Indirant
01-31 08:22 PM
Hi,
Good work Varsha, are we having the conf call today let us know.
Thanks
Sekar
Good work Varsha, are we having the conf call today let us know.
Thanks
Sekar
wallpaper Holmes short hairstyle is
msyedy
06-13 11:12 AM
Hi, Senthil and Bugmenot
You said :They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b.
Now you agree that consulting will be there. So the bill have to be tweeked or else even small american companies will shut down.
ex bearing point....
Rule 2 of restriction - Company cannot hire 6 months before or after it has laid of a person.
Impossible to be applied.
(Big companies will be affected with this, small companies like CDI, ABC.. who might hire a H1-B on their pay roll but they let them go when they are not able to find a new client that they can place that person).
Rule 3 - You have to advertise before you get an H1-B might be allowed but ignored like L1 is ignored now.
I will show you how the merit based system have to change for EB in my next post.
Got to go...
I am not supporting consulting ban on h1bs. But even that happens companies will readjust by hiring permanent people. Also big consulting companies will bring more people by L1 and B1. I am working in a consulting company and they do not depend on H1bs though considerable H1bs are there.Still H1b Cap will be reached there is heavy demand for h1b. Also I do not think it is outright ban of H1Bs in consulting. They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b. It depends on how USCIS interprets the law. I hope Congress will not do if anything is bad for country. Infact same rule is there in L1 also. But still I am seeing persons are placed in client sites.
Of course anti immigrants are trying to block H1b program using this but congress trying this because abuses are more in consulting. When congress realizes this anytime they will remove this restriction if they find some other alternative.
Now chances of CIR is 30% and 60% chance of statusquo for another 2 years. Even skil bill is passed seperately same restrictions will come as same Senators will be there.
Some of abuses are
1. Not paying bench
2. Lower pay compared to market
3. illegal agreements
4. Rotation of people and using H1b for outsourcing(It is not abuse but it is not the purpose of H1b)
5. Giving ads for recruiting only H1bs
You said :They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b.
Now you agree that consulting will be there. So the bill have to be tweeked or else even small american companies will shut down.
ex bearing point....
Rule 2 of restriction - Company cannot hire 6 months before or after it has laid of a person.
Impossible to be applied.
(Big companies will be affected with this, small companies like CDI, ABC.. who might hire a H1-B on their pay roll but they let them go when they are not able to find a new client that they can place that person).
Rule 3 - You have to advertise before you get an H1-B might be allowed but ignored like L1 is ignored now.
I will show you how the merit based system have to change for EB in my next post.
Got to go...
I am not supporting consulting ban on h1bs. But even that happens companies will readjust by hiring permanent people. Also big consulting companies will bring more people by L1 and B1. I am working in a consulting company and they do not depend on H1bs though considerable H1bs are there.Still H1b Cap will be reached there is heavy demand for h1b. Also I do not think it is outright ban of H1Bs in consulting. They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b. It depends on how USCIS interprets the law. I hope Congress will not do if anything is bad for country. Infact same rule is there in L1 also. But still I am seeing persons are placed in client sites.
Of course anti immigrants are trying to block H1b program using this but congress trying this because abuses are more in consulting. When congress realizes this anytime they will remove this restriction if they find some other alternative.
Now chances of CIR is 30% and 60% chance of statusquo for another 2 years. Even skil bill is passed seperately same restrictions will come as same Senators will be there.
Some of abuses are
1. Not paying bench
2. Lower pay compared to market
3. illegal agreements
4. Rotation of people and using H1b for outsourcing(It is not abuse but it is not the purpose of H1b)
5. Giving ads for recruiting only H1bs
jackrabbit
07-17 11:01 AM
(2) H-1B salaries are tax-exempt - no FICA, no federal or state income taxes. They can live at the same level as tax-paying Americans at a lower cost. Therefore, Congress allows foreigners to "low-ball" American workers.
Does anyone know if we can sue them. I am sure that they are a registered organization.
Does anyone know if we can sue them. I am sure that they are a registered organization.
2011 short hairstyles for women
mpadapa
09-26 10:00 AM
Just wrote an email to the editor...Hopefully he learns and corrects the article..
more...
CSPAvictim
07-09 07:31 PM
1. In the first 3 quarters they are supposed to use 81%(3*27%) of 140,000 = 113400. They used up 140,000(which is not according to their regulation A).
