance on my non immigrant status.
(FYI : The plan is brokered through Farmers. Investment company is Putnam Investments)
I am on H1B with approved I140 and I was able to open a College savings (529) plan for my daughter. I told them that I am a non resident alien and my GC is in process. Also I was able to get Life and Variable Life insurance on my non immigrant status.
(FYI : The plan is brokered through Farmers. Investment company is Putnam Investments)
dresses Tap Tap Dance wallpaper
logiclife
12-20 05:50 PM
If you were not laid off, it is fine. Technically you are out of status only when you are laid off. If company didn't pay you that is probably an issue for the company not you.
If you traveled out and came back to US with a proper visa stamping, your old "wrongdoings" are pardoned. That is what 245(k) is all about. If you are not filing your GC through the same employer, you are even better off.
Relax !
Your first paragraph is wrong. If you are not working, then you are out of status. Regardless of whether your employer formally terminated employment and formally cancelled your H1B. Out of status means staying in USA legally, but not doing what you are supposed to be doing. If you dont attend classes and go to college when on student visa, you are out of status even though you are legally present.
Your second paragraph, about "old wrongdoing" being pardoned, yes, 245(k) would clear that. However, if he had disclosed it, then yes, he would be in the clear.
Now keep in mind that everyone, goes out of job once in a while and is unemployed for 10-15 days or even a month during the course of time. Technically, that is out of status. But that doesnt mean everyone discloses it in their 485 form. Does that mean that everyone will get rejected ?
If you traveled out and came back to US with a proper visa stamping, your old "wrongdoings" are pardoned. That is what 245(k) is all about. If you are not filing your GC through the same employer, you are even better off.
Relax !
Your first paragraph is wrong. If you are not working, then you are out of status. Regardless of whether your employer formally terminated employment and formally cancelled your H1B. Out of status means staying in USA legally, but not doing what you are supposed to be doing. If you dont attend classes and go to college when on student visa, you are out of status even though you are legally present.
Your second paragraph, about "old wrongdoing" being pardoned, yes, 245(k) would clear that. However, if he had disclosed it, then yes, he would be in the clear.
Now keep in mind that everyone, goes out of job once in a while and is unemployed for 10-15 days or even a month during the course of time. Technically, that is out of status. But that doesnt mean everyone discloses it in their 485 form. Does that mean that everyone will get rejected ?
more...
makeup Download medium wallpaper of
justAnotherFile
07-24 01:23 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.
This must lie within the discretion of the USCIS but will need some lobbying because of no precedent of invoking it.
This is similar to the H1-B issue, previously apllication were accepted only on Oct 1, if the current year visas ran out. The USCIS made a policy change to accept applications for the next year starting April 1 in order to alleviate some problems regarding status etc.
Those of who who are inetersted in pursuing this furhter should write a 2-3 line question to USCIS in the below link. If there are enough questions on the same issue we may elicit a response.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
we can plan further action later.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
This must lie within the discretion of the USCIS but will need some lobbying because of no precedent of invoking it.
This is similar to the H1-B issue, previously apllication were accepted only on Oct 1, if the current year visas ran out. The USCIS made a policy change to accept applications for the next year starting April 1 in order to alleviate some problems regarding status etc.
Those of who who are inetersted in pursuing this furhter should write a 2-3 line question to USCIS in the below link. If there are enough questions on the same issue we may elicit a response.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
we can plan further action later.
girlfriend Scatter Dance Wallpaper HD by
gcdreamer05
03-09 12:34 PM
This is insane, they are moving 15 days in 1 calendar month.
So going by this pace for EB3
mar 2002 - march 2011
mar 2003 - march 2013
mar 2004 - march 2015
mar 2005 - march 2017
mar 2006 - march 2019
i will get gc on mar 2019 ? after 16 years of stay in USA ??? that total bull shit !!!!!!!!!!!!
So going by this pace for EB3
mar 2002 - march 2011
mar 2003 - march 2013
mar 2004 - march 2015
mar 2005 - march 2017
mar 2006 - march 2019
i will get gc on mar 2019 ? after 16 years of stay in USA ??? that total bull shit !!!!!!!!!!!!
hairstyles Kumble war dance wallpaper
GCBy3000
03-16 02:47 PM
Dude it is legal and why are you annoyed with people who play by rules. Though I did not use this eventhough I could, it does not mean I should hate who uses this law. I bet, if you had even a very thin chance of doing this one without jeopradizing your existing job and status, you would have gone for it.
You could do whatever is good for you within the limits of law. No matter what you do, always there will be some people who will not be happy for some reason.
The biggest problem is interfiling from EB3 to EB2. USCIS must not allow anyone to change categories and retain old priority dates. This is nothing short of cheating ! What about the people who have been standing in line. You can't just change the rules when they suit you and get into the middle of the line. Pathetic !
You could do whatever is good for you within the limits of law. No matter what you do, always there will be some people who will not be happy for some reason.
The biggest problem is interfiling from EB3 to EB2. USCIS must not allow anyone to change categories and retain old priority dates. This is nothing short of cheating ! What about the people who have been standing in line. You can't just change the rules when they suit you and get into the middle of the line. Pathetic !
vinod_gvk
09-26 11:58 AM
They Changed and uploaded it around 12.15PM
perm2gc
12-29 02:42 PM
It good to see some activity on the thread..Please carry on the advertising..we are near to our goal ..
Thks for all who have spent their valuable time on posting about IV.
Thks for all who have spent their valuable time on posting about IV.
