hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:54 PM
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
Do you know that July 1st was a Sunday? A non-working day.
my 2 cents...
Do you know that July 1st was a Sunday? A non-working day.
wallpaper how did twin towers collapse.
imh1b
12-23 03:51 PM
Anyone filed a lawsuit yet? Someone please update.
There was one guy who was planning to do hunger strike some time back. Did he actually do it?
Or are we all waiting for the next visa bulletin?
There was one guy who was planning to do hunger strike some time back. Did he actually do it?
Or are we all waiting for the next visa bulletin?
crazyghoda
01-30 11:31 AM
Hello all,
A few days ago I started a thread where laid off folks can post their qualifications and people who know of job openings can let them know.
Unfortunately, yesterday I received an email saying that an RFE was raised about my 485. My PD is Sept 2005 in EB3. WTH is my case being processed now? I saw in some other threads also that people with further off PDs are getting RFEs. Can someone shed some light on what the RFE may be about?
I used AC21 earlier last year after completing 180 days of filing 485 and got a new H1 approved. My 140 is approved and my previous employer has not revoked it. They only revoked the H1 and that too about 7 months ago. My new (now ex) employer hasnt revoked my H1 yet.
How long does it take for the RFE to come? I suppose it will goto my old company's lawyer though they are nice folks and will let me know.
A few days ago I started a thread where laid off folks can post their qualifications and people who know of job openings can let them know.
Unfortunately, yesterday I received an email saying that an RFE was raised about my 485. My PD is Sept 2005 in EB3. WTH is my case being processed now? I saw in some other threads also that people with further off PDs are getting RFEs. Can someone shed some light on what the RFE may be about?
I used AC21 earlier last year after completing 180 days of filing 485 and got a new H1 approved. My 140 is approved and my previous employer has not revoked it. They only revoked the H1 and that too about 7 months ago. My new (now ex) employer hasnt revoked my H1 yet.
How long does it take for the RFE to come? I suppose it will goto my old company's lawyer though they are nice folks and will let me know.
2011 how did twin towers collapse.
eb3retro
08-20 11:39 AM
My kids are 7 & 9. Our fingerprinting and photo date is this Saturday Aug 25.
My child is 6 1/2 years old and not sure why they didnt send a FP notice for the child.
My child is 6 1/2 years old and not sure why they didnt send a FP notice for the child.
more...
abhijitp
07-28 02:02 AM
Copying from the reply I posted here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=133404#post133404
I consulted a high profile ($200 per 15 minutes) lawyer to discuss this issue. 1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got today.
Thanks
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=133404#post133404
I consulted a high profile ($200 per 15 minutes) lawyer to discuss this issue. 1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got today.
Thanks
RaviG
07-05 01:56 PM
Why don't IV put a sticker next to paid member Id? That might inspire people.
more...
neelu
12-13 01:01 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
2010 what year did twin towers collapse. how did twin towers collapse.
Jaime
09-11 01:12 PM
This aint my fight... This aint your fight..
THIS IS OUR FIGHT!!!
We need to come together & let our voices be heard!!!
Come to DC...
There is very little time & lots to achieve...
There are miles to go before I sleep.....Well said! This is OUR fight! Let's go guys! EVERYONE TO DC!!!!
THIS IS OUR FIGHT!!!
We need to come together & let our voices be heard!!!
Come to DC...
There is very little time & lots to achieve...
There are miles to go before I sleep.....Well said! This is OUR fight! Let's go guys! EVERYONE TO DC!!!!
more...
dealsnet
03-19 08:17 AM
See Ron Gotcher's Immigration news letter.
http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf
http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf
hair what year did twin towers
gceverywhere
09-26 10:12 AM
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.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Whether it was ignorance or a planned move, I agree with you that IV must talk to CNN and ask them to re-publish that article with the correct information.
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.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Whether it was ignorance or a planned move, I agree with you that IV must talk to CNN and ask them to re-publish that article with the correct information.
more...
vamsi_poondla
09-26 12:36 PM
Excellent coordination...
hot what year did twin towers
tnite
08-15 04:39 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
Not bad for EB2 India/China ,the dates are the same as june bulletin
Not bad for EB2 India/China ,the dates are the same as june bulletin
more...
house what year did twin towers
Ennada
12-10 01:36 PM
Easy boys and girls. We will need to stay united to win this. Cool it and enjoy the holiday season. :)
tattoo what year did twin towers collapse. how did twin towers collapse.
flresident
04-08 11:36 AM
I went to India for vacation in Dec end, 2008 and came back on Jan end, 2009.
This was my 4th trip in 8 years.
POE: Atlanta with my wife and 2 kids.
process was lengthy but lady officer was very nice, usual questions, no issue at all.
I renewed my H1b stamp in India also. same. usual questions about my job and visa. some questions to my wife also for H4 renewal. No issue at all.
I hope this helps (in calming down) guys who are visiting india. No need to panic if your documents are ok.
This was my 4th trip in 8 years.
POE: Atlanta with my wife and 2 kids.
process was lengthy but lady officer was very nice, usual questions, no issue at all.
I renewed my H1b stamp in India also. same. usual questions about my job and visa. some questions to my wife also for H4 renewal. No issue at all.
I hope this helps (in calming down) guys who are visiting india. No need to panic if your documents are ok.
more...
pictures TWIN TOWERS plane crash
aroranuj
12-11 07:01 PM
Here is my receipt number... NRC2008063637
Lets hope all our efforts help...
Lets hope all our efforts help...
dresses FACT: The Twin Towers did not
mlvats
06-10 06:22 PM
My wife is working with a company "A" in India and have filed for H1 through a company "B" in USA.
Currently she does not have any VISA.
Can her current company "A" apply for L1 and she can come to USA on L1?
And suppose she can come to US on L1 through company "A", What happens if her H1 gets approved through Company "B", Can she still continue
working for Comapny "A".?
Thanks in Advance.
-Moti
Currently she does not have any VISA.
Can her current company "A" apply for L1 and she can come to USA on L1?
And suppose she can come to US on L1 through company "A", What happens if her H1 gets approved through Company "B", Can she still continue
working for Comapny "A".?
Thanks in Advance.
-Moti
more...
makeup house how did twin towers
gc_lover
07-24 01:46 PM
Can anyone confirm if the files are actually being transferred from Nebraska to Texas? Why is the compliance date for Texas 10/26 and for Nebraska it's 8/1.
Why would files be transferred from NSC to TSC. Didn't USCIS issue instructions to file everything at NSC. Life is getting more complicated each day.
Why would files be transferred from NSC to TSC. Didn't USCIS issue instructions to file everything at NSC. Life is getting more complicated each day.
girlfriend what year did twin towers collapse. how did twin towers collapse.
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
hairstyles what year did twin towers collapse. the Twin Towers collapse
grinch
03-07 07:43 PM
Aw darn!
It's alright nirvana, yet I think the only people in this right now are me, sun, eilsoe, and spark?
It's alright nirvana, yet I think the only people in this right now are me, sun, eilsoe, and spark?
justAnotherFile
12-30 07:18 PM
...
Also posted on yahoo groups page.
Also posted on yahoo groups page.
waiting4gc
07-05 01:43 PM
Order Details - Jul 5, 2007 11:09 AM PDT
Google Order #448537035986231 Print
Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Contribute 100 $100.00
Total: $100.00
Google Order #448537035986231 Print
Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Contribute 100 $100.00
Total: $100.00
Post a Comment