nozerd
01-18 09:22 AM
I think it meand one of 2 things
1) There may be sopme qnquiry telephone number or email available only to lawyers
2) They will work through the AILA liason at TSC. I believe AILA has a liason with that office who can directly bring these up with higher ups involved. Non AILA members wouldnt have office.
1) There may be sopme qnquiry telephone number or email available only to lawyers
2) They will work through the AILA liason at TSC. I believe AILA has a liason with that office who can directly bring these up with higher ups involved. Non AILA members wouldnt have office.
wallpaper Incredible Hulk wallpaper
jsb
01-14 11:01 AM
Tired of waiting ( PD: August 2001) I finally wrote to both my local congressman and Senator today. My senator is on senate Immigration commitee so lets see what happens. Hopefully something will move.
If this doesnt help I will try Ombudsman next after couple of months. The Ombudsman form has a question of if you have tried through Congressman etc first so we can try and see that.
Guys its so funny when you see ppl with PD of 2003 and 2005 complaining and bitching. Here we have waited 7 + yrs our PD's are current and we are doing OK. Wait sure brings maturity :)
USCIS does not process cases in PD order, because they can't. Thousands of files they receive, are sequenced in order they receive them at Centers. They claim that cases are processed in order they receive them. "Receive Date" is not what you see on your receipt, it is the date they physically received the case on (thus if case is moved from one center to another, true Receive Date is the date it was recieved by the last center). You see this data online status as "...we received (or transferred) your case on ...".
PD critieria is limited to certain countries only. Therefore, by and large, "cases are processed in order they are received..." works well. However, for India, China etc. where PD cutoff has to be factored, it is used merely to decide to work or skip a file (when seen in the receive date order). If PD cutoff date is very restricted, they will have to skip a lot of cases, which slows them down. That's the reason every July they ask for wider PD cutoff dates so that they can consume a lot of visas, as they don't have to skip that many cases.
This process is a mockery of the PD cutoff dates, but that's how it works. If you sent your case on June 28, 07, with July 2, 07 as the printed Receive Data on your receipt, but the case where it finally rested, was entered in their database on Oct. 28, '07 (with a Notice Date soon thereafter), you case will not be looked at, no matter what the PD cutoff date is, unless all cases received before Oct. 28, '07 have been reviewed.
If this doesnt help I will try Ombudsman next after couple of months. The Ombudsman form has a question of if you have tried through Congressman etc first so we can try and see that.
Guys its so funny when you see ppl with PD of 2003 and 2005 complaining and bitching. Here we have waited 7 + yrs our PD's are current and we are doing OK. Wait sure brings maturity :)
USCIS does not process cases in PD order, because they can't. Thousands of files they receive, are sequenced in order they receive them at Centers. They claim that cases are processed in order they receive them. "Receive Date" is not what you see on your receipt, it is the date they physically received the case on (thus if case is moved from one center to another, true Receive Date is the date it was recieved by the last center). You see this data online status as "...we received (or transferred) your case on ...".
PD critieria is limited to certain countries only. Therefore, by and large, "cases are processed in order they are received..." works well. However, for India, China etc. where PD cutoff has to be factored, it is used merely to decide to work or skip a file (when seen in the receive date order). If PD cutoff date is very restricted, they will have to skip a lot of cases, which slows them down. That's the reason every July they ask for wider PD cutoff dates so that they can consume a lot of visas, as they don't have to skip that many cases.
This process is a mockery of the PD cutoff dates, but that's how it works. If you sent your case on June 28, 07, with July 2, 07 as the printed Receive Data on your receipt, but the case where it finally rested, was entered in their database on Oct. 28, '07 (with a Notice Date soon thereafter), you case will not be looked at, no matter what the PD cutoff date is, unless all cases received before Oct. 28, '07 have been reviewed.
ragarwala
08-12 08:33 AM
Masterji, Did you get your greencard in hand yet.
2011 Planet Hulk has all the
jthomas
04-13 05:27 PM
Thanks IV core members for helping a member in our community. this will help me to support IV's agenda in future.
