huh
12-08 03:35 PM
Is the 15 months counted from the filing date or the audit reply date?
Mine was filed on Oct. 07' and still stuck in audit. It disgusts me just by thinking about this...
Thanks!
Mine was filed on Oct. 07' and still stuck in audit. It disgusts me just by thinking about this...
Thanks!
wallpaper VOLKSWAGEN GOLF VI 4MOTION
chanduv23
02-25 10:56 PM
Do not move to IT!
Are you crazy?? IT is indentured servitude for some desi consultant!
stay away.. there are already plenty of slaves..
It all depends on how you look at it. Under the h1b program anyone is a indentured slave, just not indian software engineers. There are good consulting companies and do pay well.
There seems to be a misconception about software and consulting companies. This seems to be perception based on what people hear or see, but in reality, if the person is capable and good, he/she does not have issues with employer/ nor does employer has issues with the person. While Desi consulting companies seem to stretch rules and have their own ways of handling business, they are also a part of the system. They act like a feeder to system, acting as buffer between layoffs and also specialize in immigration and can be really flexible at times and also give you a share of the billing rates which is not possible in a permanant job where there is career stagnation and lack of mobility.
Are you crazy?? IT is indentured servitude for some desi consultant!
stay away.. there are already plenty of slaves..
It all depends on how you look at it. Under the h1b program anyone is a indentured slave, just not indian software engineers. There are good consulting companies and do pay well.
There seems to be a misconception about software and consulting companies. This seems to be perception based on what people hear or see, but in reality, if the person is capable and good, he/she does not have issues with employer/ nor does employer has issues with the person. While Desi consulting companies seem to stretch rules and have their own ways of handling business, they are also a part of the system. They act like a feeder to system, acting as buffer between layoffs and also specialize in immigration and can be really flexible at times and also give you a share of the billing rates which is not possible in a permanant job where there is career stagnation and lack of mobility.
surabhi
04-08 05:24 AM
This is serious and could affect quite a few.
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
2011 LETTUCE, Volkswagen Golf 4motion, Tandem DDB, Volkswagen, Print, Outdoor,
wandmaker
11-18 10:37 AM
shutterbabe: Prior to July fiasco, EAD is issued after regular FP; but I have not heard of separate FP to process EAD for Paperfiling cases. If you (have) efile(d) your AP, you will get a separate notice to FP for EAD without that your EAD will not be issued. I would advise you to take an inforpass appointment and discuss with I/O. At the worst case, you have them open a SR and take it from there.
more...
vinayskadam
11-29 08:18 PM
Thanks for the Reply and I had called up the USCIS and they had asked me to send a letter for correcting the information. I have sent the letter now along with the supporting documents. Hope evverything goes fine.
Nil
11-09 11:32 AM
This was very prompt of you guys.
Keep up the momentum.
The community and (we believe) this country needs professionals of your caliber.
Keep up the momentum.
The community and (we believe) this country needs professionals of your caliber.
more...
Green.Tech
08-05 06:09 PM
I am not sure this will count as an illegal behavior. Of course, I am not a lawyer. But companies typically ask for relocation reimburesement and lawyer expenses, etc. to be paid back pro-rated, in case the employee leaves within a year or so.
Again, this is not really asking for money for labor, but just making sure that the company gets their expenses back in case employee leaves within an year.
Btw, I do not have any such agreement with my company. But I think this is standard. Unfair, maybe. Illegal? I dont know....
Good point!
For one, my employer contract (which I haven't signed yet) says that I will need to reimburse for ALL GC related fee that they have incurred on my behalf if I leave ANYTIME during my GC application is pending. I know such contracts are common (or are they?) but I am not sure if they can ask me to reimburse them for labor cert fee (which as per DOL is employers responsibility) or even for that matter any other application fee (which I understand are employers responsibility as well?). So, basically they can contract me for all the legal fee (attorney fee) but not ALL fee.
More thoughts?
Again, this is not really asking for money for labor, but just making sure that the company gets their expenses back in case employee leaves within an year.
Btw, I do not have any such agreement with my company. But I think this is standard. Unfair, maybe. Illegal? I dont know....
Good point!
For one, my employer contract (which I haven't signed yet) says that I will need to reimburse for ALL GC related fee that they have incurred on my behalf if I leave ANYTIME during my GC application is pending. I know such contracts are common (or are they?) but I am not sure if they can ask me to reimburse them for labor cert fee (which as per DOL is employers responsibility) or even for that matter any other application fee (which I understand are employers responsibility as well?). So, basically they can contract me for all the legal fee (attorney fee) but not ALL fee.
