karthkc
07-23 01:01 PM
I posted this message on another thread and got slammed - :confused:. All the discussions here are just speculations.. no one really has access to real numbers.. so take it easy this time :p
As we do not have any real numbers my predictions are based on EB2 numbers from (assuming the data to be a true random sample)
Here are number of EB2-I I485 pending cases by year
2007-100
2006-150
2005-125
2004-200
2003-50 (250 have been approved)
USCIS has approved about 450 EB2-I cases last year. A conservative estimate of approval rate going forward would be 30 cases per month. Based on this the movement..
2003 cases will be approved by Sep '08
2004 cases by Apr '09
2005 cases by Sep '09
2006 cases by Dec '09
Good Luck !!!
This does not make sense at all.. cases are a miniscule portion of actual USCIS approvals and a rate of 30 cases per month would mean most of USCIS personnel are on vacation for summer :)
As we do not have any real numbers my predictions are based on EB2 numbers from (assuming the data to be a true random sample)
Here are number of EB2-I I485 pending cases by year
2007-100
2006-150
2005-125
2004-200
2003-50 (250 have been approved)
USCIS has approved about 450 EB2-I cases last year. A conservative estimate of approval rate going forward would be 30 cases per month. Based on this the movement..
2003 cases will be approved by Sep '08
2004 cases by Apr '09
2005 cases by Sep '09
2006 cases by Dec '09
Good Luck !!!
This does not make sense at all.. cases are a miniscule portion of actual USCIS approvals and a rate of 30 cases per month would mean most of USCIS personnel are on vacation for summer :)
wallpaper hot Lady Gaga Before And After
zCool
04-28 09:17 PM
Finally!!!..
So what happened with Murthy's contacts and advice to INS officials etc???? :p
This is too little .. too late..
Most of the crooks already used up or sold after initial bulletin in march!
But better late than never..
So what happened with Murthy's contacts and advice to INS officials etc???? :p
This is too little .. too late..
Most of the crooks already used up or sold after initial bulletin in march!
But better late than never..
sundarpn
01-13 04:13 PM
All is well :)
Is this already passed or is it something they are comtemplating?
Is this already passed or is it something they are comtemplating?
2011 lady gaga before and after
yabadaba
02-14 02:31 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_lit_030402a.asp
WASHINGTON, D.C.- Immigrant advocates filed a national class action lawsuit in federal court today challenging the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) misadministration of a law that provides persons granted asylum the right to live and work in the United States permanently. The suit, filed by the American Immigration Law Foundation and Dorsey & Whitney LLP, seeks to compel the INS to issue all allotted "green cards" fairly on a first-come, first-served basis.
Some 50 named plaintiffs represent tens of thousands of asylees throughout the country. The plaintiffs are all refugees who fled persecution in their home countries and were granted asylum in the United States. Under U.S. law, they may apply to become permanent residents, or so-called green card holders, of the United States. Congress has imposed a cap of 10,000 on the number of asylees who can attain permanent resident status each year.
The lawsuit alleges that the government failed to distribute more than 18,000 green cards in the last eight years while more than 60,000 asylees wait in legal limbo; failed to process applications on a first-come, first-served basis as required by law; and kept thousands of asylees on the wait list who are exempt from the cap. The lawsuit also challenges the government's practice of requiring asylees to obtain a new employment authorization card each year-at a cost that presents a hardship for many families-while they wait for their permanent status.
If 50 asylees managed to get enough money for action, 50 high-skilled immigrants can do it too. Otherwise I'll be greatly dissappointed. Lack of action is a killer. I was shoked to read walking_dude's post that nobody from MI volunteered to be a plaintiff in DL case. If people do not want to help themselves, IV won't be able to help them.
dude..lazycis...this is awesome precedent. it doesnt get easier than this....its exactly the same as what we are going after. there was wastage in numbers, thereby hardship in terms of renewals of eads
what type of profile would a class based plaintiff have? will any of the july filers be able to "qualify" as a plaintiff in this class action lawsuit
WASHINGTON, D.C.- Immigrant advocates filed a national class action lawsuit in federal court today challenging the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) misadministration of a law that provides persons granted asylum the right to live and work in the United States permanently. The suit, filed by the American Immigration Law Foundation and Dorsey & Whitney LLP, seeks to compel the INS to issue all allotted "green cards" fairly on a first-come, first-served basis.
