texanmom
09-26 11:40 AM
Please deluge both the author (Eilene Zimmerman) and the editor with emails pointing out the misrepresentation of IV's agenda.
Using words like 'defamatory' , "unethical reporting" and 'misrepresentation' catches their attention since they are always afraid of law suits.
Using words like 'defamatory' , "unethical reporting" and 'misrepresentation' catches their attention since they are always afraid of law suits.
wallpaper Cristiano Ronaldo-Ronaldo-CR7-
GCBy3000
01-18 03:06 PM
I dont understand where they will deport you if you do not have any immigration documents? By default to mexico?... :) This office does not know anything...
Well, this is NOT a cooked up story. This happened to me yesterday at Harlingen (HRL) Texas airport.
On January 16, 2008, I went to Mexico for H1-B visa stamping at Matamoras US consulate. I got my H1-B visa stamped and returned to Brownville, Texas.
On January 17, 2008, I was at Harlingen (HRL), Texas airport for my final destination.
One of the TSA security personnel�s is in process of verifying my ticket before proceeding to security check. As every one knows, we must present one of the government issued PHOTO-ID to them to clear the security check. I have shown my driver license and he has cleared the security check (name check).
I was about to proceed further for security screening; mean while, a Police Officer came to me and asked me following questions.
Sir, are you a US citizen?
I said, No
Then, he asked me, can I see your immigration documents.
I have shown my passport to the police officer.
He looked at H1-B visa and I-94 and asked me; who do you work for?
I said my employer�s name.
Later, he gave me my passport back.
Now,
I have asked the Police Officer few questions
1. Sir, I�m in domestic traveling, is it mandatory to carry my immigration documents at all times?
Police Officer said, as per the US LAW, all non-immigrants must carry immigration documents and passport at all times.
2. What would you have done to me, if I had failed to present my passport?
Police office said, I could have DEPORTED you.
3. Sir, it is not possible for any one to carry passport at all times. Could the LAW allow me to carry photo copies of my passport and immigrations documents?
Police office said, No. Technically, you must carry original documents at all times.
I would advice you to carry Passport at all times.
I did not know this until Police Officer told me about this LAW.
P.S: BTW, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) level is in �ORGANE�.
Well, this is NOT a cooked up story. This happened to me yesterday at Harlingen (HRL) Texas airport.
On January 16, 2008, I went to Mexico for H1-B visa stamping at Matamoras US consulate. I got my H1-B visa stamped and returned to Brownville, Texas.
On January 17, 2008, I was at Harlingen (HRL), Texas airport for my final destination.
One of the TSA security personnel�s is in process of verifying my ticket before proceeding to security check. As every one knows, we must present one of the government issued PHOTO-ID to them to clear the security check. I have shown my driver license and he has cleared the security check (name check).
I was about to proceed further for security screening; mean while, a Police Officer came to me and asked me following questions.
Sir, are you a US citizen?
I said, No
Then, he asked me, can I see your immigration documents.
I have shown my passport to the police officer.
He looked at H1-B visa and I-94 and asked me; who do you work for?
I said my employer�s name.
Later, he gave me my passport back.
Now,
I have asked the Police Officer few questions
1. Sir, I�m in domestic traveling, is it mandatory to carry my immigration documents at all times?
Police Officer said, as per the US LAW, all non-immigrants must carry immigration documents and passport at all times.
2. What would you have done to me, if I had failed to present my passport?
Police office said, I could have DEPORTED you.
3. Sir, it is not possible for any one to carry passport at all times. Could the LAW allow me to carry photo copies of my passport and immigrations documents?
Police office said, No. Technically, you must carry original documents at all times.
I would advice you to carry Passport at all times.
I did not know this until Police Officer told me about this LAW.
P.S: BTW, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) level is in �ORGANE�.
Dhundhun
07-12 09:28 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20141
Somebody with Nov05 PD tried to renew EAD and was given a 3 month EAD.......
Use of "01" instead of "10" has been common mistake by USCIS. I came across couple of such cases. This is typo error and they will fix it.
Somebody with Nov05 PD tried to renew EAD and was given a 3 month EAD.......
Use of "01" instead of "10" has been common mistake by USCIS. I came across couple of such cases. This is typo error and they will fix it.
2011 Cristiano Ronaldo-Smile
ItIsNotFunny
10-15 02:14 PM
Please explain, What is the space limitation issue on IV as login? In that case, I should have some :confused:
more...