More thoughts?
2010 Golf R 4MOTION
purgan
04-13 10:13 AM
USINPAC, for instance, promotes its role in the India-US nuclear deal.
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
It has also listed immigration as one of its issues, but all it cares about there is family immigration, so all those citizens can sponsor their own relatives. A bunch of A$^#^
himu73, why don't you try to contact these two oganizations + USINPAC to see what kind of traction you can get? The core is busy and needs all the help it can get. Are you upto it?
more...
amitjoey
03-18 04:24 PM
Hello
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
My I140 has been pending for a long time too, without any reason. So finally after many service requests, I have talked to one of the senators of my state. I have explained the situation, ofcourse used the opportunity to highlight IV and EB immigrants problems and then talked about my specific case. There is a routine paperwork that my senators office has that they use to get authorisation from individuals like us to pursue the case with the USCIS. I have filled that paperwork and the request to look into my case. I have a strong notion that it is going to work. The senators office had looked into an earlier case for me with success where I needed to obtain a pending AP in a hurry. I have my own labor (NO Substitute)
I have no idea what the deal is with the H1- Why it was denied.
I suggest you talk to your senator's office.
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
My I140 has been pending for a long time too, without any reason. So finally after many service requests, I have talked to one of the senators of my state. I have explained the situation, ofcourse used the opportunity to highlight IV and EB immigrants problems and then talked about my specific case. There is a routine paperwork that my senators office has that they use to get authorisation from individuals like us to pursue the case with the USCIS. I have filled that paperwork and the request to look into my case. I have a strong notion that it is going to work. The senators office had looked into an earlier case for me with success where I needed to obtain a pending AP in a hurry. I have my own labor (NO Substitute)
I have no idea what the deal is with the H1- Why it was denied.
I suggest you talk to your senator's office.
hair Fahrbericht VW Golf 4Motion
seba
09-24 10:35 AM
Hi all,
I am sure there are people here who started the green card application process but also wanted to go to school (e.g., for MBA) during the green card process. Is it possible to get an F-1 visa to attend school full-time while your green card is still pending?
I heard during a lawyer's presentation that it is very hard (almost impossible) to get an F-1 visa if you have started the green card application process, since by starting it, you have declared an intent to immigrate.
However, I have also heard that it is easy to get an F-1 visa even after starting the green card application process, but your green card application will be canceled.
Please let me know if you have any knowledge or experience in this. Thanks.
I am sure there are people here who started the green card application process but also wanted to go to school (e.g., for MBA) during the green card process. Is it possible to get an F-1 visa to attend school full-time while your green card is still pending?
I heard during a lawyer's presentation that it is very hard (almost impossible) to get an F-1 visa if you have started the green card application process, since by starting it, you have declared an intent to immigrate.
However, I have also heard that it is easy to get an F-1 visa even after starting the green card application process, but your green card application will be canceled.
Please let me know if you have any knowledge or experience in this. Thanks.
more...
desi3933
07-07 06:18 PM
Gurus, need a lil help clarifying issue in GC process.
I've a question regarding location of work place for a H1B employee filing GC process.
I've learnt that either after filing I-140 or I-485 stage, one should maintain as an employee at the same job position(job description as mentioned in LC) and also the geographical location. I've learnt instances where if an employee is half way through (lets say approved labor or I-140) his GC process has to start all over if he had to move to another branch of the same company in another city/state.
Incorrect. Current location has NOTHING to do with GC job location which for a future job that one need to start AFTER I-485/CP is approved. One can be doing job in NYC and have GC job for Chicago. Probably the best case is when LC mentions "anywhere in USA".
Is this true? I might be wrong about the information above but I'm concerned as being consultant, I might have to move to a different city or state if I find a better project and am contemplating whether this would be an issue in future for my green card.
If I'm right, employer has to file LCA for prevailing wage for current city I'm residing now. What will be the process incase I've to move to another city/state.
I'd really appreciate if someone who has better official info or gone through this can clarify my queries so ppl like me can be better informed.
Thanks in advance.
The current job location should be same as stated in LCA for your current H1. If your LCA says Chicago and you are in Dallas then you are NOT in valid H1-B status and consider consulting an attorney for legal advice.
Out of Status > 180 days is one good enough ground to dny I-485 application. For more details on "out of status" scenarios, please refer to my old posts.
