matreen
10-28 11:42 PM
PD = Jan 29, 2007
I40 = Aprroved = April, 2007
485 = Receipt Date, July, 12 2007
I40 = Aprroved = April, 2007
485 = Receipt Date, July, 12 2007
wallpaper Read more in Fashion, Lauren
deepimpact
09-10 01:53 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
Caliber
03-10 02:58 PM
From July-07 fiasco DOS and USICS work very closely on VB, I am referring to USCI and DOS. And USCIS is the one who influence DOS decision.
MDIX: I wish your forecast come true. But if you followed the thread, most of 2001/2002/2003 did not even have soft LUD's. While I agree that USCIS is working on EB3 I as many got RFE's, there are many more whose cases were not touched. I gave you green.
MDIX: I wish your forecast come true. But if you followed the thread, most of 2001/2002/2003 did not even have soft LUD's. While I agree that USCIS is working on EB3 I as many got RFE's, there are many more whose cases were not touched. I gave you green.
2011 Lauren Conrad-3
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-10 02:03 PM
Why r we fighting over pity things like EAD needs employment letter, their political position
etc. Wait for pappu's update and try getting as many people as you can to support this issue. We need a good head count to win this.
etc. Wait for pappu's update and try getting as many people as you can to support this issue. We need a good head count to win this.
more...
coopheal
03-12 12:19 PM
First of all I don't know who sachbole is ?
I have contributed to IV in faxes, phone calls and sending numerous letters. You can always check my history before analyzing from a blind eye. I have been here for a while, I have even spoken to a few IV core members.
That being said, IV need's be more organized, blind actions and blind analysis wont get us anywhere.
It is the IV core members responsibility, I am aware of the challenges, but people are quiet frustrated and desperate for a change.
If IV is committed on its objectives, then organize a rally or a meeting with USCIS, I will be there.
Show the world what you are and stand for, not just talks should be the motto of this organization. Need my trust and money, please earn it.
IV does not want your money. Its not asking for Charity.
IV is working on getting relief for people stuck in EB green card mess. If you would like something done in this regards contribute money, time and efforts to IV.
I have contributed to IV in faxes, phone calls and sending numerous letters. You can always check my history before analyzing from a blind eye. I have been here for a while, I have even spoken to a few IV core members.
That being said, IV need's be more organized, blind actions and blind analysis wont get us anywhere.
It is the IV core members responsibility, I am aware of the challenges, but people are quiet frustrated and desperate for a change.
If IV is committed on its objectives, then organize a rally or a meeting with USCIS, I will be there.
Show the world what you are and stand for, not just talks should be the motto of this organization. Need my trust and money, please earn it.
IV does not want your money. Its not asking for Charity.
IV is working on getting relief for people stuck in EB green card mess. If you would like something done in this regards contribute money, time and efforts to IV.
sanju
02-14 12:44 AM
I totally agreed with you. This system has to be cleaned. If a system is being misused then the Gov will take some action. I also dont think they want to remove all Indians from US. I believe they will link this system with a new system similar to JRE and TOFFEL so that a police inspector from India can not come as PL/Sql programmer no matter who is hiring. I know my comment will hurt lot of people here.
I bet you, Urban legend or joke about 'police inspector as PL/Sql programmer' is what you heard in some desi party. I have heard that story many times from multiple people, each one telling their own version. Its just like religion, where every one is stupified by other's ignorance and having fun at others expense. Can you name that police officer? Now you won't reply. I bet lot of others on this forum may have also heard this joke. Is there anyone who knows the name of that police officer pl/sql programmer? You see, fun jokes are good only for desi pani puri parties. This is serious discussion going on here, so if you would please excuse us and take your 20 year old jokes to your standard weekend desi parties, please?
.
I bet you, Urban legend or joke about 'police inspector as PL/Sql programmer' is what you heard in some desi party. I have heard that story many times from multiple people, each one telling their own version. Its just like religion, where every one is stupified by other's ignorance and having fun at others expense. Can you name that police officer? Now you won't reply. I bet lot of others on this forum may have also heard this joke. Is there anyone who knows the name of that police officer pl/sql programmer? You see, fun jokes are good only for desi pani puri parties. This is serious discussion going on here, so if you would please excuse us and take your 20 year old jokes to your standard weekend desi parties, please?
.
more...
abhijitp
07-24 01:35 PM
1) is it safer to wait for RN and then submit this letter as evidence quoting the A# assigned, I think that would be wise for a concurrenly filed application. My lawyer said that if its concurrently filed, the letter accompanying the i-140 is sufficient and 2 letters are not required. But if the i-485 is on it own then an employment letter must accompany the form.
