walking_dude
09-19 01:07 PM
On the flight back I was watching LIES Dobbs on Communist Nativist Network...
Corrected.
On the flight back I was watching Lou Dobbs on CNN and they used a clipping from our rally and did a whole piece on illegal immigration without even mentioning the rally!! That is so typical of the media.
Corrected.
On the flight back I was watching Lou Dobbs on CNN and they used a clipping from our rally and did a whole piece on illegal immigration without even mentioning the rally!! That is so typical of the media.
wallpaper Phone Booth (2003)
mbawa2574
02-15 05:30 PM
Look, I don't want to enter a pissing match with anyone here. Go read your history (http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses) before jumping to conclusions.
Don't tell me that If I come from India, I don't assimilate with the local population. If you support the old colonist and racist mentality , you stand no where. If you are so afraid of competing with Chinese and Indians that you have to refer Black period of American history, then my friend you don't belong on this website. We don't represent any nationality here at IV but there is a good population of Indians and Chinese on this website and you don't wanna offend them with your racism. Again there is freedom of speech but you can take your a$$ to some anti-indian or anti-chinese blog if you want to release your bigotry.
Don't tell me that If I come from India, I don't assimilate with the local population. If you support the old colonist and racist mentality , you stand no where. If you are so afraid of competing with Chinese and Indians that you have to refer Black period of American history, then my friend you don't belong on this website. We don't represent any nationality here at IV but there is a good population of Indians and Chinese on this website and you don't wanna offend them with your racism. Again there is freedom of speech but you can take your a$$ to some anti-indian or anti-chinese blog if you want to release your bigotry.
frostrated
09-09 03:09 PM
For those of you thinking that EB3I will move forward once EB2 becomes current in the next year or so, please think again.
There are many EB2 I & C waiting to file their AOS applications. Anyone that missed the 2007 and 2008 windows, are eagerly waiting to file. It is estimated that there are a few thousand primary applicants in EB2 alone, each year from 2007 to 2010.
As a result, it is very unlikely that EB3 I will advance apart from its annual allocation of approximately 2800 visas. At the current rate, it will be three years before EB3 I 2002 is cleared, and many more years for the other years. In the meantime, there will be more applicants in EB2 category, thereby preventing your applications from being approved.
The options that lie before you are the passage of CIR, removal of country limits (which again is invariably tied to CIR), porting to EB2. The only option that is within your control is porting.
I would highly suggest that you use that option rather than rely on a change in law - a law that we have seen being dangled before us like a carrot for the past four years.
If you have been given a promotion or even offered one, take that. Contrary to what someone says about not being able to use experience in your current company, that is wrong to a certain extent. Experience in your current company in your current position cannot be used. But, experience in a different position in the same company can be used as experience to your EB2 status.
Take your promotion, and have the employer file a new labor petition. During the I-140 stage, port your EB3 priority date to your EB2 petition, and pretty much your 485 will be approved along with your 140, if not a few weeks after that (provided your PD is current).
Good luck in your porting. If you decide to wait until EB3I becomes current without porting, you are going to wait for a long time. I would suggest that anyone with a PD of Jan 2003+ to start your porting process. For the others, I'd suggest you wait it out as in the time it takes to do the porting, your 485 in EB3 will be approved.
There are many EB2 I & C waiting to file their AOS applications. Anyone that missed the 2007 and 2008 windows, are eagerly waiting to file. It is estimated that there are a few thousand primary applicants in EB2 alone, each year from 2007 to 2010.
As a result, it is very unlikely that EB3 I will advance apart from its annual allocation of approximately 2800 visas. At the current rate, it will be three years before EB3 I 2002 is cleared, and many more years for the other years. In the meantime, there will be more applicants in EB2 category, thereby preventing your applications from being approved.
The options that lie before you are the passage of CIR, removal of country limits (which again is invariably tied to CIR), porting to EB2. The only option that is within your control is porting.
I would highly suggest that you use that option rather than rely on a change in law - a law that we have seen being dangled before us like a carrot for the past four years.
If you have been given a promotion or even offered one, take that. Contrary to what someone says about not being able to use experience in your current company, that is wrong to a certain extent. Experience in your current company in your current position cannot be used. But, experience in a different position in the same company can be used as experience to your EB2 status.
Take your promotion, and have the employer file a new labor petition. During the I-140 stage, port your EB3 priority date to your EB2 petition, and pretty much your 485 will be approved along with your 140, if not a few weeks after that (provided your PD is current).
