mlvats
06-10 10:18 PM
thanks very much
wallpaper Hot girls tattoos! Tattoo
eb3_nepa
07-05 01:43 PM
How is it different from my idea?
Who said it was different. I liked ur idea and went ahead and enhanced it a little bit more.
Who said it was different. I liked ur idea and went ahead and enhanced it a little bit more.
GreenLantern
03-15 12:30 PM
A robot would be cool. I would do that.
2011 Tribal Tattoo. Tribal Tattoo
senthil1
06-12 03:10 PM
If no H1b restrictions then mostly lottery for new H1b for every year( I think 115k is not enough as Consulting companies will rush to get the quota on first day) unless unlimited H1b was given. Lottery is very bad for good companies. Best way is to put restrictions only for new H1bs and exclude from extensions and transfers.
If people think that after CIR fails, we will have a better chance of getting favorable provisions with some other Bill or on coat tails of appropriation bills, it could be a risky gamble.
However, looking at the mood of Senate there is a very good chance that post-CIR we might be thrown a curve ball with some hard line H1B restrictions and fee increases extracted from almost passed CIR. So opposing CIR due to H1 alone is not the best strategy.
CIR is on the table because there are lot of interests driving its existence. If Compete America and us(IV) cannot drive in a small amendment into a popular bill like this, it would be a big blow. Is there enough bite in the coalition to create our own bill or fight an anti-H1 wave out there? That's up for judgement.
My point is, please do not assume H1B status quo will stay that way even if CIR fails. Like someone pointed out in these forums, big Corporations might enlist these anti-consulting restrictions/fee increases and use as compromise to increase H1 numbers(even post CIR).
And we thought life was tough now, imagine paying 10K for every H1 extension and not being able to consult and status quo on current GC system still place. Thats a hair raising thought for me.
If people think that after CIR fails, we will have a better chance of getting favorable provisions with some other Bill or on coat tails of appropriation bills, it could be a risky gamble.
However, looking at the mood of Senate there is a very good chance that post-CIR we might be thrown a curve ball with some hard line H1B restrictions and fee increases extracted from almost passed CIR. So opposing CIR due to H1 alone is not the best strategy.
CIR is on the table because there are lot of interests driving its existence. If Compete America and us(IV) cannot drive in a small amendment into a popular bill like this, it would be a big blow. Is there enough bite in the coalition to create our own bill or fight an anti-H1 wave out there? That's up for judgement.
My point is, please do not assume H1B status quo will stay that way even if CIR fails. Like someone pointed out in these forums, big Corporations might enlist these anti-consulting restrictions/fee increases and use as compromise to increase H1 numbers(even post CIR).
And we thought life was tough now, imagine paying 10K for every H1 extension and not being able to consult and status quo on current GC system still place. Thats a hair raising thought for me.
more...
ashwin_27
07-01 03:47 PM
I think the new reference # for the Sanders Amendment is now
Senate Amendment 4439 to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 5297).. Correct??
People will be sending emails to senators with reference to the wrong amendment if this text is not corrected!!
Senate Amendment 4439 to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 5297).. Correct??
People will be sending emails to senators with reference to the wrong amendment if this text is not corrected!!
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-10 12:50 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)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
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)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
more...
bigboy007
07-18 12:47 PM
I think all of us cautious at this time is very imp and we keep calling uscis pref next week so that we ensure we have enough backup avail and we have 30 days till.
2010 sexy tattoo, sexy girls tattoo
kk_kk
06-10 04:53 PM
Sent
more...
gccovet
03-09 12:26 PM
No movement for EB2-I just 15 days forward for EB3-I
This sux
GCCOvet
This sux
GCCOvet
hair Hot Tattoo Girls Photos
roseball
07-09 03:55 PM
Yes, you are right that we cannot sue anyone for working harder. I agree with that part too.
I didnt say they broke the "law" by processing several thousands of cases. What they did is broke their own "regulations" by approving applications with incomplete security/back ground checks.....In the current environment the country is in, this could be a very serious issue. Well again they can argue that regulations can be moulded/twisted to their liking.....
