felix31
02-28 12:27 AM
I am setting up for the transfer of my second contribution...
wallpaper Labels: Maria Sharapova `S
kumar1
01-13 02:51 PM
vdlrao, I know you are looking at this thread. Any comments?
By the way, Where is logiclife these days?
By the way, Where is logiclife these days?
ramus
06-28 12:12 PM
Does this indicate that all dates will be 'C' in July?
Starting July 2, USCIS will no longer allow petitioners to file their I-140's under the premium processing program.* This is expected to be a temporary measure; starting August 1 petitioners will be allowed to file their*I-140 cases under the premium processing program.
*
The USCIS' press release can be accessed here: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22772
Starting July 2, USCIS will no longer allow petitioners to file their I-140's under the premium processing program.* This is expected to be a temporary measure; starting August 1 petitioners will be allowed to file their*I-140 cases under the premium processing program.
*
The USCIS' press release can be accessed here: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22772
2011 maria sharapova photos maria
belmontboy
05-22 08:34 PM
I just saw the May processing dates.
I printed it out and used it to wipe my backside, then flushed it down the toilet.
make sure the printout doesnot cause a "backlog" in the toilet :p
I printed it out and used it to wipe my backside, then flushed it down the toilet.
make sure the printout doesnot cause a "backlog" in the toilet :p
more...
qasleuth
04-01 09:19 PM
as of now, there is nothing ..it is just donate, donate and donate.
we don't even know why we are having new donation campaigns every month ... my favorite color is red ..so start giving me red's for being frank and speaking out the truth
Zen, simple question: how would you handle something like this without advocacy/group effort ? --> http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24786&referrerid=15623
we don't even know why we are having new donation campaigns every month ... my favorite color is red ..so start giving me red's for being frank and speaking out the truth
Zen, simple question: how would you handle something like this without advocacy/group effort ? --> http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24786&referrerid=15623
Macaca
08-12 06:08 PM
In fall 2003, an applicant filed a green card application, which remained pending due to FBI name checks until spring 2007. During the course of the adjudication, the applicant was fingerprinted and applied for interim benefits several times.
Although the applicant applied for most of the interim benefits in a timely manner, the filing of the last EAD was not timely, and the applicant had to end his employment. In correspondence to the Ombudsman in the winter of 2007, the applicant related that he is a cancer patient who no longer has income necessary to pay for treatments. (page 40)
A green card application filed in late spring 2003 with a service center remains pending. The applicant filed his fourth EAD in the fall of 2006. In January 2007, the applicant needed the EAD to continue employment, but had not yet received it more than 90 days after filing. As advised by USCIS, the applicant visited the USCIS field office to obtain an interim EAD. At the field office, USCIS told the applicant it no longer issues interim EADs. USCIS gave the applicant a form to request an interim EAD, which the applicant filed with the service center but received no response.28 The applicant contacted the Ombudsman in February 2007. The applicant�s green card application remains pending, while the interim EAD was approved late. (page 17)
Although the applicant applied for most of the interim benefits in a timely manner, the filing of the last EAD was not timely, and the applicant had to end his employment. In correspondence to the Ombudsman in the winter of 2007, the applicant related that he is a cancer patient who no longer has income necessary to pay for treatments. (page 40)
A green card application filed in late spring 2003 with a service center remains pending. The applicant filed his fourth EAD in the fall of 2006. In January 2007, the applicant needed the EAD to continue employment, but had not yet received it more than 90 days after filing. As advised by USCIS, the applicant visited the USCIS field office to obtain an interim EAD. At the field office, USCIS told the applicant it no longer issues interim EADs. USCIS gave the applicant a form to request an interim EAD, which the applicant filed with the service center but received no response.28 The applicant contacted the Ombudsman in February 2007. The applicant�s green card application remains pending, while the interim EAD was approved late. (page 17)
more...
