javadeveloper
07-20 09:12 PM
IF you are in such a big hole, you will have to come forward and work for yourself. We want others to work for us and solve our problems. That is my issue here. With 11.25 K EB3 members we would have still collected quarter million bucks.(@ 25$/person) If EB3-I does not care for itself, why would anybody else give a damn? (PS : I did contribute for the drive as I want everybody's issues with respect to GC resolved, not just mine)
So, the original post still stands true.
Problem was ours (EB2 & EB3) and we fought together until EB2&EB3 dates were retrogressed.Now the problem is only for EB3s so EB3s only have to come forward and work for ourselves. Thank you Sir...
What I am saying is we(EB2&3) will fight together and you are saying that It's your problem and you(EB3) have to work for yourself.So do we have to start a new community called eb3immigrationvoice?
So, the original post still stands true.
Problem was ours (EB2 & EB3) and we fought together until EB2&EB3 dates were retrogressed.Now the problem is only for EB3s so EB3s only have to come forward and work for ourselves. Thank you Sir...
What I am saying is we(EB2&3) will fight together and you are saying that It's your problem and you(EB3) have to work for yourself.So do we have to start a new community called eb3immigrationvoice?
wallpaper love quotes and sayings with
samrat_bhargava_vihari
06-12 09:38 PM
Anybody who filed after 06/04/2007, got receipt#
I am just trying to see if NSC could go past the I-485 received on 06/01/2007. Many folks whose application was received the first day got receipt and receipt#. Is there anyone who applied later and got the receipt or receipt#.
we ( 5+6 dependents) applied on 5/31. Reached NSC on 6/1 but not yet received our notices.Hoping we will get them this week.
I am just trying to see if NSC could go past the I-485 received on 06/01/2007. Many folks whose application was received the first day got receipt and receipt#. Is there anyone who applied later and got the receipt or receipt#.
we ( 5+6 dependents) applied on 5/31. Reached NSC on 6/1 but not yet received our notices.Hoping we will get them this week.
dontcareanymore
07-28 12:48 AM
1) First of all this is not the response to just the quoted post, but many on the same lines, especially from delax and others.
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
2011 tattoo i love you so much
karthiknv143
09-28 02:35 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ace7ec20cfbd4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
more...
princeusa2006
02-14 03:17 PM
Contributed $50 by paypal Transaction ID: 040218399T855313L
sankar_203
04-21 10:32 AM
i guess ur fine. My collegue here won similar case in NJ. I am sure they'll pay u if u put little pressure on them. I would think twice before i report him to DOL & DHS only the reason being it might affect all other employees that are currently working for your previous company. If they don't pay u, i guess u have no choice to go for a fomal complaint.
more...
Carlau
06-18 10:48 AM
Mailed to NSC on: 1st June
Mailed From State: VA
Received at NSC on: June 4th
140 approved from : NSC
Receipt Date : Still Waiting
Cheque Not cashed as yet
Priority Date Sept 2002
Sanjeev: How do you know it was received by NSC on June 4th,is there on line reference? did you get a letter of recepit? DId your lawyer call them or you just checked the courier company on line receipt?
Mailed From State: VA
Received at NSC on: June 4th
140 approved from : NSC
Receipt Date : Still Waiting
Cheque Not cashed as yet
Priority Date Sept 2002
Sanjeev: How do you know it was received by NSC on June 4th,is there on line reference? did you get a letter of recepit? DId your lawyer call them or you just checked the courier company on line receipt?
2010 short i love you sayings.
imm_check
05-05 08:28 PM
Has any one in the forum here have a FP notice for a 4 and half year child during the 485 process. I ask this question as my daughter did not get one.
Feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
more...
reddymjm
06-15 10:27 AM
Receipts only recieved by lawyer? Will benefeciary get any updates?
My colleague sent it on JUN 7th and got his receipts in mail yesterday and the receipt date was Jun11th.
My colleague sent it on JUN 7th and got his receipts in mail yesterday and the receipt date was Jun11th.
hair short i love you sayings. i
desi3933
06-28 10:58 AM
On a practical note, if the company has sponsored H1Bs in the past, what justification can the company give for not filing another H1B ?
Many reasons. Pick any one of you choice.
1. Employer does not want file H-1B this year at all.
2. Employer already has 15% workforce on H-1B and does not want to become H-1B dependent employer.
3. This job is permanent and H-1B can be filed only for temporary jobs.
H-1B Specialty (Professional) Workers (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/h-1b.cfm) The H-1B program allows an employer to temporarily employ a foreign worker in the U.S. on a nonimmigrant basis in a specialty occupation or as a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability.