Some 50 named plaintiffs represent tens of thousands of asylees throughout the country. The plaintiffs are all refugees who fled persecution in their home countries and were granted asylum in the United States. Under U.S. law, they may apply to become permanent residents, or so-called green card holders, of the United States. Congress has imposed a cap of 10,000 on the number of asylees who can attain permanent resident status each year.
The lawsuit alleges that the government failed to distribute more than 18,000 green cards in the last eight years while more than 60,000 asylees wait in legal limbo; failed to process applications on a first-come, first-served basis as required by law; and kept thousands of asylees on the wait list who are exempt from the cap. The lawsuit also challenges the government's practice of requiring asylees to obtain a new employment authorization card each year-at a cost that presents a hardship for many families-while they wait for their permanent status.
If 50 asylees managed to get enough money for action, 50 high-skilled immigrants can do it too. Otherwise I'll be greatly dissappointed. Lack of action is a killer. I was shoked to read walking_dude's post that nobody from MI volunteered to be a plaintiff in DL case. If people do not want to help themselves, IV won't be able to help them.
dude..lazycis...this is awesome precedent. it doesnt get easier than this....its exactly the same as what we are going after. there was wastage in numbers, thereby hardship in terms of renewals of eads
what type of profile would a class based plaintiff have? will any of the july filers be able to "qualify" as a plaintiff in this class action lawsuit
more...
soljabhai
12-14 09:28 AM
It is not the case that a law cannot be challenged. All the authority of the various government branches (legislative, judicial and executive) is derived from the powers created in the constitution. So even if congress creates a law and president signs it, it can still be challenged if it is found to be contradicting with the constitution from which the government branches derive their authority.
If that was not the case then "Separate would still have been equal" and we would have still been living in a divided society with whites having different schools, hotels and theaters than everyone else. The Supreme Court ruled that "Separate cannot be equal" and all the laws for separating the different ethnicities immediately became unconstitutional and hence invalid.
The question is not that whether any law can be challenged but whether this rule regarding per country ceilings can be. Only a constitutional expert can answer that question.
If that was not the case then "Separate would still have been equal" and we would have still been living in a divided society with whites having different schools, hotels and theaters than everyone else. The Supreme Court ruled that "Separate cannot be equal" and all the laws for separating the different ethnicities immediately became unconstitutional and hence invalid.
The question is not that whether any law can be challenged but whether this rule regarding per country ceilings can be. Only a constitutional expert can answer that question.
mundada
12-13 02:00 PM
I think you have made a great argument. The original intention of diversity quota was to prevent people from certain European countries from becoming a dominant race in the US in 1920s.
However, the Civil Rights Act that protects national origin came into effect in 1964.
I am not a lawyer but have been taking business law course. I therefore believe if national origin discrimination is not allowed in the employment then unusually high (5 years) green card delays for certain nationalities is promoting national origin discrimination by detering employers from hiring people born in certain countries.
I think this argument will fly. I am not sure family based restrictions could be lifted but national origin quota restriction on employment and national origin non-discrimination in employment are definitely contradicting each other.
FYI:
TITLE VII of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (1964)
The protected classes: race, color, sex, religion & national origin. Employers with 15 or more employees. The most well known employment discrimination statute. Prohibits employment discrimination against the protected classes - race, color, sex, religion & national origin – in every aspect of employment, i.e. hiring, firing, promotion, training, working conditions, compensation, etc.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
However, the Civil Rights Act that protects national origin came into effect in 1964.
I am not a lawyer but have been taking business law course. I therefore believe if national origin discrimination is not allowed in the employment then unusually high (5 years) green card delays for certain nationalities is promoting national origin discrimination by detering employers from hiring people born in certain countries.
I think this argument will fly. I am not sure family based restrictions could be lifted but national origin quota restriction on employment and national origin non-discrimination in employment are definitely contradicting each other.
FYI:
TITLE VII of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (1964)
The protected classes: race, color, sex, religion & national origin. Employers with 15 or more employees. The most well known employment discrimination statute. Prohibits employment discrimination against the protected classes - race, color, sex, religion & national origin – in every aspect of employment, i.e. hiring, firing, promotion, training, working conditions, compensation, etc.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
more...
longq
02-14 10:13 PM
I'm sorry, I haven't monitored the web-site since my last posting.