![maria sharapova hottest pictures. Maria Sharapova Pictures [HQ]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhC_AVQKspPDjjDwNachYs9lXVOs_rji6JZxYI7GgPPJVWfPmVBzEIZeypfHKBMYwZvmKx9Efhv5gzG_4Uqbmg5z1J_VqMC_iGmMgKIhyphenhyphennmcFetSbOgTRAAnciGhlCpSLeOBtxaMNzXgjoV/s400/maria_sharapova_high+Quality_wallpaper_hot1024%252B786+(2).jpg "Maria Sharapova Pictures [HQ]")
nomad
07-09 04:13 PM
Please share your comments and suggestions to CISOMB. I dont know how good its going to be, but atleast we can share our VB gate experience!
The Office of the CIS Ombudsman (CISOMB) is pleased to invite you
to "The Ombudsman's 2007 Annual Report to Congress: Your
Questions and Comments". Session 1: Th, July 12, 1:30 - 2:30 pm.
Session 2: Th, July 12, 3:00 - 4:00 pm. Please join us to share
your comments and suggestions, as well as any issues of concern.
RSVP to mailto:cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov specifying
which call and session time you'd like to join. Indicate the
city, state from which you are calling. Participants will
receive confirmation email. Send your comments in advance to
mailto:cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov.
Source: ILW.com email newsletter dated July 10, 2007
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/#Announcements
The Office of the CIS Ombudsman (CISOMB) is pleased to invite you
to "The Ombudsman's 2007 Annual Report to Congress: Your
Questions and Comments". Session 1: Th, July 12, 1:30 - 2:30 pm.
Session 2: Th, July 12, 3:00 - 4:00 pm. Please join us to share
your comments and suggestions, as well as any issues of concern.
RSVP to mailto:cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov specifying
which call and session time you'd like to join. Indicate the
city, state from which you are calling. Participants will
receive confirmation email. Send your comments in advance to
mailto:cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov.
Source: ILW.com email newsletter dated July 10, 2007
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/#Announcements
2010 Maria Sharapova Designers and
lacrossegc
07-20 06:03 PM
Whenever an attempt to increase visa numbers is made a budget point of order can usually be made. So, you will need 60 votes to amend the law.
"Before every one starts to bash Hillary : this is what someone on IV posted regarding Senate floor Amendment 2339... and now it sort of makes sense:"
Not really. Senators voted against this because they opposed the underlying amendment. The Democratic opposition stems from the facts that the amendment proposed to re-capture from all categories and then re-distribute accordingly to a Republican preference. For instance EB-3, numbers re-captured didn't all go to EB-3. The amendment gave 61,000 to Schedule A and then re-distributed the rest equally.
A much fairer, simpler and permanent solution is to simply rollover the unused numbers to next years numbers.
"Before every one starts to bash Hillary : this is what someone on IV posted regarding Senate floor Amendment 2339... and now it sort of makes sense:"
Not really. Senators voted against this because they opposed the underlying amendment. The Democratic opposition stems from the facts that the amendment proposed to re-capture from all categories and then re-distribute accordingly to a Republican preference. For instance EB-3, numbers re-captured didn't all go to EB-3. The amendment gave 61,000 to Schedule A and then re-distributed the rest equally.
A much fairer, simpler and permanent solution is to simply rollover the unused numbers to next years numbers.
more...
coolvigo
11-03 11:35 PM
Folks,
For NRE account, you can easily send money to india and then repatriate it back. But in my case I have money to my NRE and bought an apartment. Now since i have sold that apartment, that money is in NRO account which is a one way account. You can only send money to NRO but you cannot get that money back in dollars from it.
Talking about getting money thru travellers check, you can do that only if you go to india and come back here in US with it....since you have to sign it at both places. Also there is a limit of $1500 for TC's when you come from India. Limitations....limitations....limitations.
If we send money to India for investment purposes.....all you will get is LOSS.
I started a business in India....lost lot of money in India becoz ppl in India do not want to trade honestly......bottomline......if you want to stay in US,,,,dont send your money anywhere....use in US and enjoy that money !!!