Different lawyers are providing different opinions on this. To follow the letter of the law, you MUST submit the employer letter.
OR
2) is it a better idea to submit a new I-485 rightaway along with the letter, What is reasoning behind this. Are you expecting a rejection? Why not wait for the RN and then send in the letter? Have you spoken to your lawyer?
To follow the letter of the law, you MUST submit the employer letter. My lawyer says it is extremely unlikely you will receive a rejection for this especially since USCIS says it is okay to submit without Medical clearance. In my opinion, this is a lame excuse. I am happy to wait for RN, if only there is the guarantee USCIS will issue one, and won't reject my packet rightaway!
OR
3) should such people just wait hoping they will receive an RFE (I don't like this one at all) whenever the case is opened? For initial evidence items I believed that it would be automatically rejected if not included, HOWEVER, with the new press release from USCIS on July 23, if i-485s WITHOUT medical reports will be accepted, then what is an employment letter?I hope that is true. AILA seems to be working on this. I am happy to believe it if USCIS issues a press release to that effect... high hopes:-)
pls find above the answers.
Different lawyers are providing different opinions on this. To follow the letter of the law, you MUST submit the employer letter.
OR
2) is it a better idea to submit a new I-485 rightaway along with the letter, What is reasoning behind this. Are you expecting a rejection? Why not wait for the RN and then send in the letter? Have you spoken to your lawyer?
To follow the letter of the law, you MUST submit the employer letter. My lawyer says it is extremely unlikely you will receive a rejection for this especially since USCIS says it is okay to submit without Medical clearance. In my opinion, this is a lame excuse. I am happy to wait for RN, if only there is the guarantee USCIS will issue one, and won't reject my packet rightaway!
OR
3) should such people just wait hoping they will receive an RFE (I don't like this one at all) whenever the case is opened? For initial evidence items I believed that it would be automatically rejected if not included, HOWEVER, with the new press release from USCIS on July 23, if i-485s WITHOUT medical reports will be accepted, then what is an employment letter?I hope that is true. AILA seems to be working on this. I am happy to believe it if USCIS issues a press release to that effect... high hopes:-)
pls find above the answers.
2010 Lauren Conrad has regained the
amitjoey
07-05 05:31 PM
Guys, please contribute to IV. I just did today, and believe me, you will feel better for doing so...
This is not just for you and me, but also for those who will come after us. Also, this is not a battle just to sue USCIS/DOS, but a war we need to fight on multiple fronts:
1) First and foremost, we the immigrant community need to join hands and fight as one cohesive group.
2) Sue the government agencies for damages/violation of law/precedents due to the revised visa bulletin
3) Get this matter the attention it deserves in the media
4) Try and get congress to intervene in this matter, and also introduce and pass legislation that will fix the broken employment based immigration system
5) Request corporate sponsorship. Since employers spent money on this fiasco as well, they will have a vested interest in pursuing this as well.
The main thing, however, is funds. IV needs funds to fight for us. Each of us has already spent 100's (many even 1000's) of $ trying to get ready to file our I-485's. So even if 10,000 members contribute just $100 each, it will be $1 mil. I am sure each of us can at least spare that much. It is a small price to pay for liberation from this GC mess for all of us....
With ~15,000 members already, and hopefully some serious $$$$$$ raised, IV will be a force to be reckoned with. No one will be able to treat us with such disdain ever again...
Awesome! you said it!!
This is not just for you and me, but also for those who will come after us. Also, this is not a battle just to sue USCIS/DOS, but a war we need to fight on multiple fronts:
1) First and foremost, we the immigrant community need to join hands and fight as one cohesive group.
2) Sue the government agencies for damages/violation of law/precedents due to the revised visa bulletin
3) Get this matter the attention it deserves in the media
4) Try and get congress to intervene in this matter, and also introduce and pass legislation that will fix the broken employment based immigration system
5) Request corporate sponsorship. Since employers spent money on this fiasco as well, they will have a vested interest in pursuing this as well.
The main thing, however, is funds. IV needs funds to fight for us. Each of us has already spent 100's (many even 1000's) of $ trying to get ready to file our I-485's. So even if 10,000 members contribute just $100 each, it will be $1 mil. I am sure each of us can at least spare that much. It is a small price to pay for liberation from this GC mess for all of us....
With ~15,000 members already, and hopefully some serious $$$$$$ raised, IV will be a force to be reckoned with. No one will be able to treat us with such disdain ever again...
