apt29
11-11 05:00 PM
Is there any IV member in DC willing take up this task, while we work on document?
The next step is really to get an appointment with the official. We can get signatures/representation much easily.
The next step is really to get an appointment with the official. We can get signatures/representation much easily.
wallpaper johnny knoxville interview
forever_waiting
02-11 05:17 PM
Just a friendly thought from a co-member, If you are motivated to attend the advocacy event, why dont you consider sponsoring your travel? We should try to keep the donated miles/hotel points for on-the-edge members who we will have to try convince at the last moment when we closer to April.
Motivated members who believe in this event should come forward and sponsor themselves and consider it as a contribution to the event. We are not doing anyone else a favor by travelling to DC - this is for our own good.
-Attending the advocacy day.
I will attend the event. I want someone to sponsor my airfare and stay.
Motivated members who believe in this event should come forward and sponsor themselves and consider it as a contribution to the event. We are not doing anyone else a favor by travelling to DC - this is for our own good.
-Attending the advocacy day.
I will attend the event. I want someone to sponsor my airfare and stay.
ashishgour
09-10 02:03 PM
Guess they had an extended lunch session...!!! Finally back..but no discussion yet...
2011 Johnny Knoxville is HOT!
logiclife
12-27 12:08 PM
was visiting India after 5 years..the visa on my passport expired in 2003.. no transit visa.. had the new Visa document with me though.. missed the connecting KLM flight in Amsterdam & the next available flight was the following day.. the Airline staff went through my Visa document & gave me a 24-hr transit Visa & did put me up @ a hotel outside the Airport.. 'twas a blessing in disguise as I could tick AMS off my 'to visit' list..
So you were in Amsterdam for 1 day. ;) Did you visit any of the legal hesh bars? (Just kiddin).
So you were in Amsterdam for 1 day. ;) Did you visit any of the legal hesh bars? (Just kiddin).
more...
virtual55
07-05 01:16 PM
Yes I aggree. I think we have reached a stage where there are at least around 1000 members who flock to IV, when they need help on any GC related issue.
Why not make IV paid membership? IV core team's work and persistance has made this site an integral part of all GC apsirants' lives.
Peole value this site/it's opinions etc. There is nothing wrong in make them pay for it ONLY because we are on so shoestring budget. Our efforts can be more fruitful if core is having enough funds at disposal.
Those who care about IV efforts ,who care about themselves and GC will definitely join and those who wanted this site to be non paid will realize and will also join as paid members later on.
Why not make IV paid membership? IV core team's work and persistance has made this site an integral part of all GC apsirants' lives.
Peole value this site/it's opinions etc. There is nothing wrong in make them pay for it ONLY because we are on so shoestring budget. Our efforts can be more fruitful if core is having enough funds at disposal.
Those who care about IV efforts ,who care about themselves and GC will definitely join and those who wanted this site to be non paid will realize and will also join as paid members later on.
amitjoey
01-18 12:36 PM
I've been following this Forum daily for more than
two years and never seen any achievement by Core group or
their lobbysts!
Why should I contribute this time?
Thanks
The question to ask is what should/can I do to help the core with this effort.
Not be a arm-chair critic. I know, you seem to be just frustrated, I am sure you are not questioning the core and their efforts. This is our year and we are going to be successfull this year. Nothing meaningfull can be achieved without struggle.
two years and never seen any achievement by Core group or
their lobbysts!
Why should I contribute this time?
Thanks
The question to ask is what should/can I do to help the core with this effort.
Not be a arm-chair critic. I know, you seem to be just frustrated, I am sure you are not questioning the core and their efforts. This is our year and we are going to be successfull this year. Nothing meaningfull can be achieved without struggle.
more...
himu73
07-02 07:34 AM
Hope you understand this is not the only issue we are concerned. If you feel this organization is not for you , why are you browsing here. Keep away. This is not the time we need negative energy like you.
i can say only one thing..IV willl not be able to do anythingin this regard.USCIS can do anything whatever the way hat want to do.
i can say only one thing..IV willl not be able to do anythingin this regard.USCIS can do anything whatever the way hat want to do.
2010 Convinced his that johnny
lazycis
12-20 08:54 PM
I think so. I went in an out of country 4 times. 2 Indian trips and 2 Canadian trips.
That's just another proof. A person who accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence is inadmissible into the US (at least for 3 years).
That's just another proof. A person who accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence is inadmissible into the US (at least for 3 years).
more...
sprash
01-30 01:51 PM
Hi had an RFE when my dates were not current. Here is the scan of my RFE notice.