2. Regarding clause B, in June they could have used 14000(from June) + 47400(Remaining quota from previous months i.e 113400- 66000) = 61400. They used 74000 in June(which is not according to their regulation B).
very well pointed out! maybe there is more to this than meets the eye, because the lawsuit doesn't seem to mention this violation. Or is there a remote possiblity that the lawyers havent done their math?:confused:
2. Regarding clause B, in June they could have used 14000(from June) + 47400(Remaining quota from previous months i.e 113400- 66000) = 61400. They used 74000 in June(which is not according to their regulation B).
very well pointed out! maybe there is more to this than meets the eye, because the lawsuit doesn't seem to mention this violation. Or is there a remote possiblity that the lawyers havent done their math?:confused:
.soulty
02-21 07:24 PM
yeah would be better to talk about this somewhere else, basically Lw is a really good app to those who are use to its interface, seperate modelling and layout style.
other than that you have the best out of the box rendering system in any 3d app and a very capable and quick particle system.
other than that you have the best out of the box rendering system in any 3d app and a very capable and quick particle system.
more...
nonimmi
03-07 11:17 AM
Someone said it takes about two months for G-28 to take effect. Sometime jobs changes may not allow that much time. So for that duration RFE or other documents may still go to last attorney. Is there a way to do it online or request for immediate transfer?
Also - if we represent self and later for some complex cases we need experienced attorney help do we need to file G-28 again?
Also - if we represent self and later for some complex cases we need experienced attorney help do we need to file G-28 again?
2010 Rihanna Short Hairstyles
greyhair
02-12 02:16 PM
hold on guys!!! i was the one who started this thread because i was not sure if ron was right or not but i guess seeing desi3933 comments that he is right and ron may not have the proof to justify this time.
it is good if we can get some proof of uscis wasting/not using visa but untill then please dont blame each other..
I feel the arguments desi3933 is giving.... makes most of the sense as compared to the last reply by ron which was like a general response instead of showing root cause of 13k visa lost.
peace V
Please let me clarify. This is not a question of ambiguity in the meaning of the message. Its crystal clear. One immigration body shop said that 13K visas are wasted by USCIS. It has been proven with facts that the statement made by immigration body shop is factually incorrect. Its not the first time. But you continue to ask others to look for proof of USCIS wasting visa numbers even after looking at the data. I am totally perplexed by the obsession with immigration body shop when repeatedly similar inflaming messages have been discredited in the public arena. :confused: When is enough, enough.
it is good if we can get some proof of uscis wasting/not using visa but untill then please dont blame each other..
I feel the arguments desi3933 is giving.... makes most of the sense as compared to the last reply by ron which was like a general response instead of showing root cause of 13k visa lost.
peace V
Please let me clarify. This is not a question of ambiguity in the meaning of the message. Its crystal clear. One immigration body shop said that 13K visas are wasted by USCIS. It has been proven with facts that the statement made by immigration body shop is factually incorrect. Its not the first time. But you continue to ask others to look for proof of USCIS wasting visa numbers even after looking at the data. I am totally perplexed by the obsession with immigration body shop when repeatedly similar inflaming messages have been discredited in the public arena. :confused: When is enough, enough.
more...
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
hair Short Pixie Hairstyles.
maddipati1
07-11 10:12 PM
the current 485 processing dates for both NSC and TSC are in July'07.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
which means, processing of all the 485's with a PD before July'07 are completed and ready to be assigned a visa number.
and now VISA numbers are available.
also, i heard abt namecheck ruling, they will give u GC even if ur 485 is stuck in namecheck, which was worst way of getting stuck for lot of guys.
so, every EB2-I with a PD before 01JUN06 will get a GC shortly.
140 pending, RFE, clerical error cases are exception to this.
these guys will definetely get GC in OCT'08.
surely they will make EB2-I unavailable in next month, coz, there are no more VISA #s available for this year,
but in OCT they will resume from 01JUN06 minus 'the guys whose PD is before 01JUN06 and their application processing is completed (140 approved, satisfied RFE etc ) '
it looks all good for EB2-I guys have fun.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
which means, processing of all the 485's with a PD before July'07 are completed and ready to be assigned a visa number.
and now VISA numbers are available.
also, i heard abt namecheck ruling, they will give u GC even if ur 485 is stuck in namecheck, which was worst way of getting stuck for lot of guys.
so, every EB2-I with a PD before 01JUN06 will get a GC shortly.
140 pending, RFE, clerical error cases are exception to this.
these guys will definetely get GC in OCT'08.
surely they will make EB2-I unavailable in next month, coz, there are no more VISA #s available for this year,
but in OCT they will resume from 01JUN06 minus 'the guys whose PD is before 01JUN06 and their application processing is completed (140 approved, satisfied RFE etc ) '
it looks all good for EB2-I guys have fun.
more...
kicca
09-28 02:21 PM
just found this interesting link about doing business in the world
http://www.doingbusiness.org/economyrankings/
it's on worldbank.org
http://www.doingbusiness.org/economyrankings/
it's on worldbank.org
hot Sarah Harding Short Hairstyles
sc3
10-16 01:49 PM
yesterday some one left a red saying "go and sleep in your bedroom or something like that" :D,
(which I find hilarious..because I don't exactly sleep on my couch :D:D)
then some left a green saying "nullifying red".
folks, I didn't leave a red for anyone (who cares abt them anyways)...don't assume immediately that I reacted.
giving either reds or greens will not impact anyone's gc process..or change their PDs!