Good luck in your porting. If you decide to wait until EB3I becomes current without porting, you are going to wait for a long time. I would suggest that anyone with a PD of Jan 2003+ to start your porting process. For the others, I'd suggest you wait it out as in the time it takes to do the porting, your 485 in EB3 will be approved.
2011 Pushed phone booth 2 wiki
caydee
04-22 01:04 AM
Quite a few number of ppl from IV attended and i do hear that some good things are going on in the background, esp with the Congressman's Guiterrez's office...Hopefully something good will happen for all of us out this....
Overall, the turnout was good. And the audience was very involved. The thing that impressed me the most was the resolve I saw in the Congressman.
The Congressman's speech also covered both family and employment based immigration issues and this, in my opinion, justifies the association of the term "Comprehensive" with the STRIVE bill. This bill, being comprehensive in nature, deserves broad-based support. I am sure we all can do our part to ensure that this happens.
Overall, the turnout was good. And the audience was very involved. The thing that impressed me the most was the resolve I saw in the Congressman.
The Congressman's speech also covered both family and employment based immigration issues and this, in my opinion, justifies the association of the term "Comprehensive" with the STRIVE bill. This bill, being comprehensive in nature, deserves broad-based support. I am sure we all can do our part to ensure that this happens.
more...
Hermione
09-26 10:44 AM
[QUOTE=BharatPremi;173398]Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.[QUOTE]
Yeah, and everyone is out there to get you.
Honestly, I think it is a waste of time to try to educate Americans what is what in immigration system. We need to push for our issues by proving why it is a good thing for the country, and not get caught up in this vs that. OK, so you convince the editor that the rally was not about H1Bs. All he will do is wack the sentence about the rally out of the article, because now it does not refer to the topic of the article, which is about H1 visas. Would that be an achievement? Hardly.
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.[QUOTE]
Yeah, and everyone is out there to get you.
Honestly, I think it is a waste of time to try to educate Americans what is what in immigration system. We need to push for our issues by proving why it is a good thing for the country, and not get caught up in this vs that. OK, so you convince the editor that the rally was not about H1Bs. All he will do is wack the sentence about the rally out of the article, because now it does not refer to the topic of the article, which is about H1 visas. Would that be an achievement? Hardly.
alisa
01-20 02:15 AM
Man....
You guys (from India) are in a really really terrible situation.
First column shows the year. Second one estimates applicants for GC from India. Third (Years to Clear) one divides backlog by 10000 to estimate the number of years needed too clear that backlog, assuming 10000 visa numbers released per year. Fourth (Year cleared) adds that number to the Year column to give the year you can get your GC. Finally, assuming that AC21 added a year's worth of supply of visa numbers, a year is taken out from the final estimate.
Also dependents are not included in the calculations. Send them back.
Here is how I estimated backlogs. Backlogs for 2001 and 2002 are taken from jungalee43 posting.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
For years 2003 and forward,
a) 65000 applicants for H-1 assumed
b) 40 percent of these assumed to be Indians (26000)
c) 75 % of these 26000 assumed to have applied for and made it past the I-140 stage, i.e. 19500 added annually since 2003.
d) Each year, 10000 visa numbers allotted to Indians. (Assumption: Indians don't have any dependents. If you want to include dependents, 2001 backlog clears in 2023, and 2006 backlog clears in 2055)
Here are the results.
Year Backlog YTC YC AC21
2001 123194 12.3194 2012 2011
2002 160274 16.0274 2016 2015
2003 169774 16.9774 2016 2015
2004 179274 17.9274 2020 2019
2005 188774 18.8774 2020 2019
2006 198274 19.8274 2024 2023
2007 207774 20.7774 2024 2023
2008 217274 21.7274 2028 2027
2009 226774 22.6774 2028 2027
2010 236274 23.6274 2032 2031
Feel free to improve on this.
I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
You guys (from India) are in a really really terrible situation.
First column shows the year. Second one estimates applicants for GC from India. Third (Years to Clear) one divides backlog by 10000 to estimate the number of years needed too clear that backlog, assuming 10000 visa numbers released per year. Fourth (Year cleared) adds that number to the Year column to give the year you can get your GC. Finally, assuming that AC21 added a year's worth of supply of visa numbers, a year is taken out from the final estimate.
Also dependents are not included in the calculations. Send them back.
Here is how I estimated backlogs. Backlogs for 2001 and 2002 are taken from jungalee43 posting.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
For years 2003 and forward,
a) 65000 applicants for H-1 assumed
b) 40 percent of these assumed to be Indians (26000)
c) 75 % of these 26000 assumed to have applied for and made it past the I-140 stage, i.e. 19500 added annually since 2003.
d) Each year, 10000 visa numbers allotted to Indians. (Assumption: Indians don't have any dependents. If you want to include dependents, 2001 backlog clears in 2023, and 2006 backlog clears in 2055)
Here are the results.