_________________
Not a legal advice
I've a question regarding location of work place for a H1B employee filing GC process.
I've learnt that either after filing I-140 or I-485 stage, one should maintain as an employee at the same job position(job description as mentioned in LC) and also the geographical location. I've learnt instances where if an employee is half way through (lets say approved labor or I-140) his GC process has to start all over if he had to move to another branch of the same company in another city/state.
Incorrect. Current location has NOTHING to do with GC job location which for a future job that one need to start AFTER I-485/CP is approved. One can be doing job in NYC and have GC job for Chicago. Probably the best case is when LC mentions "anywhere in USA".
Is this true? I might be wrong about the information above but I'm concerned as being consultant, I might have to move to a different city or state if I find a better project and am contemplating whether this would be an issue in future for my green card.
If I'm right, employer has to file LCA for prevailing wage for current city I'm residing now. What will be the process incase I've to move to another city/state.
I'd really appreciate if someone who has better official info or gone through this can clarify my queries so ppl like me can be better informed.
Thanks in advance.
The current job location should be same as stated in LCA for your current H1. If your LCA says Chicago and you are in Dallas then you are NOT in valid H1-B status and consider consulting an attorney for legal advice.
Out of Status > 180 days is one good enough ground to dny I-485 application. For more details on "out of status" scenarios, please refer to my old posts.
_________________
Not a legal advice
hot 2006 Volkswagen Passat Variant
optimystic
03-19 03:13 PM
Its unfortunate that you have a very recent RD. I talked to an IO at NSC yesterday and i was told that they will process the case based on the order they recieved. So they go by RD. If this is true then i guess you will have to wait some more time. Because thousands of people applied I-485 between June first to July 30.
Sure, but Nebraska, where my case is at, has a processing date of July 30 07, same as my receipt date. So I assume they must be processing cases that are filed on the same day as mine at this point. So at the most the number of cases before mine is the total number of cases filed on the same day as mine at the Nebrasks service center , right? I mean it could still be a huge number of cases, but they have been on July 30 date for almost a month now. I hope they are getting close to my case.
On a side note, do these Processing dates also retrogress? When are they updated? Along with Visa bulletin updates?
Sure, but Nebraska, where my case is at, has a processing date of July 30 07, same as my receipt date. So I assume they must be processing cases that are filed on the same day as mine at this point. So at the most the number of cases before mine is the total number of cases filed on the same day as mine at the Nebrasks service center , right? I mean it could still be a huge number of cases, but they have been on July 30 date for almost a month now. I hope they are getting close to my case.
On a side note, do these Processing dates also retrogress? When are they updated? Along with Visa bulletin updates?
more...
house La Golf 4Motion con il 2.0
arunkotte
09-07 12:45 PM
I am in great need of some suggestions. I hold a MS degree in computer science and graduate in 2004 dec. Since then I have been with the same employer.
Now that he is filing for my LC. Is it difficult to get through with MS+0yrs of expereince ?
Also, at this point of time i have found other employers who is willing to do my GC in which case I will have MS+2 yrs of expereince.
Is it worth changing employer for gaining 2 yrs of expereince for my LC.
Does this really make my case more stronger ? or I am just OVER REACTING ? and doing unneccessary thing
DOES THE EXPEREINCE with MS makes it better for EB2 ?
Please let me know if there are some experts out there
It doesn't matter. I had my EB2 approved with MS+0. Just make sure the job description explicitly mentions MS with no further experience.
Now that he is filing for my LC. Is it difficult to get through with MS+0yrs of expereince ?
Also, at this point of time i have found other employers who is willing to do my GC in which case I will have MS+2 yrs of expereince.
Is it worth changing employer for gaining 2 yrs of expereince for my LC.
Does this really make my case more stronger ? or I am just OVER REACTING ? and doing unneccessary thing
DOES THE EXPEREINCE with MS makes it better for EB2 ?
Please let me know if there are some experts out there
It doesn't matter. I had my EB2 approved with MS+0. Just make sure the job description explicitly mentions MS with no further experience.
tattoo Volkswagen Golf VI BlueMotion
dixie
09-19 04:06 PM
We should just be asking for relief on waiting times, ability to travel freely, and change jobs.
Unfortunately, this requires a complete overhaul of the immigration system; not minor amendments. For instance, if we want the ability to change jobs freely that is really asking to de-couple the whole H1-B/GC system from our employers. You know very well how things work with current law: EVERYTHING related to our presence in the US; whether that is the work visa, LC or even the PD is OWNED by our employers.