Today reality hit me very hard. I am in my late thirties and I haven't had much adversity in my life regarding financial, career, family, etc.
However; today reality really hit me hard.
One gentlemen, his name was Raja Pitchai. He had asked me to help him file his I-140 and ask for cross chargeability to his wife's place of birth (singapore). USCIS accepted his package and his 140 got approved in a couple of months. (his priority date; india became available one month later anyways (he was from india eb2).
He was the one of the nicest guys I have talked to. Very courteous fellow.
They couldn't approve his case because he was stuck in name check. Well, his wife called me today and told me that he passed away last week (brain tumor). He had two U.S. citizen children but him and his wife have no relatives here.
She doesn't seem to be interested to stay here (she wouldn't be able to keep the greencard process going anyways because the death of the petitioner is automatic denial). She is leaving USA and was going through all the things she needs to wind up. I don't know if she would have stayed here if she got the greencard and I didn't want to task. Reality really him home today.
I need a couple of days to get over this.
It is very sad to hear this story. Very sorry for him and his family. May god bless his family. When we here this kind of story, in a foreign land where no relatives are there, the life is so pathatic here. The reality is differnt. There is something big and important for us other than green card. The life, health and family is very important than GC. May god bless all of us.
Once again, very sorry for your nice friend.
Today reality hit me very hard. I am in my late thirties and I haven't had much adversity in my life regarding financial, career, family, etc.
However; today reality really hit me hard.
One gentlemen, his name was Raja Pitchai. He had asked me to help him file his I-140 and ask for cross chargeability to his wife's place of birth (singapore). USCIS accepted his package and his 140 got approved in a couple of months. (his priority date; india became available one month later anyways (he was from india eb2).
He was the one of the nicest guys I have talked to. Very courteous fellow.
They couldn't approve his case because he was stuck in name check. Well, his wife called me today and told me that he passed away last week (brain tumor). He had two U.S. citizen children but him and his wife have no relatives here.
She doesn't seem to be interested to stay here (she wouldn't be able to keep the greencard process going anyways because the death of the petitioner is automatic denial). She is leaving USA and was going through all the things she needs to wind up. I don't know if she would have stayed here if she got the greencard and I didn't want to task. Reality really him home today.
I need a couple of days to get over this.
It is very sad to hear this story. Very sorry for him and his family. May god bless his family. When we here this kind of story, in a foreign land where no relatives are there, the life is so pathatic here. The reality is differnt. There is something big and important for us other than green card. The life, health and family is very important than GC. May god bless all of us.
Once again, very sorry for your nice friend.
2010 lady gaga before and after
akred
02-13 12:36 PM
I think the US government wanted it this way.
Yes. Racial exclusion and preference for European immigration has a long history in US immigration law.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
Yes. Racial exclusion and preference for European immigration has a long history in US immigration law.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
more...
manderson
02-15 12:20 PM
Type "retrogression" in Google search bar - when the results page shows up, look at the right hand side, there under the Sponsored Links you will see IV advertisement and link.
Looks pretty cool. GO IV!
when did you check?
Looks pretty cool. GO IV!
when did you check?
hair lady gaga before and after
NKR
02-13 11:24 AM
What is ROW and POW, please? I have seen both used in several posts (I am hoping POW is not Prisoner of War:)) Still learning the immigration lingo!
There is no such thing as POW in immigration. I was kidding when I said that. With immigration mess I am feeling like one POW (prisoner of war).
There is limit on visa numbers allocated to each country, So retrogression has affected people from India, China, Mexico and Philliphines more since the maximum number of people applying for EB category GC are from these 4 countries and . "Rest of the World - ROW" refers to any country which is not the above four countries.
There is no such thing as POW in immigration. I was kidding when I said that. With immigration mess I am feeling like one POW (prisoner of war).
There is limit on visa numbers allocated to each country, So retrogression has affected people from India, China, Mexico and Philliphines more since the maximum number of people applying for EB category GC are from these 4 countries and . "Rest of the World - ROW" refers to any country which is not the above four countries.
more...
alisa
02-13 08:44 PM
Are you sure you understood it fully?
