gbarquero
08-31 09:44 PM
I've called several members and I am dispointed of them just saying "no.... I can't..."
But they all have time to be in the forums everyday asking for help, asking questions about dates, receipts, etc. It just doesn't make any sense that they have the chance to do something about it, they don't have "enough time for it"
But I am sure, they all complaint about how long is taking and all the money they have to invest on attorneys.
But they all have time to be in the forums everyday asking for help, asking questions about dates, receipts, etc. It just doesn't make any sense that they have the chance to do something about it, they don't have "enough time for it"
But I am sure, they all complaint about how long is taking and all the money they have to invest on attorneys.
wallpaper Wallpaper: 3
gianik
05-25 05:01 PM
Thanks for informative posts. and Thanks specifically for addressing the wages question.
Another Quebec/Ontirio question.
Apart from the French language and referendum threat, are there any other downsides for Montreal? I guess the reason I seem to be fixated is that I think if I am going to make this change I might as well change the life setting to somewhat more European (in terms of architecture and the environment overall) as I am getting tired of American setting some times. So Montreal sounds more European in that sense. I do however, have a wife and kids and not sure if that makes a difference in the choice of destination as oppose to being a single migrant. Any differences in terms of education quality or family friendly policies between Ontario and Quebec?
Thank you
Another Quebec/Ontirio question.
Apart from the French language and referendum threat, are there any other downsides for Montreal? I guess the reason I seem to be fixated is that I think if I am going to make this change I might as well change the life setting to somewhat more European (in terms of architecture and the environment overall) as I am getting tired of American setting some times. So Montreal sounds more European in that sense. I do however, have a wife and kids and not sure if that makes a difference in the choice of destination as oppose to being a single migrant. Any differences in terms of education quality or family friendly policies between Ontario and Quebec?
Thank you
n_2006
05-22 03:49 PM
I think many of consultants those came here with small companies might not got payment initially until you the project ataleast for few weeks. That period of time is the eligibility for illegal status.
Well they will easily find out from your SSN number if one is on payroll or not. I am seriously looking into this matter of getting illegal and many of my friends agree. Once the bill passes in its current form we should get advise from a good lawyer to convert status from legal to illegal. It sounds so insane when I say changing for legal to illegal..but that is the hit thing these days.
Well they will easily find out from your SSN number if one is on payroll or not. I am seriously looking into this matter of getting illegal and many of my friends agree. Once the bill passes in its current form we should get advise from a good lawyer to convert status from legal to illegal. It sounds so insane when I say changing for legal to illegal..but that is the hit thing these days.
2011 The MBA June wallpaper is
Sakthisagar
10-27 09:21 AM
From from the article. "On wooing back Indian talent, Murthy said there was no need to increase their salaries by 50 times to ensure this. But their lives could be made easier by providing schools, making sure that power condition and commuting is reasonably all right " Looks like he wants to still have the "less expensive" advantage over non-Indian companies / competition and he just wants more and easy H1B's and does not like the path to permanent residency and eventually citizenship and integrating with the American society - which is what American immigration is for. Just need the $$$. Though there are many good to learn from this company and this man, I do disagree with his views when it comes to immigration to USA.
To summarise: - Mr.Murthy is saying let all scape goats come to Infosys and get H1 or L1, and we may use you in whatever way we want, by showing some never attainable goals. and use it as chop shop material, get your tax money also as profit while you are in USA. give accomodation in one hotel room with 4 or less people or in an apartment 2 familes in 2 bed room apartment with a one rental car together!, Any way He want to still make $$$$ that is purely evident. by hook or Crook!
To summarise: - Mr.Murthy is saying let all scape goats come to Infosys and get H1 or L1, and we may use you in whatever way we want, by showing some never attainable goals. and use it as chop shop material, get your tax money also as profit while you are in USA. give accomodation in one hotel room with 4 or less people or in an apartment 2 familes in 2 bed room apartment with a one rental car together!, Any way He want to still make $$$$ that is purely evident. by hook or Crook!
more...
abhijitp
01-23 01:19 PM
Mailed hand-written letter to WH, copy to IV.
Sorry for the delay, have been busy with things like
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16806
Sorry for the delay, have been busy with things like
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16806
a1b2c3
10-12 10:19 AM
Looking at the movement of dates for EB3, esp India and China, it's hard to be optimistic of any changes. It's a very wretched position to be in for Indian and Chinese nationality, if they're in EB3. All those who are eligible to port will definitely try to port to EB2 as long as it's available and cut their waiting time. It might be risky and unpredictable, but it's a risk worth taking considering the endless torture in the form of a long wait and zero or little forward movement of dates.
