mallu
02-16 03:20 PM
14% Asians Americans in US. (includes indians,chinese koreans, viatnamese, japanese etc)
I dont know about India and china specifically.
There are 2.7 million Indian americans in the U.S and 9.3 Chinese Americans.
You do the math.
Not sure if the totals include GC holders
What i would say is that if folks from a particular country is getting 'edge' in numbers , then the diversity axe should be applied. In that sense i was wondering whether the country quota applied is 'fair' ( i know what is fair is determined by the country which made the rules/laws/practices . ) to India,China .
I dont know about India and china specifically.
There are 2.7 million Indian americans in the U.S and 9.3 Chinese Americans.
You do the math.
Not sure if the totals include GC holders
What i would say is that if folks from a particular country is getting 'edge' in numbers , then the diversity axe should be applied. In that sense i was wondering whether the country quota applied is 'fair' ( i know what is fair is determined by the country which made the rules/laws/practices . ) to India,China .
wallpaper world war 2 map of germany.
GCKaMaara
04-07 10:52 AM
I would not say people are intentionally lying but fact accuracy deters when transferred from one mouth to another. I would only rely on first hand information.
uma001
10-06 09:11 AM
Congratulations...did you get the client letter to satisfy the new Employer-Employee relationship requirement. Was your H1B approved for just the duration of the project.
I gave purchase order between my employer and vendor. I prepared a letter with description of dutied and give it to lawyer, told him to attach it with the application. No RFEs approved in 15 days. I still need to receive I94 , so dont know how many years its approved.
How can I get client letter before I join in a project?.Its not extension. It is impossible to get letter from client. If you say to the client I need letter because I need it for H1 transfer, they will say 'sorry, we will look for another candidate'..
I gave purchase order between my employer and vendor. I prepared a letter with description of dutied and give it to lawyer, told him to attach it with the application. No RFEs approved in 15 days. I still need to receive I94 , so dont know how many years its approved.
How can I get client letter before I join in a project?.Its not extension. It is impossible to get letter from client. If you say to the client I need letter because I need it for H1 transfer, they will say 'sorry, we will look for another candidate'..
2011 world war 2 map of asia.
singhsa3
03-05 03:41 PM
Personally, I think you are not thinking clearly. If I really wanted a mortgage do you think I would have been writting on immigrationvoice.org
My motive is simple and straightforward. I am looking for points that I can use to convince lawmakers and media that American will gain AND not loose by supporting our cause.
I also plan to use the poll results during our upcoming meeting with lawmakers. If you have some better idea , which will enable me to use during such meetings, I am all ears.
I have sympathy for your position, I feel blessed that my situation and timing were more favorable.
The poll we are voting on was when did we plan to make a property purchase, my view and my opinion was that to me holding the green card wasn't the deciding factor.
I agree there is risk in property values and the ability to liquidate.
I acknowledge that your position is because of market conditions in the lending economy that have changed, in 1999 I got a mortgage after 3 months on H1b, and I know times have changed.
But obviously you attempted to consider buying property before your GC approval, because of your mortgage rejection...which is due to lender policy.
I thought the purpose of the poll was to measure the forums "plan and intention": when do you plan to buy a house?
Are you waiting for green card approval or are you buying before?
Perhaps it's an unfair question, because most people don't have the cash to just buy out right and are forced to borrow, at the lenders conditions.
The other economic question is about property values and real estate cycles. The two rules of real estate are "location, location, location" and "timing".
Then factor the security of your position.
At the end of the day as I see it we have to choices, we either rent accomodation or we buy.
It's up to all of us to make our own decision as to which route we wish to take and whether the cost of renting is the opportunity cost of buying.
So here's my question to you...if you could secure funding, would you buy or would you wait for GC approval?
Are you experiencing difficulty in securing a mortgage because you are not a green card holder? is a different question.
my best wishes and good luck to all
My motive is simple and straightforward. I am looking for points that I can use to convince lawmakers and media that American will gain AND not loose by supporting our cause.
I also plan to use the poll results during our upcoming meeting with lawmakers. If you have some better idea , which will enable me to use during such meetings, I am all ears.
I have sympathy for your position, I feel blessed that my situation and timing were more favorable.