Jose Thomas
Jose Thomas
more...
v2neha
03-27 04:00 PM
Team,
The meeting with Rep. Pete Stark's district director Jo Cazenave went very well. She had a little idea about, but was not fully aware of EB process for obtaining GC, and was impressed with our presentation that explained the process in graphical manner. Jo confirmed that Congressman Stark was against illegal immigration and also clarified that he was all in for high tech legal immigration. She listened attentively and took notes. She showed more interest in knowing facts about provisions of S.2454 and Spector's mark up that would reverse provisions of AC21 and Sen. Fienstein's amendments to these proposed bills. She repeatedly reminded me to make sure to forward more details on these after the meeting. I've sent her these details in the 'Thank you' email after the meeting. As it has been the case with outcome of other lawmaker staff's meetings, she suggested that we agressively meet with as many lawmakers as possible - especially in DC, seek support of big companies who hire EB workers and encourage people to contact their congress reps in case of unacceptable administrative delays. Jo has extended her invitation to members of IV to attend Rep. Stark's town meetings. (The next one to be held on 1st Apr'06 in Newark - details on http://www.house.gov/stark/contact/townmeeting.htm ). She asked my personal experience with the GC Processing and how it has impacted me. She noted down my home address and promised that she will not only convey a picture of the issues faced by EB immigrants to the rep, but also have him contact me via mail for anything he might have to say or ask.
The meeting with Rep. Pete Stark's district director Jo Cazenave went very well. She had a little idea about, but was not fully aware of EB process for obtaining GC, and was impressed with our presentation that explained the process in graphical manner. Jo confirmed that Congressman Stark was against illegal immigration and also clarified that he was all in for high tech legal immigration. She listened attentively and took notes. She showed more interest in knowing facts about provisions of S.2454 and Spector's mark up that would reverse provisions of AC21 and Sen. Fienstein's amendments to these proposed bills. She repeatedly reminded me to make sure to forward more details on these after the meeting. I've sent her these details in the 'Thank you' email after the meeting. As it has been the case with outcome of other lawmaker staff's meetings, she suggested that we agressively meet with as many lawmakers as possible - especially in DC, seek support of big companies who hire EB workers and encourage people to contact their congress reps in case of unacceptable administrative delays. Jo has extended her invitation to members of IV to attend Rep. Stark's town meetings. (The next one to be held on 1st Apr'06 in Newark - details on http://www.house.gov/stark/contact/townmeeting.htm ). She asked my personal experience with the GC Processing and how it has impacted me. She noted down my home address and promised that she will not only convey a picture of the issues faced by EB immigrants to the rep, but also have him contact me via mail for anything he might have to say or ask.
smuggymba
04-29 10:19 PM
Tell me one country in this world which is giving 140K GC for skilled immigrants and alomst 1 million GCs for immigrants...
...........and the point you're trying to make is???
If you don't want a GC, why are you on this forum and making anti-GC statement. A pro-GC person would agree with this statement unequivocally.
...........and the point you're trying to make is???
If you don't want a GC, why are you on this forum and making anti-GC statement. A pro-GC person would agree with this statement unequivocally.
more...
BharatPremi
03-24 03:24 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5482
2010 Hulk Wallpaper incredible
sintax321
02-04 12:46 PM
i went with eilsoe. Nice detail;)
more...
sat
08-08 09:59 PM
what to do?
hair the incredible hulk wallpapers
greyhair
07-08 11:23 PM
eb3retro, i think u & i need not as much worry about oscarzumaran et al..... as we should worry about those who remain silent..... day after day....
Why should we worry about those who are silent? What do you mean?
Why should we worry about those who are silent? What do you mean?
more...
nogreen4decade
07-16 07:24 PM
1. Doesn't matter who it is citizen or not - you have to show legal status. If you read the law carefully, you will be put in a holding prision and given a change to prove legal status (contact family tobring your passport), etc. This is not a traffic stop - a decision will not be made on the stop. That's why there are strict rules stating who can be asked.
2. By law you have to carry identification. Does this mean as a citizen or non-immigrant visa holder, you have to roam with all your docs? No! This is why we fought so hard to make sure US-states give driver's licenses?ID cards to people here legally ONLY. So, you just carry your DL.
3. Item 1 above applies here.
Do you think the people who wrote this Bill did not think of all this? You have to be pretty naive to think that only you thought of these senarios. There is no racist movement behind it.
Sorry, you are an IDIOT!