There've been times when I've felt like attempting porting, but am not sure of the reaction of my employer - a big "reputed" company. If they revoke the I-140 in retaliation for using AC-21, then no chance of porting and back to square one. So it's the seemingly endless wait for me just like all others suffering from 2001 onwards. If only I'd not hesitated to take a bold step back in 2003. Too late to lament about that though.
It was very hard to see at least 3-4 of my friends working in very reputed, established companies, not some tinpot startups (I'm almost tempted to name the companies) using labor Sub. And all of them have got their green cards comfortably. Every single one of them.
Their managers pushed for labors subs for them and nobody even objected because it was legal!
And to my best knowledge, my current company didn't do any subs (perhaps because they didn't have layoffs during dot com bust) so I see senior employees in my company badly stuck with EB3. In fact, there are EB3 managers hopelessly stuck whose EB2 employees are in a better position than them. I'm NOT making this up.
Unless you take risks, you won't progress. Calculate your risks and take it. My friend, 2003 is an old PD and you have been stuck for long. You deserve a better deal and a more senior job profile. I agree completely with folks though, that allowing people to retain the old PD is unfair to others waiting and USCIS should grant some intermediate PD. But take it from me, all kinds of unfair practices have been happening. A classic example is July 07.
There've been times when I've felt like attempting porting, but am not sure of the reaction of my employer - a big "reputed" company. If they revoke the I-140 in retaliation for using AC-21, then no chance of porting and back to square one. So it's the seemingly endless wait for me just like all others suffering from 2001 onwards. If only I'd not hesitated to take a bold step back in 2003. Too late to lament about that though.
It was very hard to see at least 3-4 of my friends working in very reputed, established companies, not some tinpot startups (I'm almost tempted to name the companies) using labor Sub. And all of them have got their green cards comfortably. Every single one of them.
Their managers pushed for labors subs for them and nobody even objected because it was legal!
And to my best knowledge, my current company didn't do any subs (perhaps because they didn't have layoffs during dot com bust) so I see senior employees in my company badly stuck with EB3. In fact, there are EB3 managers hopelessly stuck whose EB2 employees are in a better position than them. I'm NOT making this up.
Unless you take risks, you won't progress. Calculate your risks and take it. My friend, 2003 is an old PD and you have been stuck for long. You deserve a better deal and a more senior job profile. I agree completely with folks though, that allowing people to retain the old PD is unfair to others waiting and USCIS should grant some intermediate PD. But take it from me, all kinds of unfair practices have been happening. A classic example is July 07.
more...
485Mbe4001
10-24 01:25 PM
Ignore the IOs, just talk to your Senator or Congressman. They will be able to help you out. I was stuck in name check for more than 3 years. My congressman did not help but the senators office had a namecheck cell and they help out with genuine cases. The person there helped me clear my name check in 2-3 months (talk, dont email, send certified letter with details after talking to them). Had i known this earlier I would have had contacted them earlier and would have gotten my GC in June 07. My lawyer sdid not allow us to contact the IOs for information and i suffered big time because of that. Based on my experience all i can say is be proactive.
I don't know if my NC is cleared. Tried to find it couple of times calling over phone but always ran into unfriendly IO officers.
Got out of BEC in dec 2006, I140 cleared in Jan 2007 but then my PD became current only in June 2007. And due to laziness of my law firm, my I-485 filing did not happen in June and got dragged into July 07 mess.
I think if USCIS had initiated my Namecheck as per normal timeline (sometime around when my I-485 filed , i.e anywhere between July - Sep 2007), then yes, I think it crossed 180 days long time back.
I don't know if my NC is cleared. Tried to find it couple of times calling over phone but always ran into unfriendly IO officers.
Got out of BEC in dec 2006, I140 cleared in Jan 2007 but then my PD became current only in June 2007. And due to laziness of my law firm, my I-485 filing did not happen in June and got dragged into July 07 mess.
I think if USCIS had initiated my Namecheck as per normal timeline (sometime around when my I-485 filed , i.e anywhere between July - Sep 2007), then yes, I think it crossed 180 days long time back.
2010 MOUNTAIN BIKE WALLPAPER (click
qualified_trash
12-12 01:51 PM
QT:
You mean Feb of 07, right?
I meant the bulletin released in Jan of 2007 which would be for the following month which would mean Feb of 07.
nitpicking are we ?? :-))
You mean Feb of 07, right?
I meant the bulletin released in Jan of 2007 which would be for the following month which would mean Feb of 07.
nitpicking are we ?? :-))
more...