I wrote " if you think ", meaning a lot of harping on is happening based on the assumption that removal of country limits will impact ROW badly. It's not the fact. Though it has been explained a number of times that its not the case, some members obstinately stick to their guns and regurgitate it again!
Taking some sentence written by me out-of-context does not prove anything.
Easy now!!! Simmer down.....
Its just that every time the VB comes out, we get a lot of posts from folks from India/China who want to remove country limits. And they talk about only removing the country limits, as if removing country limits is going to solve the problem.
You scare away ROW when you do that.
Can I ask you a question? How much of IV goals you have supported till date? How many IV activities you have participated? How much you have contributed? I'm interested in knowing. If you haven't , whether you have incentive or not, it doesn't make even a teeny difference to the movement.
In December 2006, I started my state chapter, and went around and held meetings and told folks about IV. Then in the summer of 2007, I, along with other folks, some from India and some from Europe, went around and met with the staff of three congressmen/women, and two senators. And then we urged another person to go and meet his congresswoman. We covered half the state delegation in the House, and both senators.
I wrote " if you think ", meaning a lot of harping on is happening based on the assumption that removal of country limits will impact ROW badly. It's not the fact. Though it has been explained a number of times that its not the case, some members obstinately stick to their guns and regurgitate it again!
Taking some sentence written by me out-of-context does not prove anything.
Easy now!!! Simmer down.....
Its just that every time the VB comes out, we get a lot of posts from folks from India/China who want to remove country limits. And they talk about only removing the country limits, as if removing country limits is going to solve the problem.
You scare away ROW when you do that.
Can I ask you a question? How much of IV goals you have supported till date? How many IV activities you have participated? How much you have contributed? I'm interested in knowing. If you haven't , whether you have incentive or not, it doesn't make even a teeny difference to the movement.
In December 2006, I started my state chapter, and went around and held meetings and told folks about IV. Then in the summer of 2007, I, along with other folks, some from India and some from Europe, went around and met with the staff of three congressmen/women, and two senators. And then we urged another person to go and meet his congresswoman. We covered half the state delegation in the House, and both senators.
hot hot Lady Gaga Before And After
PlainSpeak
01-13 12:57 PM
why doesn't anyone in iv core get it dammit..... this is crystal clear..... what more do u want...... now get mov'in & get green cards for all of us by next week..... :rolleyes:
why doesn't anyone in iv core get it dammit..... this is crystal clear..... what more do u want...... now get mov'in & get green cards for all of us by next week.....
For a second after seeing your statement i thought some is getting what i am saying but the smile at the very end destroyed that illusion
But in any case whether you agree with me or not (or whether as some say i am in cloud cooko land- to which all i can say is i woke up when will you) i appreciate a reply to the post
why doesn't anyone in iv core get it dammit..... this is crystal clear..... what more do u want...... now get mov'in & get green cards for all of us by next week.....
For a second after seeing your statement i thought some is getting what i am saying but the smile at the very end destroyed that illusion
But in any case whether you agree with me or not (or whether as some say i am in cloud cooko land- to which all i can say is i woke up when will you) i appreciate a reply to the post
more...
house lady gaga nose efore and
_TrueFacts
09-05 02:20 PM
IMV members and readers, we have been here in US for quite long and know the secret to successful life in US, just to say one: always abide by law and live your values.
After you get your GC, you may or may not visit IMV, fine. But make sure you look at things from an unbiased attitude and uphold your values and culture all the time. Most of you might retire in your home countries, so it makes every sense for us to look at how things are back home.
After you get your GC, you may or may not visit IMV, fine. But make sure you look at things from an unbiased attitude and uphold your values and culture all the time. Most of you might retire in your home countries, so it makes every sense for us to look at how things are back home.
tattoo lady gaga before and after
jsb
06-05 10:18 AM
Not really the biggest barrier is same or similar job. It is absolutely unfair no not let someone grow into different areas and keep the job exciting. I personally had to pass on so many opportunities even within my own company because of similar job constraint. In fact in many good companies including mine the executives encourage you to get experience in different areas of business before you are considered ready for executive positions and the VP of my division clearly told this to my director that i need to move on to a different job area. In general the AC 21 is risky and if you are waiting for 6-7 years you may not want to take the risk as USCIS make decisions which are unreasonable. AC 21 is also not a law and is subject to interpretation. The deal is that it is completely unfair to not let a person grow professionally and let him or her try different careers. Granted some folks may like to stay in same job area and continue what they are doing and these changes will not impact them but for those who want to try something different every few years this same or similar job rule is a curse.