For NRE account, you can easily send money to india and then repatriate it back. But in my case I have money to my NRE and bought an apartment. Now since i have sold that apartment, that money is in NRO account which is a one way account. You can only send money to NRO but you cannot get that money back in dollars from it.
Talking about getting money thru travellers check, you can do that only if you go to india and come back here in US with it....since you have to sign it at both places. Also there is a limit of $1500 for TC's when you come from India. Limitations....limitations....limitations.
If we send money to India for investment purposes.....all you will get is LOSS.
I started a business in India....lost lot of money in India becoz ppl in India do not want to trade honestly......bottomline......if you want to stay in US,,,,dont send your money anywhere....use in US and enjoy that money !!!
hair maria sharapova tennis player.
Macaca
06-17 10:15 AM
The Ombudsman agrees with the assessment of many case workers and supervisors at USCIS field offices and service centers that the FBI name check process has limited value to public safety or national security, especially because in almost every case the applicant is in the United States during the name check process, living or working without restriction.
The Ombudsman recommended in the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 25) that the FBI name check process be re-examined. Delays in the name check process actually prolong an individual’s presence in the United States while the check is pending. In this sense, the current USCIS name check policy may increase the risk to national security by extending the time a potential criminal or terrorist remains in the country.
Name checks do not differentiate whether the individual has been in the United States for many years or a few days, is from and/or has traveled frequently to a country designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, or is a member of the U.S. military. Many individuals subject to lengthy name checks are either already green card holders or have been issued Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). These documents allow them to receive Social Security cards and state drivers’ licenses. Most green card applicants are also eligible to receive advance parole enabling them to travel outside the United States and return as long as their cases are pending, which can be for many years under the current process. (page 43)
As Dawn Lurie, a Vienna immigration lawyer, put it: "If there's a security reason [for the delay], then what are those people still doing here? . . . And if there isn't a security reason, then why are we making them wait for so long?" (Washington Post (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=85213&postcount=365))
FBI name checks disclose information to USCIS that is otherwise not available. Information contained in 39 [percent] of the FBI positive responses (letterhead memoranda) received in FY 06 was not contained in IBIS/TECS, USCIS’ primary background check tool. . ..
Use of the 39 percent positive response rate as referenced by USCIS to justify continuing this program may exaggerate the value of the FBI name check. It is unclear how many of the FBI name check “responses” also were revealed by one or more of the other security checks conducted for the applications. To date, the Ombudsman has been unable to ascertain from USCIS the total number of actual problem cases that the agency discovered exclusively as a result of the FBI name check. The Ombudsman understands that most, if not all, of the problem cases which would result in an eventual denial of benefits also can be revealed by the other more efficient, automated criminal and security checks that USCIS initiates.
While USCIS declined to provide the number or percentage of annual name checks that result in denials, the FBI has reported that less than 1 percent of 1.5 million names are ultimately tied to potentially damaging information.(Washington Post (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=85213&postcount=365))
The Ombudsman recommended in the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 25) that the FBI name check process be re-examined. Delays in the name check process actually prolong an individual’s presence in the United States while the check is pending. In this sense, the current USCIS name check policy may increase the risk to national security by extending the time a potential criminal or terrorist remains in the country.
Name checks do not differentiate whether the individual has been in the United States for many years or a few days, is from and/or has traveled frequently to a country designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, or is a member of the U.S. military. Many individuals subject to lengthy name checks are either already green card holders or have been issued Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). These documents allow them to receive Social Security cards and state drivers’ licenses. Most green card applicants are also eligible to receive advance parole enabling them to travel outside the United States and return as long as their cases are pending, which can be for many years under the current process. (page 43)
As Dawn Lurie, a Vienna immigration lawyer, put it: "If there's a security reason [for the delay], then what are those people still doing here? . . . And if there isn't a security reason, then why are we making them wait for so long?" (Washington Post (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=85213&postcount=365))
FBI name checks disclose information to USCIS that is otherwise not available. Information contained in 39 [percent] of the FBI positive responses (letterhead memoranda) received in FY 06 was not contained in IBIS/TECS, USCIS’ primary background check tool. . ..