GCard_Dream
12-13 11:37 AM
We should be able to submit this question to the lawyer's conference call organized by IV and see what's their take is on this. I wonder what the procedure is to submit the question. I have never done that before.
reedandbamboo
09-11 08:38 AM
I am in for this. Is this something that can be a planned effort rather than a impulsive exercise?
I think we should -
1) Wait till this session of the Congress gets over.
2) Form a work group that will chalk out the plan (of efforts).
3) Execute the planned efforts.
Efforts could include things like -
1) Discussing the proposal with supporting Senators like Zoe Lofgren.
2) Making conscious efforts to publicize our woes and genuine issues / conditions.
3) Quantify the benefits of our presence - in evidence of a quantified evidence, idiots like Loo Dog, etc. can't refute that much.
4) Talk to organizations like Lazaras (or some org.) form a more cosmopolitan group including Chinese and others as well.
5) Letter campaign in mass to all Congressmen's offices telling them the sad story about waiting for 8-10 years.
6) Any other efforts that CORE comes up with.
Planned & focused efforts always yield desired results... I believe so.
Others, please chime in.
-A.
A,
There are some of us at this thread that are trying to address the latest retrogression and highlight USCIS inefficiency at this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340&page=2
Could we get together and put together our grievances? My letter to the Ombudsman (pending editing and re-writing) focuses on the random nature of approvals and the back and forth movements of the Visa Bulletin.
Please comment!!
Thanks.
I think we should -
1) Wait till this session of the Congress gets over.
2) Form a work group that will chalk out the plan (of efforts).
3) Execute the planned efforts.
Efforts could include things like -
1) Discussing the proposal with supporting Senators like Zoe Lofgren.
2) Making conscious efforts to publicize our woes and genuine issues / conditions.
3) Quantify the benefits of our presence - in evidence of a quantified evidence, idiots like Loo Dog, etc. can't refute that much.
4) Talk to organizations like Lazaras (or some org.) form a more cosmopolitan group including Chinese and others as well.
5) Letter campaign in mass to all Congressmen's offices telling them the sad story about waiting for 8-10 years.
6) Any other efforts that CORE comes up with.
Planned & focused efforts always yield desired results... I believe so.
Others, please chime in.
-A.
A,
There are some of us at this thread that are trying to address the latest retrogression and highlight USCIS inefficiency at this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340&page=2
Could we get together and put together our grievances? My letter to the Ombudsman (pending editing and re-writing) focuses on the random nature of approvals and the back and forth movements of the Visa Bulletin.
Please comment!!
Thanks.
more...
Ramba
07-09 07:44 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
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...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
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...
2010 cristiano ronaldo real madrid
a_yaja
01-16 09:49 PM
How can you pan to live long term without being a resident is something I don't understand..
I am assuming that by this you mean "long term plans without having a GC". While it might be difficult to imagine setting roots in this country without a GC, it also means that for some reason you think that the GC will be denied and so you don't want to set roots in this country.
If you don't think your GC will be denied, I don't see any problem in making long term plans and setting roots here while waiting for the GC. It is going to happen - it is just a matter of time.
I am assuming that by this you mean "long term plans without having a GC". While it might be difficult to imagine setting roots in this country without a GC, it also means that for some reason you think that the GC will be denied and so you don't want to set roots in this country.
If you don't think your GC will be denied, I don't see any problem in making long term plans and setting roots here while waiting for the GC. It is going to happen - it is just a matter of time.
more...
shaxami
04-05 09:23 AM
has anybody contacted senator office or congress person office on this issue. They are sometimes very helpful in handling matters of red-tape.
hair Cristiano Ronaldo - CR7
MDix
02-08 03:42 PM
There is always chance of waste of visas, but i guess CIS is doing ok job from last two years.
more...
HV000
03-19 01:26 PM
My understanding is that at the time of approval, priority date of the petition must be in accordance with current visa bulletin for visa number availability.
In short, in my opinion..the answer is NO
Wouldn't they atleast get pre-adjudicated if NOT approved??