The poll we are voting on was when did we plan to make a property purchase, my view and my opinion was that to me holding the green card wasn't the deciding factor.
I agree there is risk in property values and the ability to liquidate.
I acknowledge that your position is because of market conditions in the lending economy that have changed, in 1999 I got a mortgage after 3 months on H1b, and I know times have changed.
But obviously you attempted to consider buying property before your GC approval, because of your mortgage rejection...which is due to lender policy.
I thought the purpose of the poll was to measure the forums "plan and intention": when do you plan to buy a house?
Are you waiting for green card approval or are you buying before?
Perhaps it's an unfair question, because most people don't have the cash to just buy out right and are forced to borrow, at the lenders conditions.
The other economic question is about property values and real estate cycles. The two rules of real estate are "location, location, location" and "timing".
Then factor the security of your position.
At the end of the day as I see it we have to choices, we either rent accomodation or we buy.
It's up to all of us to make our own decision as to which route we wish to take and whether the cost of renting is the opportunity cost of buying.
So here's my question to you...if you could secure funding, would you buy or would you wait for GC approval?
Are you experiencing difficulty in securing a mortgage because you are not a green card holder? is a different question.
my best wishes and good luck to all
more...
Jaime
09-13 09:50 PM
PM me! We want to see as many of us in DC next Tuesday!!!! Let's go guys!!!!!
kkt_tkk
03-07 08:24 PM
Hi,
I am flying (to BWI) from MI, need accomodation during my stay.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
KKT
I am flying (to BWI) from MI, need accomodation during my stay.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
KKT
more...
andy garcia
01-26 09:40 AM
I had trouble sifting through all that data and figuring out what that was all about.
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
2010 Germany After World War II
CSPAvictim
07-09 06:53 PM
I have a question: If this is indeed an internal DOS regulation, which it most probably is, does it mean that DOS can make changes without sufficient notice to the applicants/public? Does the Administrative Procedures Act come into play in such a situation?
Remember this is internal DoS regulation and not a US Code or Law. They can change at any time and way they want to.
The whole law-suit is essentially about hardship caused to applicants in multiple dimensions with a sprinkling of violation of law (info on which is still quiet hazy )to give some back-bone to the argument in the law-suit!
Remember this is internal DoS regulation and not a US Code or Law. They can change at any time and way they want to.
The whole law-suit is essentially about hardship caused to applicants in multiple dimensions with a sprinkling of violation of law (info on which is still quiet hazy )to give some back-bone to the argument in the law-suit!
more...
retrohatao
02-15 05:00 PM
indi0617
Tried every thing:
1. Lawyer contacted USCIS. Waiting for security clearnace. USCIS does not expedite the issue
2. Contacted Congressman- nada
3. Contacted senetors - no help
4. E-mailed FBI- No reply
5. Faxed several letters- might have gone into trash bin
6. Sent snail mail. They have received it. Probably using the paper for various other uses.
That is the whole point to raise the issue in this forum, so that everyone in this forum aware of the problem.
You can not expedite it. You may sue, but never seen anyone doing that. It is such a hopeless ridiculous unresponsive process.
Mine is a very reputed industry. Does not matter who you are and whom you work for? They just do not care
Tried every thing:
1. Lawyer contacted USCIS. Waiting for security clearnace. USCIS does not expedite the issue
2. Contacted Congressman- nada
3. Contacted senetors - no help
4. E-mailed FBI- No reply
5. Faxed several letters- might have gone into trash bin
6. Sent snail mail. They have received it. Probably using the paper for various other uses.
That is the whole point to raise the issue in this forum, so that everyone in this forum aware of the problem.
You can not expedite it. You may sue, but never seen anyone doing that. It is such a hopeless ridiculous unresponsive process.
Mine is a very reputed industry. Does not matter who you are and whom you work for? They just do not care
hair Post+world+war+2+map+
jsb
08-20 10:05 AM
To understand the Visa bulletin, one must first understand that it is not the USCIS that computes or post VB, it is the DOS. DOS also considers those undergoing consular processing. In this case, the dates are in favor of those doing CP as we all know that most of those who are qualified to apply for AOS have already applied.
Retrogression is a CP-friendly event.
Can one initiate CP if so chosen in I-140, but already applied for AOS?
Retrogression is a CP-friendly event.