From Oct 2006 - June 2007 USCIS only used 80k of 140k immigrant numbers available and by the end of June, they consumed all of the 140k quota.....There were cases where 485s were approved on 2nd and 3rd of July.....They made a complete mockery of their own regulations is alloting visa numbers as they like....
I didnt say they broke the "law" by processing several thousands of cases. What they did is broke their own "regulations" by approving applications with incomplete security/back ground checks.....In the current environment the country is in, this could be a very serious issue. Well again they can argue that regulations can be moulded/twisted to their liking.....
From Oct 2006 - June 2007 USCIS only used 80k of 140k immigrant numbers available and by the end of June, they consumed all of the 140k quota.....There were cases where 485s were approved on 2nd and 3rd of July.....They made a complete mockery of their own regulations is alloting visa numbers as they like....
more...
pappu
06-11 03:25 PM
Pappu,
Is there a way to know the list of the states the mail was sent to. As you know it is very important for these mails going to all the 50 states in huge numbers.
Thanks,
Rayoflight
The mail will only be sent to your US Senators from your state.
Is there a way to know the list of the states the mail was sent to. As you know it is very important for these mails going to all the 50 states in huge numbers.
Thanks,
Rayoflight
The mail will only be sent to your US Senators from your state.
hot hot hot tattoo on girls side.
uma001
03-21 01:26 PM
I replied to your message. Pls check it.
more...
house Where Should You Place Flower
sanju
11-11 05:37 PM
I am not sure what lobbying efforts would do for us, haven't worked so far...
You have been waiting for your GC approval. Have you gotten it yet? No. Everything you have done hasn't worked. Then why continue to wait for the GC? Lets leave.
You see what I am saying. I am merely using your argument to highlight the ignorance embedded in your post.
I leave it up to IV core to followup on these ideas. I repeat, as I have done so many times, it is all about marketing + media presence. We won the July 2007 visa bulletin battle because of adverse media reaction to the state department. Grass roots stuff is all good, but no one will ever notice it.
I repeat, as I have done so many times, asking others to work on your ideas (which you seem to think are original and your own) is common wisdom on these forums. Next time, try to come up with something original.
.
You have been waiting for your GC approval. Have you gotten it yet? No. Everything you have done hasn't worked. Then why continue to wait for the GC? Lets leave.
You see what I am saying. I am merely using your argument to highlight the ignorance embedded in your post.
I leave it up to IV core to followup on these ideas. I repeat, as I have done so many times, it is all about marketing + media presence. We won the July 2007 visa bulletin battle because of adverse media reaction to the state department. Grass roots stuff is all good, but no one will ever notice it.
I repeat, as I have done so many times, asking others to work on your ideas (which you seem to think are original and your own) is common wisdom on these forums. Next time, try to come up with something original.
.
tattoo Tattoo Girl
jcgc
02-21 02:13 PM
I can share some estimates for EB2 India through Dec03. I wish had the cases as a database, Then we could query for all dates.