HRPRO
01-28 02:20 PM
Without knowing the situation of all the students, it is not fair to jump into conclusions. I am sure at least a few if not all the students, left India and come here with an intention to cheat. Some of them may not have known the true intent or authenticity of this university. From their standpoint it could just be they have gotten into a recognized univeristy in the US and this was going to be a gateway to a bright future. USCIS should only have themselves to blame before blaming the students for issuing I-20s, CPTs and OPTs. If the students came here on valid I-20s and are doing all the right things by going to class, why blame them. Again there could be students who are taking advantage of the system and doing the wrong things but there is blame everywhere.
All of us come here with dreams, dont we. Sometimes the dreams turn into nightmares and when it does we dont have to go out of our way to support the students in distress but the least we could do is stay away from adding to their woes. This is not a time to play smart Alec.
All of us come here with dreams, dont we. Sometimes the dreams turn into nightmares and when it does we dont have to go out of our way to support the students in distress but the least we could do is stay away from adding to their woes. This is not a time to play smart Alec.
hair mountain bike wallpaper. mountain bike wallpaper. mountain bike wallpaper.
aspiration
06-24 05:01 PM
One more co-sponsor added for HR 5882.. from California's 5th district- Sacramento...
Now total 23-Co-sponsors for HR 5882
Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-5] - 6/23/2008
Now total 23-Co-sponsors for HR 5882
Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-5] - 6/23/2008
more...
leo2606
08-07 11:59 PM
I would suggest to marry a girl who is in USA with EB3-I 2007 or later PD, that way your marriage problem will be solved and you are helping a poor sole.
Just kidding man... don't make me communist by giving REDs. :)
Even if I back date my marriage (as advised) , How can I get my future wife to USA?. I cannot get her on depend status as my H1-B (I believe) got canceled on approval of GC.
Issues I see,
1. The back date of marriage must match to my stay at India.
2. I did not visit India in the last one year.
3. I applied my I-485 in the August 2008 time. So (I must mention my marriage and dependents in the application). Which I did not . So this does not work.
See the troubles I have now.
P.S: I did not want to cheat USA Immigration Dept. Not a good practice
Let me know if there are any guanine ways.
Just kidding man... don't make me communist by giving REDs. :)
Even if I back date my marriage (as advised) , How can I get my future wife to USA?. I cannot get her on depend status as my H1-B (I believe) got canceled on approval of GC.
Issues I see,
1. The back date of marriage must match to my stay at India.
2. I did not visit India in the last one year.
3. I applied my I-485 in the August 2008 time. So (I must mention my marriage and dependents in the application). Which I did not . So this does not work.
See the troubles I have now.
P.S: I did not want to cheat USA Immigration Dept. Not a good practice
Let me know if there are any guanine ways.
hot Mountain Bike Mecca; Mountain
Circus123
07-10 08:04 AM
In my opinion, we should not spend any resources on this guy and or to oppose who oppose our views.
We should stick to getting our goals achieved instead of fighting those who are fighting us.
Lou Dobb seems to discourage illegal immigration but is all for legal immigration ...
We should stick to getting our goals achieved instead of fighting those who are fighting us.
Lou Dobb seems to discourage illegal immigration but is all for legal immigration ...
more...
house mountain bike wallpaper. Bikes, Mountain Bikes; Bikes, Mountain Bikes
ilovestirfries
06-27 03:30 PM
I understand that there is lot of fear among applicants that USCIS might retrogress the dates interimly sometime in july due to the expected high volume of applications filing in the begining of july.
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
When I think, you guys have reached the bottom of madness, you keep digging deeper...As such there is enough madness with INS in allowing every tom, dick and harry who filed in 2007 to be on par with those poor souls who have been waiting since 2002/2003/2004...And add to that fact that, you already got approved...And you want those poor souls who waited long enough, to wait for those lucky 2007 filers...Can your suggestion get any madder? :eek:
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
When I think, you guys have reached the bottom of madness, you keep digging deeper...As such there is enough madness with INS in allowing every tom, dick and harry who filed in 2007 to be on par with those poor souls who have been waiting since 2002/2003/2004...And add to that fact that, you already got approved...And you want those poor souls who waited long enough, to wait for those lucky 2007 filers...Can your suggestion get any madder? :eek:
tattoo mountain bike wallpapers -
eagerr2i
11-13 01:06 AM
If you are planning on taking action against the attorney for fraud and mis representation, you may want to file a complaint in the bar of the state where your attorney practices. Bar complaints are taken very seriously and if you have proper documentation and are ready for the fight, he could even lose his license and/or penalized by the bar.
more...
pictures mountain biking wallpapers.
arthsidhu
10-10 02:11 AM
Blood suckers
dresses 2010 Mountain Bike Wallpapers
aparnak
04-01 03:16 PM
sent the fax.
more...
makeup Tags: Steve Peat, wallpaper
rsrikant
08-10 10:45 AM
who cheated whom? come on diptam. you have been here for so long...
you can not talk like that... people look forward to get advise from guys like you. not hatred..
your company/employer cheated you. not anybody else... please rethink about it.