Awesome! you said it!!
more...
boreal
08-22 01:36 AM
I am not sure why you guys are so harsh when someone is asking for guidance and help. If you have lot of time please go after the antis...there are lot of websites to rant your farustartion. If you can not give any useful information...please refrain from posting. It just gives very bad light.
Advising someone who is clearly illegal and to top it, feels entitled to a Green card, you guys are giving quite a lot of fodder to the same antis...so please stop this as well!
Advising someone who is clearly illegal and to top it, feels entitled to a Green card, you guys are giving quite a lot of fodder to the same antis...so please stop this as well!
hair Lauren Conrad Spring 2009
designflaw
04-09 10:59 PM
ROW moved 2 months, I will take it. If it keeps moving 2 months at a time, then my turn would come up in 3 years. Highly unlikely cause ROW PD per USCIS is expected to be in 2005/2006 by end of year. I think my PR for ROW would be pretty much catching up.
more...
StarSun
02-08 09:09 AM
Thank you actaccord, shyamkishore, sukwinderd, reachinus for your contributions.
I request other members to come forward to donate air miles or plan on carpool options NOW, as this will allow for people to decide on their commitment to travel to DC. Please do not wait until the last week or so to offer air miles....
I also need a volunteer who can coordinate the airline donations, interested members, please contact me.
Few members have submitted their wish to contribute air miles and hotel stay in the registration form. Please come forward on this thread.
Thank you.
I request other members to come forward to donate air miles or plan on carpool options NOW, as this will allow for people to decide on their commitment to travel to DC. Please do not wait until the last week or so to offer air miles....
I also need a volunteer who can coordinate the airline donations, interested members, please contact me.
Few members have submitted their wish to contribute air miles and hotel stay in the registration form. Please come forward on this thread.
Thank you.
hot Interview with Lauren Conrad
perm2gc
01-10 12:12 PM
new forums and sites are here
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=16078&postcount=42
any volunteers?
volunteers to post in those above listed forums or to search forums ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=16078&postcount=42
any volunteers?
volunteers to post in those above listed forums or to search forums ?
more...
house Lauren Conrad launches fashion
GCBy3000
07-12 11:32 PM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
tattoo Lauren Conrad
gangadhargs
12-25 12:35 PM
I got my reply from USCIS today. The receipt number is NRC2008072623.
more...
pictures Top Fashion Model Lauren
gcbeku
08-10 03:35 PM
I think this is a brilliant idea and might even fly esp because it still preserves USCIS/DOS EB caste system while providin some relief to the EB3s.
While porting is still an option, it is in EB3 filers' interest to push forward on this idea.
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
While porting is still an option, it is in EB3 filers' interest to push forward on this idea.
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
dresses Lauren Conrad was amp;quot
amsgc
02-05 09:24 PM
It is very important that we point this out to Lawmakers/public when they begin drafting the CIR.
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
more...
makeup Lauren Conrad debutes her quot;LC
coopheal
05-06 08:54 PM
We thought the same way 3 years ago, 2 years ago, and last year too, but nothing happened, it could be another year and we could be sitting here in same situation 2 years from now. Question is when IV has already collected money for FOIA request than why it is not proceeding in that direction ? We get it in time or not is not the question now....
If you had contributed for the FOIA effort you would have known the actions IV has taken in donor forum. Its a shame that people like you dont contribute and have audacity to come back and demand answers.
If you had contributed for the FOIA effort you would have known the actions IV has taken in donor forum. Its a shame that people like you dont contribute and have audacity to come back and demand answers.
girlfriend Lauren Conrad
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:05 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.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
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.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
hairstyles Lauren Conrad#39;s Hair Formula
moonrah
08-07 11:10 AM
how do I translate this to future EB date movements?
prakashv44
08-11 01:44 PM
People,
Thanks for the post and I am in
Thanks for the post and I am in
prioritydate
12-20 07:05 PM
I was under the impression that 10 - 15 days gap or 1 month gap can be justified as vacation or sick leave as long as "employer - employee " relations exists (not terminated by the employer). One whole year cannot be justified under this.
What would you do if no one is calling for an interview? It is not like I didn't managed to get a job. Nobody called me for an interview. At least, the Desi consulting company that I have joined, didn't managed to arrange an interview.
What would you do if no one is calling for an interview? It is not like I didn't managed to get a job. Nobody called me for an interview. At least, the Desi consulting company that I have joined, didn't managed to arrange an interview.
No comments:
Post a Comment