Use of the 39 percent positive response rate as referenced by USCIS to justify continuing this program may exaggerate the value of the FBI name check. It is unclear how many of the FBI name check “responses” also were revealed by one or more of the other security checks conducted for the applications. To date, the Ombudsman has been unable to ascertain from USCIS the total number of actual problem cases that the agency discovered exclusively as a result of the FBI name check. The Ombudsman understands that most, if not all, of the problem cases which would result in an eventual denial of benefits also can be revealed by the other more efficient, automated criminal and security checks that USCIS initiates.
While USCIS declined to provide the number or percentage of annual name checks that result in denials, the FBI has reported that less than 1 percent of 1.5 million names are ultimately tied to potentially damaging information.(Washington Post (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=85213&postcount=365))
more...
GC_2008
09-20 01:29 PM
Both Franklin and GooblyWoobly have a valid point, but let's not offend anyone on the forum. I see a trend on this forum where some people are trying to differentiate people who attended the rally and who did not. Should we divide the forum to 2 groups now? One being "attended" and the other "no show". It is totally childish... I contributed some money to IV as well since I believe in its effort, and I did not include that in my signature to say "contributed $$$". Do not take your frustration out on anyone 'cause you know other people have the same right... I am not a programmer but it is a endless loop...
hot At Number One: Maria Sharapova
seekerofpeace
04-14 08:32 PM
In the state of Mass delivery is covered by the State provided you show you don't have insurance. Millions of single moms are delivering and many are teenagers and many are w/o any insurance. Delivery is considered an emergency and you will be covered. Keep your spirits up and bear the storm.....it always gets darkest before you see light again.
All the best
SoP
All the best
SoP
more...
house Maria Sharapova Sport: Tennis
thakkarbhav
08-11 08:38 AM
I guess they will not move dates ahead in first Q of 2011 but you have 80% chances next year to get GC
tattoo Maria sharapova - Hot sports
yabadaba
07-10 09:15 AM
dhl tacking number from ftd
Tracking history Help
Date and Time Status Location
7/10/2007 8:29 am With delivery courier. Washington - Ronald Reagan National, DC
7:28 am Arrived at DHL facility. Washington - Ronald Reagan National, DC
1:03 am In transit. Wilmington - Clinton Field, OH
12:32 am Processed at DHL Location. Wilmington - Clinton Field, OH
7/9/2007 6:29 pm Departing origin. Miami - Tamiami, FL
4:01 pm Shipment picked up Miami - Tamiami, FL
Tracking history Help
Date and Time Status Location
7/10/2007 8:29 am With delivery courier. Washington - Ronald Reagan National, DC
7:28 am Arrived at DHL facility. Washington - Ronald Reagan National, DC
1:03 am In transit. Wilmington - Clinton Field, OH
12:32 am Processed at DHL Location. Wilmington - Clinton Field, OH
7/9/2007 6:29 pm Departing origin. Miami - Tamiami, FL
4:01 pm Shipment picked up Miami - Tamiami, FL
more...
pictures Maria Sharapova Pictures [HQ]
prem_goel
08-04 05:43 PM
yes, its an equally plausible statement; however I was only referring to the way USCIS handled the July 2007 fiasco applications. There will always be bit of exceptions here and there. As people have pointed out also, there might be reasons for those exceptions as well. They have various stages in processing a 485 application, so it'll not always be FIFO. There'll be a bit of overlap always.
I was impressed by the way they published the processing dates accurately. Through that, I knew the approximate time-frame they were going to pickup my application. I also could guess reasonably well the time-frame for the RFE hence. I acted goody goody at work during those days then ;)...I knew I will have to request an EVL during this time-period that should match my job duties in the application.
Dude, i think you are thinking too much of it. USCIS is NOT an organization that goes by process.
No intention of harm or personal flame... i just wanted to show how a statement of exactly opposite nature can also sound equally plausible.