2. By law you have to carry identification. Does this mean as a citizen or non-immigrant visa holder, you have to roam with all your docs? No! This is why we fought so hard to make sure US-states give driver's licenses?ID cards to people here legally ONLY. So, you just carry your DL.
3. Item 1 above applies here.
Do you think the people who wrote this Bill did not think of all this? You have to be pretty naive to think that only you thought of these senarios. There is no racist movement behind it.
Sorry, you are an IDIOT!
hot Hulk And Wolverine Wallpapers
greencard
07-27 03:02 PM
This is the attitude of our guys. So desperate. The agents get irritated because of this.
Your application is already there if you have the delivery confirmation, what is the point of calling them? They will issue or reject when they get to it, by calling them they are not going to go searching for your application..
Please be patient the decision to accept or reject is not going to change by calling them for a receipt notice!
Your application is already there if you have the delivery confirmation, what is the point of calling them? They will issue or reject when they get to it, by calling them they are not going to go searching for your application..
Please be patient the decision to accept or reject is not going to change by calling them for a receipt notice!
more...
house The Incredible Hulk Wallpaper
zerozerozeven
04-08 05:04 PM
Very interesting:
They say that they will run Master's cap first, then put the leftovers into regular cap lottery pool. But it would be better for master's degree holders if they did it the other way around!
We know the master's odds are better than general pool odds. Maybe about 50% vs. 25% this year.
Think through the math! It would be more advantageous for Master's degree holders to go through the general lottery first, and only if they lose in general be put into master's lottery. Maybe there would be less than 20,000 general lottery losers with advanced degree, then there would be no need for another lottery, they would automatically get the 20,000 that's allocated for them.
Is USCIS trying to screw Master's holders on purpose, or are they just bad at math and screwed them due to ignorance?
The spirit of the whole master's cap law is to give master's holders an advantage. USCIS had a choice here of giving a small advantage (master's lottery first, then general) or big advantage (general lottery first, then master's) and they chose the smaller advantage.
The whole fact that we're here thinking about the odds, just like horsebetting, is of course ludicrous in itself.
Good luck to everyone in the lottery.
Even horse-betting has some amount of skill level (of the horse) and knowledge involved when u place a bet...and to think about it....When I used to be in India, I was told why India is not improving is because meritocracy takes a back seat everywhere while in US people are rewarded based on merits. I now realize with the backlog and the H1B that things are worse out here. GC process is such a long and arduous process that it takes the most productive years of your life away by forcing to work in a company without a change in position. H1B has now become even more of a laughing stock because of the mega lotto we have every year and everyone could see this coming 100 miles away and pity that nothing was done for last 2 years to address this problem
They say that they will run Master's cap first, then put the leftovers into regular cap lottery pool. But it would be better for master's degree holders if they did it the other way around!
We know the master's odds are better than general pool odds. Maybe about 50% vs. 25% this year.
Think through the math! It would be more advantageous for Master's degree holders to go through the general lottery first, and only if they lose in general be put into master's lottery. Maybe there would be less than 20,000 general lottery losers with advanced degree, then there would be no need for another lottery, they would automatically get the 20,000 that's allocated for them.
Is USCIS trying to screw Master's holders on purpose, or are they just bad at math and screwed them due to ignorance?
The spirit of the whole master's cap law is to give master's holders an advantage. USCIS had a choice here of giving a small advantage (master's lottery first, then general) or big advantage (general lottery first, then master's) and they chose the smaller advantage.
The whole fact that we're here thinking about the odds, just like horsebetting, is of course ludicrous in itself.
Good luck to everyone in the lottery.
Even horse-betting has some amount of skill level (of the horse) and knowledge involved when u place a bet...and to think about it....When I used to be in India, I was told why India is not improving is because meritocracy takes a back seat everywhere while in US people are rewarded based on merits. I now realize with the backlog and the H1B that things are worse out here. GC process is such a long and arduous process that it takes the most productive years of your life away by forcing to work in a company without a change in position. H1B has now become even more of a laughing stock because of the mega lotto we have every year and everyone could see this coming 100 miles away and pity that nothing was done for last 2 years to address this problem
tattoo 4 dvd800 Desktop Wallpaper
americandesi
10-11 05:56 PM
One important issue is over looked here. Small employers will have a tough time in proving I-140 "ability to pay" for employees with older PD�s, whose labor got cleared after Aug 17 from BEC. Cuz the company has to prove its "ability to pay" the proffered wage starting from the date PD is established continuing until the adjudication of I-140.