EB is based on employer's need and sponsorship. Even AC21 is a deviation (in our favour) after 180 days wait. That seems fair, as permiiting you to ditch sponsoring employer soon after your filing for permanent residency could lead to fraud.
Any suggested change should not appear to be too much deviation from the original intent. Best potential seems to be for USCIS to communicate preadjudiation decion to clients without waiting for the visa number (stating that the decison letter could be used for GC benefits, such as those given by EAD & AP, until such time formal GC card is issued, which could be done when visa number becomes available). This should reduce USCIS workload as they will not have to keep on working same cases again and again with frequent requests for FP, job confirmation letters, etc.
EB is based on employer's need and sponsorship. Even AC21 is a deviation (in our favour) after 180 days wait. That seems fair, as permiiting you to ditch sponsoring employer soon after your filing for permanent residency could lead to fraud.
Any suggested change should not appear to be too much deviation from the original intent. Best potential seems to be for USCIS to communicate preadjudiation decion to clients without waiting for the visa number (stating that the decison letter could be used for GC benefits, such as those given by EAD & AP, until such time formal GC card is issued, which could be done when visa number becomes available). This should reduce USCIS workload as they will not have to keep on working same cases again and again with frequent requests for FP, job confirmation letters, etc.
more...
pictures Fergie Before Plastic Surgery
eeezzz
07-30 11:26 AM
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Several things to consider.
1. Is it really 20k left for this year.
2. Are there more EB2 RoW applicants filed I-485 for the last few months.
3. You have number from India CP, do you have number from China CP.
Several things to consider.
1. Is it really 20k left for this year.
2. Are there more EB2 RoW applicants filed I-485 for the last few months.
3. You have number from India CP, do you have number from China CP.
dresses after. lady gaga before
harikris
05-31 01:40 AM
[Hiralal] ... and hence a better bet would be recapture ..
That's a much better suggestion than playing carrot-and-stick on real-estate bargains Mr. Hiralal.
Now, what would really be effective is for our own people that are already naturalized and integrated and assimilated and digested in the US system to stand up for our cause.
Please, do this for us seniors. As citizens and permanent residents, your voice will be effectively heard. Case in point - legislation on re-uniting families. To begin with, family based has nearly 60% more visas than employment based and nearly 80% of the visas available are exempt from per-country limits. And yet, the politicians want to reform family based immigration process because the people at the receiving end are their citizens. There is nothing wrong with it because the wait-time for extended family members are really long too which is a shame. But you see, there are bills that are actively discussed and passed in that category i.e fundamental solutions are being explored.
Why is Mr. Bobby Jindal and likes of him not taking up our cause actively? People use their "humble-background" in campaign times. Why do they fail in holding out a helping hand to people that are stuck in such "humble-background"? Do you see such apathy in other minority communities?
Thanks.
That's a much better suggestion than playing carrot-and-stick on real-estate bargains Mr. Hiralal.
Now, what would really be effective is for our own people that are already naturalized and integrated and assimilated and digested in the US system to stand up for our cause.
Please, do this for us seniors. As citizens and permanent residents, your voice will be effectively heard. Case in point - legislation on re-uniting families. To begin with, family based has nearly 60% more visas than employment based and nearly 80% of the visas available are exempt from per-country limits. And yet, the politicians want to reform family based immigration process because the people at the receiving end are their citizens. There is nothing wrong with it because the wait-time for extended family members are really long too which is a shame. But you see, there are bills that are actively discussed and passed in that category i.e fundamental solutions are being explored.
Why is Mr. Bobby Jindal and likes of him not taking up our cause actively? People use their "humble-background" in campaign times. Why do they fail in holding out a helping hand to people that are stuck in such "humble-background"? Do you see such apathy in other minority communities?
Thanks.
more...
makeup house lady gaga without makeup
bobzibub
07-10 11:48 AM
My wife suggested the same thing about an hour ago after getting our lawyer's visa bill for my worthless 485 application. (#$#$%you very much US government!)
It is much better to run to something than run from something. But maybe it is time.