Column 1: PD
Column 2: Nbr. Of EB2 India pending from
Column 3: Estimated Universe of EB2 India Pending ( to Universe ratio of 6.75%)
Column 4: Cumulative EB2 India pending
2000-01 0 - -
2000-03 0 - -
2000-04 1 15 15
2000-06 1 15 30
2000-08 0 - 30
2000-11 1 15 44
2000-12 0 - 44
2001-01 0 - 44
2001-03 1 15 59
2001-04 3 44 104
2001-05 2 30 133
2001-06 6 89 222
2001-07 3 44 267
2001-08 1 15 281
2001-09 1 15 296
2001-10 6 89 385
2001-11 2 30 415
2001-12 2 30 444
2002-01 5 74 519
2002-02 4 59 578
2002-03 1 15 593
2002-04 3 44 637
2002-05 11 163 800
2002-06 7 104 904
2002-07 5 74 978
2002-08 5 74 1,052
2002-09 5 74 1,126
2002-10 14 207 1,333
2002-11 16 237 1,570
2002-12 11 163 1,733
2003-01 13 193 1,926
2003-02 12 178 2,104
2003-03 20 296 2,400
2003-04 13 193 2,593
2003-05 16 237 2,830
2003-06 17 252 3,081
2003-07 22 326 3,407
2003-08 18 267 3,674
2003-09 18 267 3,941
2003-10 29 430 4,370
2003-11 17 252 4,622
2003-12 18 267 4,889
Total 330 4,889
Column 1: PD
Column 2: Nbr. Of EB2 India pending from
Column 3: Estimated Universe of EB2 India Pending ( to Universe ratio of 6.75%)
Column 4: Cumulative EB2 India pending
2000-01 0 - -
2000-03 0 - -
2000-04 1 15 15
2000-06 1 15 30
2000-08 0 - 30
2000-11 1 15 44
2000-12 0 - 44
2001-01 0 - 44
2001-03 1 15 59
2001-04 3 44 104
2001-05 2 30 133
2001-06 6 89 222
2001-07 3 44 267
2001-08 1 15 281
2001-09 1 15 296
2001-10 6 89 385
2001-11 2 30 415
2001-12 2 30 444
2002-01 5 74 519
2002-02 4 59 578
2002-03 1 15 593
2002-04 3 44 637
2002-05 11 163 800
2002-06 7 104 904
2002-07 5 74 978
2002-08 5 74 1,052
2002-09 5 74 1,126
2002-10 14 207 1,333
2002-11 16 237 1,570
2002-12 11 163 1,733
2003-01 13 193 1,926
2003-02 12 178 2,104
2003-03 20 296 2,400
2003-04 13 193 2,593
2003-05 16 237 2,830
2003-06 17 252 3,081
2003-07 22 326 3,407
2003-08 18 267 3,674
2003-09 18 267 3,941
2003-10 29 430 4,370
2003-11 17 252 4,622
2003-12 18 267 4,889
Total 330 4,889
more...
pictures If You Like Tattooed Girls
ryan
08-21 12:12 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. .
Sorry to hear. We can debate on this form till the cows come home, however, I think it is best you contact an experienced / skilled immigration lawyer ASAP. Often there are alternatives and solutions an immigration lawyer can evaluate and put forth to you. IMO that is the best option at this point. I hope things work out for you, good luck.
Sorry to hear. We can debate on this form till the cows come home, however, I think it is best you contact an experienced / skilled immigration lawyer ASAP. Often there are alternatives and solutions an immigration lawyer can evaluate and put forth to you. IMO that is the best option at this point. I hope things work out for you, good luck.
dresses Hot stylish girl walking down
priderock
06-22 04:39 PM
And wait for RFE.
USCIS is asking for COLOR copies of DL and passport.
Can you please point me to a link where USCIS asking for a color copy of DL and Passport? My lawyer did not even ask for copy of the DL and B/W copy of the passport was good enough.
USCIS is asking for COLOR copies of DL and passport.
Can you please point me to a link where USCIS asking for a color copy of DL and Passport? My lawyer did not even ask for copy of the DL and B/W copy of the passport was good enough.
more...
makeup hot tattoo on girls side. side
Hassan11
03-19 01:43 PM
pmb76,
that was not my statement. if you read my post, you will understand that I clearly was quoting Ron Gotcher. I even put a link to that message where I got that quote from his forum. so in the future, you can say maybe Ron wasn't right instead.
Your statement about 27% limit holding does not make sense ! As per the visa bulletin if numbers are not filled up in a particular category they will go to unsubscribed countries. Here is the excerpt from the April Visa bulletin:
D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual �per-country� limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially.
that was not my statement. if you read my post, you will understand that I clearly was quoting Ron Gotcher. I even put a link to that message where I got that quote from his forum. so in the future, you can say maybe Ron wasn't right instead.