Year Backlog YTC YC AC21
2001 123194 12.3194 2012 2011
2002 160274 16.0274 2016 2015
2003 169774 16.9774 2016 2015
2004 179274 17.9274 2020 2019
2005 188774 18.8774 2020 2019
2006 198274 19.8274 2024 2023
2007 207774 20.7774 2024 2023
2008 217274 21.7274 2028 2027
2009 226774 22.6774 2028 2027
2010 236274 23.6274 2032 2031
Feel free to improve on this.
I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
more...
ajju
03-15 08:47 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?
Most of these guys were stuck in backlog.. Welcome to the world of USCIS/DOL/DHS... Some would be Name Check victims too.. Though not many.. But a lot in backlog... Plus labor substitution...
And when finaly most 2003 filed in July 2007 and had dates current for next 3 months.. The Processing was taking atleast 6 months...
I seriosly hope that not may atleast with 2003 PD.. and dates should move to 2004 and beyong soon.. and this is practically possible...
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?
Most of these guys were stuck in backlog.. Welcome to the world of USCIS/DOL/DHS... Some would be Name Check victims too.. Though not many.. But a lot in backlog... Plus labor substitution...
And when finaly most 2003 filed in July 2007 and had dates current for next 3 months.. The Processing was taking atleast 6 months...
I seriosly hope that not may atleast with 2003 PD.. and dates should move to 2004 and beyong soon.. and this is practically possible...
2010 British phone booths
ashkam
07-28 12:31 PM
Pray, how is displaying Ganesha on a beer bottle akin to opposing Hinduism?
And if that's so, isn't having a beer genre called "India Pale Ale" akin to opposing Indians?
Getting offended has turned into a national pastime. Get a hobby instead, will you?
And if that's so, isn't having a beer genre called "India Pale Ale" akin to opposing Indians?
Getting offended has turned into a national pastime. Get a hobby instead, will you?
more...
gc28262
06-11 01:28 PM
If you really believe that this bogus bill will become a Law, then also see the real picture, that is why I posted the other Ifs.
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Please fill in your profile !
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Please fill in your profile !
hair Phone Booth
moonrah
07-01 10:32 PM
Online petition is a great idea. But what will it accomplish?? Ultimately all those questions have to addressed in the form of a bill and that needs to be passed in the Congress. Is it a coincidence, we already have a bill HR5921 addressing those questions raised by OP All we need to do is channel our energy to make this bill along with the other Rep. Lofgren bills a success.
IV is already raising all those questions mentioned in the petition with the lawmakers. So what is new in this petition?
Even after thousands of calls, what if they don't pass the bill? I am not pessimistic but I want to have this pass desparately. Lets think about all the possibilities and have solutions or atleast plan for all of those. Just think about this, if someone files a lawsuit on us, we will be sweating and running here and there even though we know we are gonna win. lawsuit will make them think, make them spend money. Trust me nobody wants to go through that husstle. And if we win, they have no way but do something about per country quota limit whether congress passes the bill or not. On the downside, if we loose, they can worsen the situation for us in which case they have to face anger from business community and during election season, goverment wouldn't like to do that.
All I am saying is if we have a case we should pursue it. Otherwise there is no point of fighting loosing battle.
IV is already raising all those questions mentioned in the petition with the lawmakers. So what is new in this petition?
Even after thousands of calls, what if they don't pass the bill? I am not pessimistic but I want to have this pass desparately. Lets think about all the possibilities and have solutions or atleast plan for all of those. Just think about this, if someone files a lawsuit on us, we will be sweating and running here and there even though we know we are gonna win. lawsuit will make them think, make them spend money. Trust me nobody wants to go through that husstle. And if we win, they have no way but do something about per country quota limit whether congress passes the bill or not. On the downside, if we loose, they can worsen the situation for us in which case they have to face anger from business community and during election season, goverment wouldn't like to do that.
All I am saying is if we have a case we should pursue it. Otherwise there is no point of fighting loosing battle.
more...
whiteStallion
09-10 04:27 PM
i guess they were very happy that they discussed the horse issue and they decided to take a well deserved break...as for 5882 who cares, as one poster mentioned, the horses are US citizens and they support the economy by eating grass. Republicans are happy because legal horses will be eating legal grass as opposed to illegals cutting and shipping grass to the horses. Democrats will be happy because the horses are well looked after.
Nice humour!