Can one initiate CP if so chosen in I-140, but already applied for AOS?
more...
GIDOC
07-13 11:03 PM
Different opinions have been expressed in this forum over Murthy's letter to DHS. I think any letter or noise helps the situation. When writing to congressmen and senators about our difficulties with the legal immigration system we can quote the letter to make the point. Legal immigration issues have long been ignored in this country. It is time for Legal Immigration issues to be in the limelight.
hot dresses use after World War II
rck4evr
09-10 02:25 PM
They just started talking about immigration. I can read the name clearly but I think its Zoe Lofgren. She is talking about a lady who was deported because of immigration issues.
more...
house After World War II,
gg_ny
08-16 01:13 PM
Hi, do you know how long it took them to clear name check? which EB category /country are you? Mine is stuck in name check and am trying to find some pattern and if possible, some solace.. thanks.
All my security check are cleared as per information from IO (by calling 4 times in last 4 months).
I am hoping that I will get GC by the end of this year.
All my security check are cleared as per information from IO (by calling 4 times in last 4 months).
I am hoping that I will get GC by the end of this year.
tattoo MAP OF GERMANY AFTER WORLD WAR
lazycis
12-21 10:03 PM
lazycis,
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
more...
pictures it was after WWII you
gbof
01-17 11:02 AM
I read your story (every line and every word) and portray my self in that but few small changes.
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
Read the post well before concluding and offer prayers
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
Read the post well before concluding and offer prayers
dresses busy post-World War II map
perm2gc
01-10 09:24 PM
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13914
more...
makeup makeup post-world war ii
jnraajan
03-17 05:00 PM
From the poll results for EB3 priority Dates, I think, I learned something. People waiting for Green Card Pre-PERM are way more than people Waiting POST-PERM. This is an approximate comparision(before Dec 2004 and after Dec 2004, though PERM started in Apr 2005.)
What I am trying to see is, Whether we can very little membership from people who started their GC process after Mar 2005. If that is the case, why those people are not joining IV? Believe it or not, They would also love to have their GC's right now. Something seems to be wrong. We should probably come up with some ways to target those people who are still waiting to file their I-485 or having their Labor Pending.
What do you all say?
What I am trying to see is, Whether we can very little membership from people who started their GC process after Mar 2005. If that is the case, why those people are not joining IV? Believe it or not, They would also love to have their GC's right now. Something seems to be wrong. We should probably come up with some ways to target those people who are still waiting to file their I-485 or having their Labor Pending.
What do you all say?
girlfriend hairstyles Post World War II
delhiguy
07-09 03:43 PM
I was surprised to see that nowhere it was mentioned that USCIS processed 25k petitions over the weekend (or nearly 60k in 2 weeks) as reported by some USCIS officials last week and in many cases broke their own regulations by approving several cases with pending background/name checks. That definitely sounds to me like a conspiracy against July filers....In my view, that should have been one of the strongest points we can use against USCIS. I dont think we have a case against DOS as they had to revise the bulletin as USCIS requested more than available Visa numbers and exhausted the quota.....Even Dr. Rice made it clear in her NBC interview from the DOS perspective that revision of visa bulletin caused an "inconvenience" to the petitioners....
I dont think legally you can sue someone, because they have worked harder.
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can be presented in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
I dont think legally you can sue someone, because they have worked harder.
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can be presented in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
hairstyles world war 2 wallpaper. post
vin
06-13 11:08 AM
I have seen this same footage months ago and to it don't look real, its cooked. Some facts there are just un-digestible like the gora guy will take job of a waiter immediately after working as senior exec. cmon market is not that bad unless he don't know anything else and don't have ability to get other similar job, then he should be fired anyways. and then that carlos guy, his dress up don't seems convincing that other execs will give me good response after presentation. its all cooked... showing 600k+ numbers are all bogus.
LOL. Come on man. No need to seriously justify so much! Looking at it, straightway anyone can make out that it was made to be a joke!
LOL. Come on man. No need to seriously justify so much! Looking at it, straightway anyone can make out that it was made to be a joke!
sanju
04-04 03:43 PM
You are confused on this. IEEE is against increase of H1B visas. They have never said anything about GCs. If they have, show me where.
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
myvoice23
08-07 12:03 PM
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