4. H-1B quota is over (if applicable) and employee is on F1 OPT.
5. In past, many H1-B has been rejected by USCIS for this job position.
6. The job does not qualify as specialty occupation under H-1B
All of these reasons are valid legal reasons. One more time, valid legal reasons.
Practically there are many ways a company can avoid hiring an H1B or GC if they want to. But the point is, as per law that is illegal.
Are you suggesting the employer is required, by law, to file for H-1B sponsorship for the job applicant?
Avoiding H-1B applicant is legal, whereas avoiding GC/EAD/OPT applicant isn't.
For argument sake, assuming if H-1B applicant can force employer to file H-1B and he/she was not picked because of his/her H-1B visa status, he/she has legal route of filing case against that employer. In this was true, there will be many attorneys eager to file such cases. But, alas, there is not even one such case.
Employer has choice of
1. Filing or not filing H-1B
2. Filing or not filing green card for the employee.
These are employer's choices. Legal choices.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Many reasons. Pick any one of you choice.
1. Employer does not want file H-1B this year at all.
2. Employer already has 15% workforce on H-1B and does not want to become H-1B dependent employer.
3. This job is permanent and H-1B can be filed only for temporary jobs.
H-1B Specialty (Professional) Workers (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/h-1b.cfm) The H-1B program allows an employer to temporarily employ a foreign worker in the U.S. on a nonimmigrant basis in a specialty occupation or as a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability.
4. H-1B quota is over (if applicable) and employee is on F1 OPT.
5. In past, many H1-B has been rejected by USCIS for this job position.
6. The job does not qualify as specialty occupation under H-1B
All of these reasons are valid legal reasons. One more time, valid legal reasons.
Practically there are many ways a company can avoid hiring an H1B or GC if they want to. But the point is, as per law that is illegal.
Are you suggesting the employer is required, by law, to file for H-1B sponsorship for the job applicant?
Avoiding H-1B applicant is legal, whereas avoiding GC/EAD/OPT applicant isn't.
For argument sake, assuming if H-1B applicant can force employer to file H-1B and he/she was not picked because of his/her H-1B visa status, he/she has legal route of filing case against that employer. In this was true, there will be many attorneys eager to file such cases. But, alas, there is not even one such case.
Employer has choice of
1. Filing or not filing H-1B
2. Filing or not filing green card for the employee.
These are employer's choices. Legal choices.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
rssb
11-17 04:29 PM
Done
hot makeup love you poems. short i
coldcloud
11-17 07:08 PM
Done.
more...
house hot i love you quotes for him.
sankap
07-10 12:57 PM
@desi3933:
Permanent means job that is for for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
This definition is only for researchers/academics in the document. Question is, why can't self-employment be called a "permanent" job? After all, that job is of indefinite or unlimited duration.
AC-21 is not just for changing GC employer.
Yes, AC-21 i not just for changing the GC employer. The Yates memo was published in 2001 with a few amendments later.
Do not confuse existing H-1B job with future GC job.
H-1B is linked to LCA (Temp Job) (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/h-1b.cfm) Note: The link clearly says
If all H-1B jobs are not permanent, then your definition that a "permanent job is for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration" fails. Please decide what you want to say.
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Permanent means job that is for for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
This definition is only for researchers/academics in the document. Question is, why can't self-employment be called a "permanent" job? After all, that job is of indefinite or unlimited duration.
AC-21 is not just for changing GC employer.
Yes, AC-21 i not just for changing the GC employer. The Yates memo was published in 2001 with a few amendments later.
Do not confuse existing H-1B job with future GC job.
H-1B is linked to LCA (Temp Job) (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/h-1b.cfm) Note: The link clearly says
If all H-1B jobs are not permanent, then your definition that a "permanent job is for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration" fails. Please decide what you want to say.
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
tattoo Love Quotes and Sayings 1
dixie
12-11 04:27 PM
Totally agreed that quota increase is controversial and an alternative approach must be agreed upon - 1932, CIR and now SKIL has taught us that bitter lesson. I am not by any means questioning the wisdom of going after the low-hanging fruits like 485 filing etc. All I am saying is - we cannot assume everything else remains the same. Things like 485 filing etc are our niche goals - no corporate interest is served by that and in a brutally capitalistic country thats a huge disadvantage.The fact is ANY relief, whether it includes quota increase or not, still takes a lot of lobbying and money to introduce all on its own strength.Yours and mine promotion/career prospects are the least of the lawmakers' worries, however non-controversial it may be and however deserving we may be. The need of the hour is to increase our membership base and contributions - lets face it, 200k in funds is not going to get us too far on our own steam. If 6000 of us could achieve so much in an year, imagine what 100k will do. That way we will be a credible enough force to be heard and respected. It still beats me how we have only 6000 odd members despite the dire situation that the majority of EB applicants find themselves in since 2001.