I do agree that increasing visa numbers does not make good PR for our cause.
But the only quick and non-controversial fix (without increasing visa numbers) that I can think of is recapture and ability to file 485 without a visa number.
However, we cannot shy away from explaining how our problems can be solved .. after all average americans have no clue of how their country's immigration system works; if we dont do the explaining the anti-immigrant groups will do that for us with their own interpretation.
Unfortunately, this requires a complete overhaul of the immigration system; not minor amendments. For instance, if we want the ability to change jobs freely that is really asking to de-couple the whole H1-B/GC system from our employers. You know very well how things work with current law: EVERYTHING related to our presence in the US; whether that is the work visa, LC or even the PD is OWNED by our employers.
I do agree that increasing visa numbers does not make good PR for our cause.
But the only quick and non-controversial fix (without increasing visa numbers) that I can think of is recapture and ability to file 485 without a visa number.
However, we cannot shy away from explaining how our problems can be solved .. after all average americans have no clue of how their country's immigration system works; if we dont do the explaining the anti-immigrant groups will do that for us with their own interpretation.
more...
pictures 1999 VW Golf Mk IV V6 4Motion
abd
02-21 12:34 PM
EB2 - 140 at NSC moved by 5-6 days only and shows date of July 19.2006. Mine is July 27 2006. Don't know how many months more to move to July 27, 2006.
dresses Volkswagen Golf 4Motion: Grass
japs19
01-22 11:18 AM
Red my other posts where I wrote my experience as I was asked the same question. But here's the answers to your questions in nut shell.
If you have a valid H-1 visa then just stick to it and don't us AP unless you have to.
If CBP officer don't ask, you don't tell, but if s/he does, be HONEST and tell them that you don't. It will really stir the pot but politely tell them that GC on Employment Base is for future employment and that has been my understanding and in good faith my intentions are to go and work for that employer.
They can really harass you for hours like they did me for 6 hrs and then was told to go downtown office. BTW just on a positive note, my AP has been stamped and I am good to go.
There is no law that defines that you have to be working for the original petitioner while your application is being processed but just ethically it's a much better situation if you are employed by the same employer. CBP offficer's argument was that "what's the guarantee that you will go and work for that employer after approval of your GC? or what is the guarantee that they will have that position open for all these years as it may take a very long time?" I told them with a chuckle on my face that if it hadn't taken USCIS 3-4 years to process that application, that wouldn't be the question but they are still processing my file...I mean how many people you gave an offer letter who you want to start after 4 years as a CBP officer?" He gave me a rude smile and walked away to secondary check section.
Anyways....long story short, be honest, have patience and don't show desperation to enter the country.
Good luck...
Looks like Immigration Officers at Port of Entry are asking the AP entry individuals if they are still working from the GC sponsoring company.
I am planning to travel on AP and is not working anymore for the GC sponsoring company.
1. What would be the reaction of the Immigration Officer if he finds out that I am NOT working from the sponsoring company?
2. What documents should I carry to ensure the I will be allowed to re-enter to US on AP with my current non-GC sponsoring company offer letter, pay-stubs etc?
PLease advise
If you have a valid H-1 visa then just stick to it and don't us AP unless you have to.
If CBP officer don't ask, you don't tell, but if s/he does, be HONEST and tell them that you don't. It will really stir the pot but politely tell them that GC on Employment Base is for future employment and that has been my understanding and in good faith my intentions are to go and work for that employer.
They can really harass you for hours like they did me for 6 hrs and then was told to go downtown office. BTW just on a positive note, my AP has been stamped and I am good to go.
There is no law that defines that you have to be working for the original petitioner while your application is being processed but just ethically it's a much better situation if you are employed by the same employer. CBP offficer's argument was that "what's the guarantee that you will go and work for that employer after approval of your GC? or what is the guarantee that they will have that position open for all these years as it may take a very long time?" I told them with a chuckle on my face that if it hadn't taken USCIS 3-4 years to process that application, that wouldn't be the question but they are still processing my file...I mean how many people you gave an offer letter who you want to start after 4 years as a CBP officer?" He gave me a rude smile and walked away to secondary check section.
Anyways....long story short, be honest, have patience and don't show desperation to enter the country.
Good luck...
Looks like Immigration Officers at Port of Entry are asking the AP entry individuals if they are still working from the GC sponsoring company.
I am planning to travel on AP and is not working anymore for the GC sponsoring company.