You dont need to knock anyones door - I'll proactively go to anyone who used a "Labor Subs" and call them a Cheat because they have cheated someone else's Property and Dream.
Its gone but i'm personally a victim of that - My 1st Labor was traded in the Market for certain US dollars... The legislation was not there - otherwise i did have sufficient Proof and resources to take care of that cheat company.
you can not talk like that... people look forward to get advise from guys like you. not hatred..
your company/employer cheated you. not anybody else... please rethink about it.
You dont need to knock anyones door - I'll proactively go to anyone who used a "Labor Subs" and call them a Cheat because they have cheated someone else's Property and Dream.
Its gone but i'm personally a victim of that - My 1st Labor was traded in the Market for certain US dollars... The legislation was not there - otherwise i did have sufficient Proof and resources to take care of that cheat company.
girlfriend mountain bike wallpaper.
h1techSlave
11-30 03:54 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf
Look at page 52. Page 53 explains, why USCIS is wasting visa numbers even though there is huge demand for the same.
The 7% country limit does not exist for the last quarter. But it does exist during the first 3 quarters. Since USCIS is moving the PD drastically only in the last quarter, they are unable to process all the applications in the last quarter resulting in wastage of EB visas.
Where did you get this number 80,000 FB numbers given to EB immigrants? Please show me the source !
Also, you are forgetting about 7% country quota and the demand from ROW (which itself is retrogressed!).
So no matter what you may think, without IV it's going to be a long wait
Look at page 52. Page 53 explains, why USCIS is wasting visa numbers even though there is huge demand for the same.
The 7% country limit does not exist for the last quarter. But it does exist during the first 3 quarters. Since USCIS is moving the PD drastically only in the last quarter, they are unable to process all the applications in the last quarter resulting in wastage of EB visas.
Where did you get this number 80,000 FB numbers given to EB immigrants? Please show me the source !
Also, you are forgetting about 7% country quota and the demand from ROW (which itself is retrogressed!).
So no matter what you may think, without IV it's going to be a long wait
hairstyles Wallpaper: 5
madhu345
05-22 04:28 PM
May be its a message for every one on ther other side of the border to sneak in :)
CHRAMA
04-14 02:44 PM
My I-140 was denied incorrectly , as a result my I-485 was denied.
The USCIS is claiming that the I-140 Petition was filed without a certified PERM application. This is absolutely incorrect. The original certified PERM application was filed with the I-140 Petition. I have a photocopy of the original PERM application.
My lawyer filed MTR for both I140 and I485 6weeks ago.I received receipt notices for both I290B.
I was working on my H1B till last week, but was laid off last week and I am searching for job.No one is offering job on H1B.I send a letter to coressman explaining my situation.
Can I use my EAD?-----My Lawyer says my EAD is invalid.
The USCIS is claiming that the I-140 Petition was filed without a certified PERM application. This is absolutely incorrect. The original certified PERM application was filed with the I-140 Petition. I have a photocopy of the original PERM application.
My lawyer filed MTR for both I140 and I485 6weeks ago.I received receipt notices for both I290B.
I was working on my H1B till last week, but was laid off last week and I am searching for job.No one is offering job on H1B.I send a letter to coressman explaining my situation.
Can I use my EAD?-----My Lawyer says my EAD is invalid.
andy garcia
12-30 01:04 PM
Longq,
Are these info are based on good guess? If not, can you provide us some link, or attach jpg with highlighting relevent facts.
From November 2005 Visa Bulletin
HOW IS THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
* The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
* In recent years, the application of the rules outlined in AC21 has allowed countries such as China � mainland born, India, and the Philippines to utilize large amounts of employment numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
* During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
* To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
Are these info are based on good guess? If not, can you provide us some link, or attach jpg with highlighting relevent facts.
From November 2005 Visa Bulletin
HOW IS THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
* The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
* In recent years, the application of the rules outlined in AC21 has allowed countries such as China � mainland born, India, and the Philippines to utilize large amounts of employment numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
* During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
* To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.