Hope the scan helps you prepare in advance the necessary documentation.
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b337/sprash/RFEMine.jpg
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b337/sprash/RFEWife.jpg
I had discussed this in the following thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=296497#post296497
My *guess* is that the revoking of previous H1b has triggered this RFE --- When my wife's previous employer canceled her H1b it took a few months before her already approved h1b petition was reopened (as per USCIS online).
The suspense must be terrible!
Good luck.
Hope the scan helps you prepare in advance the necessary documentation.
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b337/sprash/RFEMine.jpg
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b337/sprash/RFEWife.jpg
I had discussed this in the following thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=296497#post296497
My *guess* is that the revoking of previous H1b has triggered this RFE --- When my wife's previous employer canceled her H1b it took a few months before her already approved h1b petition was reopened (as per USCIS online).
The suspense must be terrible!
Good luck.
hair Johnny Naomi and Madison at
paskal
07-03 09:13 PM
If this is true, then everyone who thinks this is unfair must write letters to USCIS, Ombudsman, WH etc
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
more...
logiclife
12-21 10:28 PM
You should've thought about this that whole year that you were goofin' off! Why are you bringing this up at this late juncture, anyway? Your PD is Dec, 2004. What makes you your petition will trigger an RFE for not working during 2001? You raise a very perplexing and contradicting query...
Hey, take it easy big guy/gal.
You are acting as if instead of being gainfully employed, he was sitting around and playing golf or something and that put him out of status.
Go easy on the judging part, coz you could be goofing off for a while too and if you are goofing off for a while, its not like after a week of goofing off, you are going to throw in the towel and take the next plane back home. In a country that has employed and harbored 11 million illegals, who dont even have a passport, those who are legally present and 'goofing off' for a while between 2 legitimate jobs that require excrutiating process of h1 sponsorship are the least of anyone's problems. In fact, the section 245(k) says that it is OK to goof off as long as goofing off is less than 180 days. And if the goofing off was before your last entry into usa, it doesnt even matter, regardless of whether it was less than 180 or more than 180 days. If US CONGRESS legitimizes, who are you to be the bigger judge.
IF the economy tanks, then a lot of us will be 'goofing off' in 2008 and 2009.
When someone is 'goofing off', that someone is concerned about paying the rent, managing to buy groceries and borrowing money off of credit cards to pay the bill, and during the 'goofing off' people dont sit by on a bench and think..."hmm...what will happen when I file my 485 and will this 'goofing off' hurt me at the time".
Hey, take it easy big guy/gal.
You are acting as if instead of being gainfully employed, he was sitting around and playing golf or something and that put him out of status.
Go easy on the judging part, coz you could be goofing off for a while too and if you are goofing off for a while, its not like after a week of goofing off, you are going to throw in the towel and take the next plane back home. In a country that has employed and harbored 11 million illegals, who dont even have a passport, those who are legally present and 'goofing off' for a while between 2 legitimate jobs that require excrutiating process of h1 sponsorship are the least of anyone's problems. In fact, the section 245(k) says that it is OK to goof off as long as goofing off is less than 180 days. And if the goofing off was before your last entry into usa, it doesnt even matter, regardless of whether it was less than 180 or more than 180 days. If US CONGRESS legitimizes, who are you to be the bigger judge.
IF the economy tanks, then a lot of us will be 'goofing off' in 2008 and 2009.
When someone is 'goofing off', that someone is concerned about paying the rent, managing to buy groceries and borrowing money off of credit cards to pay the bill, and during the 'goofing off' people dont sit by on a bench and think..."hmm...what will happen when I file my 485 and will this 'goofing off' hurt me at the time".
hot Johnny Knoxville and Steve-O
malaGCPahije
12-10 03:57 PM
Do some population control in India and China, that would automatically fix the issue of retrogression. We are simply too many and we have clogged the system real bad. every 6th person on the face of this earth is Indian.
every 4'th person on this earth is a chinese. The obvious conclusion given the 2 facts (6'th person as Indian and 4'th as Chinese) is that every 4'th person on this earth is a chinese, every 6'th person an Indian and every 12'th person is an Indian Chinese :-).
I know, bad joke...The only thing we can do is support IV, and I mean financially more so than anything else.
every 4'th person on this earth is a chinese. The obvious conclusion given the 2 facts (6'th person as Indian and 4'th as Chinese) is that every 4'th person on this earth is a chinese, every 6'th person an Indian and every 12'th person is an Indian Chinese :-).