Your statement about 27% limit holding does not make sense ! As per the visa bulletin if numbers are not filled up in a particular category they will go to unsubscribed countries. Here is the excerpt from the April Visa bulletin:
D. INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual �per-country� limit. It has been determined that based on the current level of demand being received, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices, there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category. As a result, numbers have once again become available to the India Employment Second preference category. The rate of number use in the Employment Second preference category will continue to be monitored, and it may be necessary to make adjustments should the level of demand increase substantially.
girlfriend Choosing a tattoo is a very
nixstor
07-03 02:26 PM
this does happen- for people in the US already. larger companies find it convenient to simply send the employee out for asactly 365 days and then transfer them back. and Viola! you are in the front of the line!
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
I am not debating it whether it can happen at all or not, whether its right or wrong. I should have worded it better in my previous post. It can happen, but not many who are already in the US do this. If it were equally rampant like the labor substitution, EB1 cannot be current for long time. While some one can go this route, they are paying a significant amount of Salary (possibly Spouse's salary as well), Family upheaval for an year and many other things as a premium. Not all people have the chance to do so and can afford to do so, if they have a chance. We are not seeing any clogs in EB1. Are we?
all legal...but one of the various problems that cause the system to be clogged.
I am not debating it whether it can happen at all or not, whether its right or wrong. I should have worded it better in my previous post. It can happen, but not many who are already in the US do this. If it were equally rampant like the labor substitution, EB1 cannot be current for long time. While some one can go this route, they are paying a significant amount of Salary (possibly Spouse's salary as well), Family upheaval for an year and many other things as a premium. Not all people have the chance to do so and can afford to do so, if they have a chance. We are not seeing any clogs in EB1. Are we?
hairstyles Hot tattooed girl by Joanna
GreenCard4US
06-10 06:24 PM
For whatever reason, rumors are flying all over the Internet that the end of H1B and EAD employment authorization is at hand. This is complete nonsense. The purported basis for these rumors is an amendment offered in the Senate (S. Amdt. 4319) to a tax bill previously passed by the House (HR 4213). As written, this proposal would prohibit companies from filing H1B petitions if the company has laid off any employees in the last year. It would also void all existing H petitions for a company if the company lays off personnel.
Let's put this in context. Microsoft decides to lay off some of its loading dock personnel because they want to outsource that work. Under this proposal, they would then have to terminate all of their H1B engineers. That simply doesn't pass the laugh test.
Like most of Grassley's proposals, this amendment is pure idiocy. I suppose that's what happens when your parents are siblings. This bill has absolutely no chance of ever becoming law. .
Let's put this in context. Microsoft decides to lay off some of its loading dock personnel because they want to outsource that work. Under this proposal, they would then have to terminate all of their H1B engineers. That simply doesn't pass the laugh test.
Like most of Grassley's proposals, this amendment is pure idiocy. I suppose that's what happens when your parents are siblings. This bill has absolutely no chance of ever becoming law. .
webm
05-28 03:40 PM
Congrats!! damialok
arnab221
04-23 01:38 AM
Lot of you guys have mentioned that there were a set of people( Latino immigrant community) there who were not happy with some of the terms in the STRIVE ACT. Could one of you tell us what those terms were ? Since legal immigration reform are hostage to Comprehensive immigration bills at this stage, I am just pondering if those terms become a hindarance in STRIVE getting cleared and consequently section V not getting passed .
Also Ramaonline says that Congressman Guiterrezz told him that he is assured of a support of 180 House democrats and needs 218 Votes to pass the bill. So that leaves us with 38 votes that are needed. From what we see and hear in the news media, there are just a handful of House Republicans now who do not support this Bill . The consensus from the news media is that many of the Republicans who opposed CIR last year have not got re-elected . So if this is the case then 38 Republicans should not be a real problem to find . Any factual opinions ?
Also Ramaonline says that Congressman Guiterrezz told him that he is assured of a support of 180 House democrats and needs 218 Votes to pass the bill. So that leaves us with 38 votes that are needed. From what we see and hear in the news media, there are just a handful of House Republicans now who do not support this Bill . The consensus from the news media is that many of the Republicans who opposed CIR last year have not got re-elected . So if this is the case then 38 Republicans should not be a real problem to find . Any factual opinions ?
0 comments:
Post a Comment