Most of the time we have to search for bills to attach our provisions anyways. The only problem is that right now all our provisions are either being labeled as "quota increase" or are being attached to "Quota Increase" bills. Try and remember S-1932, CIR and SKIL. AILA will always be after H1 Increase and so will Big Corps. Only this time instead of seperating ourselves as "EB only" we try to piggyback on either "Quota increase" bills OR we try and piggyback on just about ANY bill we can piggyback onto. Most of the times weird bills get combined (S1932 for example).
If 2006 has taught us anything it should be "Do NOT try and increase quotas and numbers". For starters it takes TOO long to do and there is MUCH more opposition from even the average American. Remember the IV Core telling us how the Anti-immigrant calls far outnumbered our calls during the Recent SKIL bill? Guys even the biggest Corps have been unsuccessful in getting Visa number increases. Do we honestly believe that with 6,000 members who are NOT a voting base (and may never be) + the lack of funds, we are going to do what these big guns have not been able to accomplish? Am I saying we should give up? HELL NO!! All I am saying is, it is time to review our strategy. Over and above all this, if we think that our current course will bring us victory then let the majority prevail.
Most of the time we have to search for bills to attach our provisions anyways. The only problem is that right now all our provisions are either being labeled as "quota increase" or are being attached to "Quota Increase" bills. Try and remember S-1932, CIR and SKIL. AILA will always be after H1 Increase and so will Big Corps. Only this time instead of seperating ourselves as "EB only" we try to piggyback on either "Quota increase" bills OR we try and piggyback on just about ANY bill we can piggyback onto. Most of the times weird bills get combined (S1932 for example).
If 2006 has taught us anything it should be "Do NOT try and increase quotas and numbers". For starters it takes TOO long to do and there is MUCH more opposition from even the average American. Remember the IV Core telling us how the Anti-immigrant calls far outnumbered our calls during the Recent SKIL bill? Guys even the biggest Corps have been unsuccessful in getting Visa number increases. Do we honestly believe that with 6,000 members who are NOT a voting base (and may never be) + the lack of funds, we are going to do what these big guns have not been able to accomplish? Am I saying we should give up? HELL NO!! All I am saying is, it is time to review our strategy. Over and above all this, if we think that our current course will bring us victory then let the majority prevail.
more...
pictures love you, girl! Glad you found
shantak
05-21 06:11 PM
i had biometric yesterday but no Lud yet until today .
when i will see LUD?
what is soft LUD and hard LUD?
Soft meaning just the date changes and not the message. Hard meaning even the online status message changes
when i will see LUD?
what is soft LUD and hard LUD?
Soft meaning just the date changes and not the message. Hard meaning even the online status message changes
dresses i love you quotes sayings,
anilsal
10-25 11:49 AM
Wonder if dems take the house, will they worry about the 2008 prez elections and not make major decisions?
more...
makeup What are sayings called that
chmur
07-26 11:59 PM
There is not much use for just fighting EB3-I. You can send a letter or lobbey and they will hear it. Thats all. There are so much discrepancies in immigration policy of USA(The impact is for just for potential immigrants not for the country) I do not think they will spend time to resolve each and every small discrepancy. There are more more severe issues in the country than resolving EB3-I. Of course that is a big issue for those who are impacted.
But the problem will be automatically resolved if STEM/and or Recapture bill is passed. That is a big picture and that will get more attention than just lobbying for EB3-I.
"There are more more severe issues in the country than resolving EB3-I"
True ... and so I guess there no issues more important in the country than to recapture visas for legal immigrants.
With your approach IV should just keep quiet and hope for the best.
Agreed Recapture will solve most of the problems but at the same time it has turned out to be the most difficult one to achieve since it requires a legislation change.
All the immigrant community should support IV in it's effort to recapture .
But I cannot understand your ilk who are adamant that the entire community should only focus on recapture and doing anything else is blasphemous and attach negative conotations like "infighting", "Splitiing" ....it's absurd.
Such utterances can poetentially hurt the recapture issue by alienating significant community size .