1. What would be the reaction of the Immigration Officer if he finds out that I am NOT working from the sponsoring company?
2. What documents should I carry to ensure the I will be allowed to re-enter to US on AP with my current non-GC sponsoring company offer letter, pay-stubs etc?
PLease advise
more...
makeup Volkswagen Golf 2.0 TDi
posmd
04-13 10:54 AM
Sessions ammendment was for the previous SJC bill, which is dead right? I thought the basis of future bills is the Hagel Martinez compromise. Rest assured if it is, then the numbersusa agent in the senate Sessions will put that obstacle as an ammendment again, and since Dems already agreed it in SJC, it will probably take hold.
If I recollect it was 3 months for a review of the impact, then 3 months after that for implementation.
I am getting a little nervous about the CIR though. Not in the sense that it will be done or it won't. I just feel the USCIS will screw up its implementation very badly, and might end up causing our potential 3 yr waits to turn into 5-10 yr waits along with all these law breakers. We are already seeing the effect of 245i cases right now and that is a fraction of this tidal wave of illegals wanting legalisation.
In that sense a breakdown of CIR with some other resolution for our problem with PACE or TALENT might not be such a bad idea. It is like the old addage, be careful what you wish for.........!
If I recollect it was 3 months for a review of the impact, then 3 months after that for implementation.
I am getting a little nervous about the CIR though. Not in the sense that it will be done or it won't. I just feel the USCIS will screw up its implementation very badly, and might end up causing our potential 3 yr waits to turn into 5-10 yr waits along with all these law breakers. We are already seeing the effect of 245i cases right now and that is a fraction of this tidal wave of illegals wanting legalisation.
In that sense a breakdown of CIR with some other resolution for our problem with PACE or TALENT might not be such a bad idea. It is like the old addage, be careful what you wish for.........!
girlfriend nuova volkswagen golf 4motion
Gravitation
10-23 10:30 AM
One common misconception is that there's a "quota" for each country. There's none.
The number 2600 is actually the upper limit. It means that no one country should get more visa numbers than 2600.
The total number of EB3 visa numbers for the whole world is 40,000. There's no entitlement here. There's no guarantee of all visa numbers being issued. There's no minimum number of visas that a specific country is sure to get...
If there's a demand for more than 2600 for a specific country, it's said to be oversubscribed. If the total demand from all countries remains below 40,000, the remaining visa numbers may overflow to the oversubscribed countries.
Once again, it's perfectly within the law to issue less than 40,000 visa numbers. It's a limit, not a quota.
The number 2600 is actually the upper limit. It means that no one country should get more visa numbers than 2600.
The total number of EB3 visa numbers for the whole world is 40,000. There's no entitlement here. There's no guarantee of all visa numbers being issued. There's no minimum number of visas that a specific country is sure to get...
If there's a demand for more than 2600 for a specific country, it's said to be oversubscribed. If the total demand from all countries remains below 40,000, the remaining visa numbers may overflow to the oversubscribed countries.
Once again, it's perfectly within the law to issue less than 40,000 visa numbers. It's a limit, not a quota.
hairstyles Volkswagen. Model. Golf
brij523
02-17 10:10 AM
Test Siganture
H1B-GC
07-15 04:49 PM
you can say that.USCIS processes the case Erratically . No Logic . No FIFO. Its just like playing the French Roulette. Sad but True.
eastindia
01-06 09:44 AM
I understand that this bill many not pass or even move any forward. I thought two senior senators from both parties showing interest in this topic is a great opportunity for IV to present our case in a different light. We have been clamoring about the difficulties we are facing because of the present delay in green card processing. Unfortunately this is only our problem and no one else really has to be bothered about it. If we present our case in a mutually beneficial point of view perhaps some of the politicians will have little more interest in our situation. Remember JFK’s famous words…”Ask not what the country can do for you….” If we write to Senators Kerry and Lugar now, even if the bill does not pass, they will consider our situation slightly differently next time CIR or another immigration bill is introduced in the congress. I think IV ought to present our case in all different angles possible rather than the one way approach of expecting mercy in our situation. Most importantly, I think the premise of the proposed Kerry/Lugar bill is very much applicable the folks in IV. Aren’t many people in this forum waiting for an opportunity to do some business on their own? That is how new immigrants in America have always been. We shouldn’t be any different. I am sure we cannot bring in the capital that senators are looking for. But why don’t they view us slightly differently?
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
No comments:
Post a Comment