Nice humour!
hot English red phone booth Vector
kondur_007
04-10 10:28 AM
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
more...
house YELLOW PHONE BOOTH
apahilaj
02-21 02:32 PM
Please note:PERM Audit very aggressive with EB2 since last couple of months. Just to keep in mind
Till how long can they audit the PERM once it's approved? Just curious.
Till how long can they audit the PERM once it's approved? Just curious.
tattoo Starring colinbuy phone booth
ashatara78
03-10 04:38 PM
The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
more...
pictures Rests an abandoned phone booth
at0474
12-21 07:56 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.
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.
dresses Funny phone booth photo
EkAurAaya
09-26 03:10 PM
Dear Reader,
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
In response to....
"Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the
situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the
U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill."
Above statement is totally wrong! you are seriously misguiding readers by your above statement... the rally was for clearing up backlog of petitions filed
for Green Cards not for increasing H1b. You should really contact the source, in this case Immigration Voice to learn what was the rally about. info@immigrationvoice.org
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
In response to....
"Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the
situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the
U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill."
Above statement is totally wrong! you are seriously misguiding readers by your above statement... the rally was for clearing up backlog of petitions filed
for Green Cards not for increasing H1b. You should really contact the source, in this case Immigration Voice to learn what was the rally about. info@immigrationvoice.org
more...
makeup Phone Booth
Ineedsleep
01-29 02:41 PM
at last something Im not embarassed to submit!! like the 25 line code contest :hugegrin:
girlfriend Red phone booth - Canadian
pappu
01-16 12:10 PM
I just updated the profile. Could you please confirm?
Sorry about making a commitment for only @ 20.00.
Thanks again for all the effort done by IV Core.
Thanks.
We confirm your contribution commitment for $20 per month. Each $20 is important for us.
Sorry about making a commitment for only @ 20.00.
Thanks again for all the effort done by IV Core.
Thanks.
We confirm your contribution commitment for $20 per month. Each $20 is important for us.
hairstyles phone booth 2003
immi2006
02-22 07:26 PM
Hi,
I called USCIS today, i was asked to take infopass to get a status update on my case, as it was pending in local office. I am not sure why.
My PD is 2001 March, from Dallas BEC - LC cleared on June 2007. Filed 140+485 on July 2. In my company atleast 400 - 500 number of EB2 cases came thru in June 2007, there were a few hundred lcs from BEC for EB3 too..from 2000-2001 time frame, based on some of the threads I have seen. We are one of the largest networking company in San Jose, here. I am sure there are other companoies that have good number of folks, also depends on how many stuck on..
Filed my 10 th year H1 extension,
PD March 2001
EB2 - Category - Adv Degree
Country - India
Degree - Research IIT/IISc Bangalore.
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
I called USCIS today, i was asked to take infopass to get a status update on my case, as it was pending in local office. I am not sure why.
My PD is 2001 March, from Dallas BEC - LC cleared on June 2007. Filed 140+485 on July 2. In my company atleast 400 - 500 number of EB2 cases came thru in June 2007, there were a few hundred lcs from BEC for EB3 too..from 2000-2001 time frame, based on some of the threads I have seen. We are one of the largest networking company in San Jose, here. I am sure there are other companoies that have good number of folks, also depends on how many stuck on..
Filed my 10 th year H1 extension,
PD March 2001
EB2 - Category - Adv Degree
Country - India
Degree - Research IIT/IISc Bangalore.
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
copsmart
07-12 05:55 PM
:D I don't know what to say. But, keep your Fingers, Toes, Arms and Legs crossed.
Good Luck!!!
All right I am current again..exactly after 2 years
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
Good Luck!!!
All right I am current again..exactly after 2 years
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
485Mbe4001
09-11 11:58 AM
wow..they resume discussions on sept 18th?
Here is the info from NumbersUSA:
Vote on Foreign-Worker Bills Postponed Amid Growing Opposition
Updated Thursday, September 11, 2008, 10:00 AM
The House Judiciary Committee yesterday postponed consideration of bills containing massive foreign worker increases (H.R. 5882 and H.R. 5924) after the committee's debate stalled during discussions on the armed forces amnesty bill (H.R. 6020). The committee is expected to resume consideration of all three bills on September 18
Here is the info from NumbersUSA:
Vote on Foreign-Worker Bills Postponed Amid Growing Opposition
Updated Thursday, September 11, 2008, 10:00 AM
The House Judiciary Committee yesterday postponed consideration of bills containing massive foreign worker increases (H.R. 5882 and H.R. 5924) after the committee's debate stalled during discussions on the armed forces amnesty bill (H.R. 6020). The committee is expected to resume consideration of all three bills on September 18
Post a Comment