Suppose the PD for an employee is Oct 2001 and the proffered wage is 80K per annum, then the company should prove that its assets, net income or salary payments were >=80K starting from Oct2001 continuing until the adjudication of I-140.
This is indeed an acid test for small employers.
Suppose the PD for an employee is Oct 2001 and the proffered wage is 80K per annum, then the company should prove that its assets, net income or salary payments were >=80K starting from Oct2001 continuing until the adjudication of I-140.
This is indeed an acid test for small employers.
more...
pictures hulk wallpaper by
diptam
07-02 04:02 PM
Medical - $350
0.5 day off for Medical + 0.5 Follow up Medical - $400
Photo - $10
USPS Express Mailing - $20
Birth Cert from NY Consulate - $20
Visit to NY Consulate from Boston - $110
1 day off for Birth Certificate - $400
Origina Birth Cert Affidavit (From India) - $10
Misc - $80
------------
$1400
Plus the emotional distress and Pain i'm bearing continuously....
0.5 day off for Medical + 0.5 Follow up Medical - $400
Photo - $10
USPS Express Mailing - $20
Birth Cert from NY Consulate - $20
Visit to NY Consulate from Boston - $110
1 day off for Birth Certificate - $400
Origina Birth Cert Affidavit (From India) - $10
Misc - $80
------------
$1400
Plus the emotional distress and Pain i'm bearing continuously....
dresses Hulk Wallpapers
mallu
11-30 05:57 PM
I never said 80,000 FB visas are reserved for EB. Then those numbers would not be called as FB visas, would they?
Any way, if you look at the statistics (page 52, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf), USCIS has not fully utilized all available EB visas for 12 years out of the 15 years. Hence I said, USCIS is THE bottleneck. For the 3 years (out of the total of 15 years), unavailability of visa numbers is THE issue. But for the majority of the years, lack of visa numbers is NOT the issue.
When is this name check reform getting implemented. Why is is so difficult to implement ?
Any way, if you look at the statistics (page 52, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf), USCIS has not fully utilized all available EB visas for 12 years out of the 15 years. Hence I said, USCIS is THE bottleneck. For the 3 years (out of the total of 15 years), unavailability of visa numbers is THE issue. But for the majority of the years, lack of visa numbers is NOT the issue.
When is this name check reform getting implemented. Why is is so difficult to implement ?
more...
makeup Incredible Hulk Live Wallpaper
chanduv23
08-12 08:52 AM
My Job duties on labor says
"Design, develop and test software using Java, C++, C, VB, Winrunner, SAP, Oracle, Networking, ASP and RUP"
The title in labor is "Software Engineer"
Now the new job offer has title as "Lead Developer"
and duties are
"The lead developer will be responsible for leading a team to creating components within Java, utilizing standard Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), writing unit test cases and supporting the Testing and Quality Assurance phases of the software development lifecycle."
Can somebody comment on this in context of same / similar job?
It is similar. The key words are "Design, develop, test .....maintain.... etc.." Look up the O*net code for 15-1031.00 - Your L/C will state this occupational code. This has a broad classification.
I am in the same boat - my old job says ""design, develop, test wireless and mobile applications using Pocket PC SDK, MFC, Win32 API ........" and my new job says "Design , develop, test finaicial system applications using VC++, MFC, Win32API ........" I ran this through some lawyers and they say it is fine.
15-1031.00 has a lot of titles that any software person can fit in.
Old job title is "Senior Software Engineer" new job title is "Senior Software Developer"
Fellow IVans - please comment if this is fine?
"Design, develop and test software using Java, C++, C, VB, Winrunner, SAP, Oracle, Networking, ASP and RUP"
The title in labor is "Software Engineer"
Now the new job offer has title as "Lead Developer"
and duties are
"The lead developer will be responsible for leading a team to creating components within Java, utilizing standard Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), writing unit test cases and supporting the Testing and Quality Assurance phases of the software development lifecycle."
Can somebody comment on this in context of same / similar job?
It is similar. The key words are "Design, develop, test .....maintain.... etc.." Look up the O*net code for 15-1031.00 - Your L/C will state this occupational code. This has a broad classification.