Why was this mantra,"Only Recapture nothing else", not preached
1. When IV sucessfully reversed USCIS decisions last July
2. Two year EAD's.
Recapture would have solved the above problems automatically to
But the problem will be automatically resolved if STEM/and or Recapture bill is passed. That is a big picture and that will get more attention than just lobbying for EB3-I.
"There are more more severe issues in the country than resolving EB3-I"
True ... and so I guess there no issues more important in the country than to recapture visas for legal immigrants.
With your approach IV should just keep quiet and hope for the best.
Agreed Recapture will solve most of the problems but at the same time it has turned out to be the most difficult one to achieve since it requires a legislation change.
All the immigrant community should support IV in it's effort to recapture .
But I cannot understand your ilk who are adamant that the entire community should only focus on recapture and doing anything else is blasphemous and attach negative conotations like "infighting", "Splitiing" ....it's absurd.
Such utterances can poetentially hurt the recapture issue by alienating significant community size .
Why was this mantra,"Only Recapture nothing else", not preached
1. When IV sucessfully reversed USCIS decisions last July
2. Two year EAD's.
Recapture would have solved the above problems automatically to
girlfriend in love sayings and quotes.
feedfront
08-30 12:34 PM
I've not seen approval from TSC this month. Good luck to all who are waiting and congratulations to all who got GC this month.
hairstyles love you sayings. Sayings
wellwisher02
03-29 01:33 PM
As proof of funds for landing, do we need to carry cashiers-checks etc or just a plain printout of bank-statement (INGDirect) is good enough?
Thanks.
Just carry your bank statements. No need to carry cash or cashier's checks.
Visit your bank's website, log into your bank savings/checking account and download your bank account statements.
Thanks.
Just carry your bank statements. No need to carry cash or cashier's checks.
Visit your bank's website, log into your bank savings/checking account and download your bank account statements.
chapper
08-13 05:20 PM
Congrats! Can you please tell us where your I140 was approved from. Are the checks cashed?
I got my I485 receipt notice today. Our applications are delivered on July 2nd.
Receipt Date: 07/02/07
Notice Date: 08/06/07
I got my I485 receipt notice today. Our applications are delivered on July 2nd.
Receipt Date: 07/02/07
Notice Date: 08/06/07
priti8888
12-18 07:30 PM
Some of my cousins and friends who are just leaving college (even the prestigious IIT's) are unwilling to come to the US.
If they do come here, they are reluctant to go after the "GC". They want to wait for a few years, and would embark upon the journey only if there are any "fixes" in the EB GC system.
If not, there are several developed countries that take point based immigrant visa applications and give you a decision in a year or two.
Most of these young friends have already made plans to apply to these countries. Those who qualify have already applied. In one case, a friend whose H1B did not go through last year, immigrated to Australia. (Both he and his wife also found a job in less than a month.)
2, I can appreciate your position. You have already spent several years here, and yet no decision in the sight. If possible, you could still create a fall-back option like Canada/UK/Australia. A PR in these countries might give us easier access come back to the USA later (although not permanently).
Both you and Jazz are geralizing.
Most people here are in IT and have IT friends back home.IITans and IIMs get the best opportunities in India. IT ppl even from ordinary universities have a great future.
But what about others? I have several friends who have a B.S,/ M.S / phd in chemistry, art, sociology, agriculture but have limited opportunities in India. They would love to explore oppotunities in US , Europe or any developed country.
India and other developing nations have other priorities. The government would rather help the poor or improve infrastucture then fund a research project.
If they do come here, they are reluctant to go after the "GC". They want to wait for a few years, and would embark upon the journey only if there are any "fixes" in the EB GC system.
If not, there are several developed countries that take point based immigrant visa applications and give you a decision in a year or two.
Most of these young friends have already made plans to apply to these countries. Those who qualify have already applied. In one case, a friend whose H1B did not go through last year, immigrated to Australia. (Both he and his wife also found a job in less than a month.)
2, I can appreciate your position. You have already spent several years here, and yet no decision in the sight. If possible, you could still create a fall-back option like Canada/UK/Australia. A PR in these countries might give us easier access come back to the USA later (although not permanently).
Both you and Jazz are geralizing.
Most people here are in IT and have IT friends back home.IITans and IIMs get the best opportunities in India. IT ppl even from ordinary universities have a great future.
But what about others? I have several friends who have a B.S,/ M.S / phd in chemistry, art, sociology, agriculture but have limited opportunities in India. They would love to explore oppotunities in US , Europe or any developed country.
India and other developing nations have other priorities. The government would rather help the poor or improve infrastucture then fund a research project.
No comments:
Post a Comment