It is much better to run to something than run from something. But maybe it is time.
girlfriend wallpaper 2010 lady gaga born
pappu
07-02 06:08 PM
Immigration Voice is compiling experiences from members on the 02/07 Visa Bulletin incident. Please see the posts below.
We encourage members to share their experiences with us. Please look at the posts below for focus and talking points, and post your stories on IV at
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=99550#post99550
with details on:
a) Your current Green Card Status
b) If you have yet sent in your I-485 application
c) Your contact details along with Name and handle on IV. IV is mindful of your privacy and will share this information externally only with prior consent. No anonymous write-ups, please
d) IMPORTANT: We want to keep our focus in our stories only on the following issues:
- Impact of 07/02 on your application (Quality of life issues, time and money expended, inconvenience experienced, et al)
- Request USCIS /DOS to consider accepting 485s filed
- Please refrain from mentioning AILA or even questioning the mechanics of USCIS in the past few days
- Please refrain from using strong negative accusatory adjectives while refering to any federal or state agency
Some of our key members will guide you through the process.
WHAT'S BEEN DONE ALREADY
Stories that have been accepted for publishing are listed on our blog at immigrationvoice.blogspot.com
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
The above story ranked the highest (over 3500 views) in the last 7 days on prlog.
An additional story was also released yesterday:
http://www.prlog.org/10022854-american-dream-suspended-on-the-eve-of-july-fourth-for-several-thousand-legal-green-card-aspirants.html
WHAT YOU CAN DO
a) Distribute the above stories (Other blogs, contacts)
b) Submit more write-ups
We encourage members to share their experiences with us. Please look at the posts below for focus and talking points, and post your stories on IV at
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=99550#post99550
with details on:
a) Your current Green Card Status
b) If you have yet sent in your I-485 application
c) Your contact details along with Name and handle on IV. IV is mindful of your privacy and will share this information externally only with prior consent. No anonymous write-ups, please
d) IMPORTANT: We want to keep our focus in our stories only on the following issues:
- Impact of 07/02 on your application (Quality of life issues, time and money expended, inconvenience experienced, et al)
- Request USCIS /DOS to consider accepting 485s filed
- Please refrain from mentioning AILA or even questioning the mechanics of USCIS in the past few days
- Please refrain from using strong negative accusatory adjectives while refering to any federal or state agency
Some of our key members will guide you through the process.
WHAT'S BEEN DONE ALREADY
Stories that have been accepted for publishing are listed on our blog at immigrationvoice.blogspot.com
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
The above story ranked the highest (over 3500 views) in the last 7 days on prlog.
An additional story was also released yesterday:
http://www.prlog.org/10022854-american-dream-suspended-on-the-eve-of-july-fourth-for-several-thousand-legal-green-card-aspirants.html
WHAT YOU CAN DO
a) Distribute the above stories (Other blogs, contacts)
b) Submit more write-ups
hairstyles Plastic Surgery Fail?
geevikram
11-09 11:41 PM
I would love to see how close is Sachug with his predictions once Dec bulletin comes through..
BharatPremi
07-26 04:01 PM
So why are you here in the first place? Why in US? Why applying for GC? Why on IV to try to improve this broken system? Face the fact, you too dont want to return or else you wouldnt be here.
There is no harm in being selfish and persuing a better life. "Do something good for India" is an ideal punch line for preachers. BUT Be realistic.
Rongha_2000,
Hypothetically speaking let's say if USA decides not to take you in permanently what will you do?:D
There is no harm in being selfish and persuing a better life. "Do something good for India" is an ideal punch line for preachers. BUT Be realistic.
Rongha_2000,
Hypothetically speaking let's say if USA decides not to take you in permanently what will you do?:D
msp1976
02-13 03:07 PM
The 7% is a maximum.
They do not have to go to 7% if they don't want to. However; they can't go over it; if there is more demand then supply.
What about paragraph 5 that I have posted up somewhere ???
Does that allow the 7% limit to be exceeded or not ?
they can't go over it; if there is more demand then supply.
That is why we need more supply.....Once supply is more they can go over 7%...
They do not have to go to 7% if they don't want to. However; they can't go over it; if there is more demand then supply.
What about paragraph 5 that I have posted up somewhere ???
Does that allow the 7% limit to be exceeded or not ?
they can't go over it; if there is more demand then supply.
That is why we need more supply.....Once supply is more they can go over 7%...