I am in the same boat - my old job says ""design, develop, test wireless and mobile applications using Pocket PC SDK, MFC, Win32 API ........" and my new job says "Design , develop, test finaicial system applications using VC++, MFC, Win32API ........" I ran this through some lawyers and they say it is fine.
15-1031.00 has a lot of titles that any software person can fit in.
Old job title is "Senior Software Engineer" new job title is "Senior Software Developer"
Fellow IVans - please comment if this is fine?
girlfriend Hulk Wallpapers
Madhuri
07-24 02:23 PM
Here's update on my cases
Self e-filed: May 30, 2008
FP: Jun 25, 2008
Card prod ordered: July 23, 2008
EB3-I / PD: Mar 2006 / I-485 - RD: Jul 2007
Will post about duration as soon as I get the cards in hand.
Self e-filed: May 30, 2008
FP: Jun 25, 2008
Card prod ordered: July 23, 2008
EB3-I / PD: Mar 2006 / I-485 - RD: Jul 2007
Will post about duration as soon as I get the cards in hand.
hairstyles -hulk-mobile-wallpaper
casinoroyale
08-26 02:28 PM
No, it is not mandatory, but I suggest your renew it if you do not have H1B visa so that you can have it readily should a need arise to travel in emergency.
My AP is expiring very soon. I do not have any travel plans to India in 6 months from now. Is it mandatory that I have to renew the AP before the old one expires?
Thanks in advance.
Ram
My AP is expiring very soon. I do not have any travel plans to India in 6 months from now. Is it mandatory that I have to renew the AP before the old one expires?
Thanks in advance.
Ram
a1b2c3
10-12 11:11 AM
I do see your point about the unfairness of allowing the old PD. In that case, what do you say about the cross-chargeability provision ? I guess the percentage of people availing of that provision is small, but it does happen.
For example, If you're from India and in EB3, but your spouse was born in a non-retrogressed country, you automatically jump to the earlier PD in your category, EB3-World in this case. Maybe the percentage of such cases is low, and hence there're no protests from the people waiting. I personally know of one colleague who had a later PD than me, but got the EB3-World PD since his spouse was born in Zambia. If EB3-World was current, he'd be green simply because his spouse was born in the "right" country.
Unfair ?? Maybe - but it's legal and allowed. My point is that getting an older PD in both cross category and cross chargeability are allowed today and people will continue to avail of them is they can. As long as the USCIS doesn't have issues with that, applicants will attempt to migrate between categories and countries, during their im-migration process :) Couldn't help myself with that pun there :)
Yes, your point is entirely valid. I didn't know about this cross-country provision. Another unfair provision.
In fact, my point was that unfairness should be dealt with on all possible fronts. If the system works properly, nobody will need to do anything that is even remotely unfair.
I have a strong gut feeling that 2009 would be a good year for EB3. They will start approving more cases I think.
For example, If you're from India and in EB3, but your spouse was born in a non-retrogressed country, you automatically jump to the earlier PD in your category, EB3-World in this case. Maybe the percentage of such cases is low, and hence there're no protests from the people waiting. I personally know of one colleague who had a later PD than me, but got the EB3-World PD since his spouse was born in Zambia. If EB3-World was current, he'd be green simply because his spouse was born in the "right" country.
Unfair ?? Maybe - but it's legal and allowed. My point is that getting an older PD in both cross category and cross chargeability are allowed today and people will continue to avail of them is they can. As long as the USCIS doesn't have issues with that, applicants will attempt to migrate between categories and countries, during their im-migration process :) Couldn't help myself with that pun there :)
Yes, your point is entirely valid. I didn't know about this cross-country provision. Another unfair provision.
In fact, my point was that unfairness should be dealt with on all possible fronts. If the system works properly, nobody will need to do anything that is even remotely unfair.
I have a strong gut feeling that 2009 would be a good year for EB3. They will start approving more cases I think.
alterego
09-15 01:39 PM
Hey, this sounds sig-worthy... can I use that for my sig?
Did you come to america for Horizontal growth...................ie to increase your girth?
You could easily do that in india these days. Some comments here are plain funny!
Did you come to america for Horizontal growth...................ie to increase your girth?
You could easily do that in india these days. Some comments here are plain funny!
No comments:
Post a Comment