In short, in my opinion..the answer is NO
Wouldn't they atleast get pre-adjudicated if NOT approved??
hot -Cristiano Ronaldo
simple1
05-12 02:53 PM
http://www.geteducated.com/online-college-ratings-and-rankings/best-buy-lists/best-buy-mba-regional
http://www.geteducated.com/online-college-ratings-and-rankings/best-buy-lists/best-buy-online-masters-mba-aacsb
accreditation check
http://ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Search.aspx
http://www.geteducated.com/online-college-ratings-and-rankings/best-buy-lists/best-buy-online-masters-mba-aacsb
accreditation check
http://ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Search.aspx
more...
house More Wallpapers on 22.03.2009
sid3699
09-16 10:16 PM
My H1B visa stamp has expired, but I have the approval papers extending my H1B until Jan 2011. My company filed for bankruptcy. Another company bought parts of my company (not the entire company) in which I work. So I got absorbed by the buyer.
What happens to my visa? Does the new company have to file for an amended petition? If so, how long does that take?
I have to travel to India in two months. If they file the petition and I travel out of the country before I get the approval, will that be safe?
Thanks very much.
What happens to my visa? Does the new company have to file for an amended petition? If so, how long does that take?
I have to travel to India in two months. If they file the petition and I travel out of the country before I get the approval, will that be safe?
Thanks very much.
tattoo Football Star Cristiano
goel_ar
08-08 09:47 AM
I work at one of these companies & they applied for my GC.
more...
pictures Cristiano Ronaldo Wallpaper So
unknown123
03-12 02:14 AM
I support.. I've contributed earlier and will contribute again.
I think we should first raise awareness on the problem like I-485 pending for more than 2 years for more than xxx applicants, who played by the rules, paid taxes, etc......
Visa re-capture is one (or may be the only one) solution of above problem.
Just my thought
I think we should first raise awareness on the problem like I-485 pending for more than 2 years for more than xxx applicants, who played by the rules, paid taxes, etc......
Visa re-capture is one (or may be the only one) solution of above problem.
Just my thought
dresses cristiano-ronaldo-wallpaper-
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
more...
makeup cristiano ronaldo fotos
dakajo
12-21 10:07 PM
You should've thought about this that whole year that you were goofin' off! Why are you bringing this up at this late juncture, anyway? Your PD is Dec, 2004. What makes you your petition will trigger an RFE for not working during 2001? You raise a very perplexing and contradicting query...
girlfriend ronaldo cristiano real madrid
webm
03-17 01:14 PM
Category: EB3 India
PD: Oct 2001
140 AD:Sep,2005
485 RD:06/25/2007
PD: Oct 2001
140 AD:Sep,2005
485 RD:06/25/2007
hairstyles cristiano ronaldo wallpaper 2009. cristiano ronaldo real madrid
va_dude
05-26 04:32 PM
carrying your gc is understandable, its just a card like your license.
But expecting folks to carry their immigration papers all the time, even when they haven't travelled abroad is a bit too much. As long as i have my license or state id with me, it should suffice.
This is just a classic case of harassing immigrants.
But expecting folks to carry their immigration papers all the time, even when they haven't travelled abroad is a bit too much. As long as i have my license or state id with me, it should suffice.
This is just a classic case of harassing immigrants.
Jerrome
07-12 05:28 PM
I feel this move is to benefit EB-2 China, Since the EB1 and EB2 overflow are evenly distributed across china and india, keeping PD with 2004 would be a loss for china and gain for India. So by keeping 2006 June, USCIS will have enough visa numbers for China . India's share will be consumed by 2004 and 2005 applicants.
Even if India's PD is going to be in 2006 mid, this would result some adhoc or lucky one in 2006 getting GC than a majority of applicants. PD for india would move back to 2004 or 2005 by october 08.
If USCIS follows the same rule again then by next year end the PD for India will move.
This is my guess.
Even if India's PD is going to be in 2006 mid, this would result some adhoc or lucky one in 2006 getting GC than a majority of applicants. PD for india would move back to 2004 or 2005 by october 08.
If USCIS follows the same rule again then by next year end the PD for India will move.
This is my guess.
imh1b
11-12 04:26 PM
If EB2 I becomes current , who benefits its EB3 I as the spillover will go EB3 India as India is the most retrogressed country. Our effort does not impact ROW EB2 as they are current any way. EB2 China will also benefit as spill over will help them. So supporting quarterly spillover is in EB3 India's. Make EB2 C and all over flow goes to EB3 I. Finally by opposing this it will not help EB3 I any way unless it makes you happy to see everybody suffer as long as you are suffering.
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
0 comments:
Post a Comment