I know, bad joke...The only thing we can do is support IV, and I mean financially more so than anything else.
more...
house Johnny Knoxville Just Married!
GCHope2011
07-02 01:18 AM
To senators..
tattoo Johnny+knoxville+wife+2010
feedfront
10-12 04:11 PM
I got the RFE. Its says that the civil surgeon did not attach the copy of the radiologist report to form I-693. It needs the report on an official letterhead.
It also says that I don't need to take another medical exam for this.
I've contacted the Doctor's office and asked them for the same. Did you get the same RFE?
Thanks,
That's better. Collect the radiologist's report and send them at the earliest. Make sure your attorney sends it to addressed mentioned in the letter. Someone's attorney in this forum used FedEx's service (sent to non-PO Box address) and took longer time to reach right department.
As I said earlier, my doctor was not in USCIS's current list. So, I had to redo everything. My status has changed to 'Respone to RFE review'
It also says that I don't need to take another medical exam for this.
I've contacted the Doctor's office and asked them for the same. Did you get the same RFE?
Thanks,
That's better. Collect the radiologist's report and send them at the earliest. Make sure your attorney sends it to addressed mentioned in the letter. Someone's attorney in this forum used FedEx's service (sent to non-PO Box address) and took longer time to reach right department.
As I said earlier, my doctor was not in USCIS's current list. So, I had to redo everything. My status has changed to 'Respone to RFE review'
more...
pictures Johnny Knoxville - Behind The
spicy_guy
08-11 11:44 AM
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
You put it out well from your side.
BTW, are you really 2007 EB3 I? Do you have a guesstimate on when you would get GC?:rolleyes:
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
You put it out well from your side.
BTW, are you really 2007 EB3 I? Do you have a guesstimate on when you would get GC?:rolleyes:
dresses Johnny Knoxville and Bam
Legal
08-13 04:08 PM
I think thats AC21 recapture thing...
AC 21 numbers all have been used up some in 2002, some in 2005-2007. Nothing left from that. This was in a USCIS document that vdlrao posted some time ago.
AC 21 numbers all have been used up some in 2002, some in 2005-2007. Nothing left from that. This was in a USCIS document that vdlrao posted some time ago.
more...
makeup Johnny Knoxville: Baby #3 On
little_willy
10-15 06:14 PM
Nixtor - In the poll question you talk about providing your receipt number but I don't see any mentions about that in the document. Do you expect us to include our receipt # with this request. Please clarify.
girlfriend Johnny Knoxville
mdcowboy
06-10 07:42 PM
sent it to my friends too..this bill is ridiculous!:mad:
hairstyles Johnny Knoxville Expecting
Ramba
03-17 11:08 AM
Between 2001 and 2004 all EB catagories were current for all countries (thanks to AC21 visa recapture). No one, (particularly Indians) cared about EB3 and EB2, till DOS indicated in Dec 2004 visa bulliton that EB3 India will retrogress in Jan 2005. Till that point (dec 2004) most of the labor filed are EB3 (75% is EB3 and 25% may be EB2). After Jan 2005, the filings were reverse. After Jan 2005, everyone tried to file EB2, unless they are not absolutly qualified for EB2. Till recent months, DOL was very liberal in approving LC with EB2 qualifications. Now it is difficult. Therefore EB2 India will move fast till Dec-2004 (unless most EB3 guys did not convert to EB2, by PD porting). After DEC-2004 it will be very-very slow.
Jaime
09-10 12:54 PM
There are thousands
alisa
01-27 09:25 AM
I am glad you posted this.
I will put the numbers in the excel spreadsheet and see what comes out.
But these might give more sensible results than the preposterous wait times that we were getting.
If the average depletion rate for India is 34K per annum, then the wait times would look a lot better I think.
I am assuming that these numbers include the dependents. So, if 34K adjustment of status were awareded, then, roughly speaking, there were 17K primary applicants, and 17K dependents? Am I correct?
Also, for the accumulation rate, when we say that 65K H-1 visas are given out annually, I am assuming that does not include the dependents. Am I right??
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
I will put the numbers in the excel spreadsheet and see what comes out.
But these might give more sensible results than the preposterous wait times that we were getting.
If the average depletion rate for India is 34K per annum, then the wait times would look a lot better I think.
I am assuming that these numbers include the dependents. So, if 34K adjustment of status were awareded, then, roughly speaking, there were 17K primary applicants, and 17K dependents? Am I correct?
Also, for the accumulation rate, when we say that 65K H-1 visas are given out annually, I am assuming that does not include the dependents. Am I right??
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
Post a Comment