Like itsnotfunny says, if you agree/disagree say it so. gave itsnotfunny a green to nullify the red.
let me reiterate though, that I am completely opposed to flower campaign because once bitten, twice shy.
USCIS has lot of autonomy and there is every likely of a repeat i.e july 07 part 2 as a reaction to gandhigiri part 2
instead focus on other avenues, there is an excellent thread on FOIA in addition to the other avenues
First: Disabuse yourself of the notion that Gandhigiri had anything to do with the backtrack of the July 07 fiasco. There were other more pressing (and effective) organizations that helped reverse the situation.
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
(which I find hilarious..because I don't exactly sleep on my couch :D:D)
then some left a green saying "nullifying red".
folks, I didn't leave a red for anyone (who cares abt them anyways)...don't assume immediately that I reacted.
giving either reds or greens will not impact anyone's gc process..or change their PDs!
Like itsnotfunny says, if you agree/disagree say it so. gave itsnotfunny a green to nullify the red.
let me reiterate though, that I am completely opposed to flower campaign because once bitten, twice shy.
USCIS has lot of autonomy and there is every likely of a repeat i.e july 07 part 2 as a reaction to gandhigiri part 2
instead focus on other avenues, there is an excellent thread on FOIA in addition to the other avenues
First: Disabuse yourself of the notion that Gandhigiri had anything to do with the backtrack of the July 07 fiasco. There were other more pressing (and effective) organizations that helped reverse the situation.
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
more...
house This hairstyle is short,
GCKaMaara
04-08 09:28 AM
I don't understand the IO calling Client part. What if (like most of us do) the person was traveling on a weekend? Is the client supposed to be on call for the IO?Besides, even if it is so, answering NO to that question implies fraud on behalf of the Client too.
IOs do call. Happened once in my company itself last month. But everything else was smooth after IOs call. The guy didn't have letter from my company about current job / employment.
IOs do call. Happened once in my company itself last month. But everything else was smooth after IOs call. The guy didn't have letter from my company about current job / employment.
tattoo Short Hairstyles 2009 | Pixie
sbabunle
01-02 12:51 AM
There are many ethnic TV channels in the USA. For instance Asianet is Kerala Channel. Sun TV is Tamil I guess. Can we think of doing advertisement on some of these channels? It could be expensive, but I think it would be worth trying....
more...
pictures 2010 Short Pixie Hairstyles,
prioritydate
09-20 10:06 AM
Now they are saying "Smartness" is a relative term.:)
Heeeee... I know what you mean.
Heeeee... I know what you mean.
dresses Short Pixie Bob Haircuts for
pappu
04-09 03:31 PM
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
more...
makeup Lauren Holly Short Pixie
brad_sk2
03-09 02:41 PM
If your kids were born in the US then maybe they will be able to file for you by then and that will be definitely faster than EB-3. :D
Hehe..nice one...and so true as well:(
Hehe..nice one...and so true as well:(
girlfriend A pixie is fun to custom
reddymjm
10-15 10:23 PM
You will receive one for your request please post here.
hairstyles new short hairstyles 2010
desi3933
05-26 05:18 PM
The applicant was found to be inadmissible pursuant to section 212(a(6)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), for falsely claiming to be a U.S. citizen.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/H4%20-%20Application%20for%20Reentry%20after%20Removal%2 0or%20Aggravated%20Felony%20Conviction/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Jun162008_07H4212.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/err/H4%20-%20Application%20for%20Reentry%20after%20Removal%2 0or%20Aggravated%20Felony%20Conviction/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Jun162008_07H4212.pdf
HV000
03-18 03:33 PM
Now with April VB out. Any chance of EB2 India moving further another 2 years to DEC 2005 Before October 2008?? Are there a lot of EB2 - INDIA applicants between DEC 03 - DEC 05??
sroyc
07-11 04:43 PM
There is a lot of hurtburn among folks here abt a lot of things...Does that mean USCIS is going to cater to every case of heartburn. I dont think so.
What else would explain EB2 China's PD going back to EB2 India's PD (April 2004) when visas from EB2-ROW were made available and then both PD's moving to June 2006 (which was EB2 China's PD before it became unavailable)?
They could have set it to March 2005 and it would have been enough to exhaust the remaining EB2-ROW visas left considering the number of EB2 India applicants in the backlog. The fact is that there are not enough EB2 China applicants left in 2003/2004/2005. The only way they can get a fair share of the EB2-ROW spillover was if PD's for both EB2 India and China were moved to 2006.
What else would explain EB2 China's PD going back to EB2 India's PD (April 2004) when visas from EB2-ROW were made available and then both PD's moving to June 2006 (which was EB2 China's PD before it became unavailable)?
They could have set it to March 2005 and it would have been enough to exhaust the remaining EB2-ROW visas left considering the number of EB2 India applicants in the backlog. The fact is that there are not enough EB2 China applicants left in 2003/2004/2005. The only way they can get a fair share of the EB2-ROW spillover was if PD's for both EB2 India and China were moved to 2006.
Post a Comment