I was impressed by the way they published the processing dates accurately. Through that, I knew the approximate time-frame they were going to pickup my application. I also could guess reasonably well the time-frame for the RFE hence. I acted goody goody at work during those days then ;)...I knew I will have to request an EVL during this time-period that should match my job duties in the application.
Dude, i think you are thinking too much of it. USCIS is NOT an organization that goes by process.
No intention of harm or personal flame... i just wanted to show how a statement of exactly opposite nature can also sound equally plausible.
dresses Maria Sharapova/tennis
gogal
11-03 03:43 PM
Renewal of License or a New one for H1 or H4 or related visa... is fully based on I797... this rule has been applied since last 3years.. who all arrived in PA before 2002 or so... are safe they get the license renewed for more than 5 years but who are after that gets only renewed as per the I797 expiry date.. the problem lies what our I797 gets delayed, we cant drive ... sit home ... does anyone have a work around or dealt with such situation
more...
makeup maria sharapova hot imagess.
aadimanav
08-27 04:01 PM
A small BUMP for BIG expectation. :)
girlfriend in a red hot short attire and stunning hairstyle. maria sharapova 2011
jthomas
09-23 01:36 AM
I think we should call and tell them that highly skilled legal immigrants are working for long time and the jobs are granted because there is a shortage of highly skilled immigrants in US. We are waiting just because of the inefficiency of USCIS.
This is from numberusa website on sept 18th with link on the home page.
H.R. 5882 � "Recapturing Unused Employer-Sponsored Visas"
This legislation is similar to the measure that Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) used before Summer recess to hijack debate on E-Verify reauthorization. The bill�s sponsor, Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif), claims it would �recapture unused employer-sponsored visas� from as far back as 1991 and then add them to the current numerical cap of 140,000 employer-sponsored visas that are available each year. Current law, however, clearly states that any employer-sponsored visas not used in one year are allocated to the family-preference categories in the following year. That means that there are no �unused� visas from past years to �recapture.�
Moreover, these extra green cards would be for foreign workers to take engineering jobs, health care jobs, construction jobs, manufacturing jobs and just about every other job that Americans have been losing in this economy. In order to qualify, a foreign worker doesn't need more than 2 years of on-the-job training � and they aren't even required to have a high school diploma. Our country doesn't need these workers - our workers need these jobs!
Another problem i see here....
this ROY BECK is CEO & Founder of NumbersUSA is doing a backdoor calls directly to Harry Reid to kill this and other bills ....
Check his Today's Blog
Link (http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/september-22-2008/e-verify-will-die-if-congress-doesnt-act.html)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has two honorable choices:
* No. 1: Go around Sen.Menendez who has a "hold" on H.R. 6633, the "clean" E-Verify re-authorization bill passed by the House. Sen. Reid can bring this back-room filibuster to the Senate floor for a vote. If he does this, there easily will be the 60 votes necessary to stop Menendez and allow an overwhelming majority vote to pass H.R. 6633. (Reid reportedly doesn't want to do this because he doesn't want to force some of his Democrats to have to go on record just before the election.)
* No. 2: Avoid a vote altogether by talking to Menendez privately, persuading him that what he is doing is threatening the reputation of the Democratic Party just before elections and get him to withdraw his "hold" on H.R. 6633. (This way, Reid could then bring H.R. 6633 to the floor in the "hot-wire" fashion which will pass by voice vote.)
Either way, the American worker and public wins. It is all about Reid doing one of those two things.
This is why we want you to put particular pressure on Democratic Senators to put an end to Menendez' shameful grandstanding. Fortunately, Senate Republicans are standing firm against Menendez.
The weakest and most vulnerable American workers -- and non-workers -- will benefit the most from your willingness to step forward and take action this week.
SEN. MENENDEZ' E-VERIFY BLACKMAIL DEAL
After we told you that some Republican Senate staffers were working with Sen. Menendez (D-N.J.) for massive increases in foreign workers, you hammered Republican offices for not holding the line for a "clean" E-Verify bill.
Your efforts really worked. By the end of this last week, Republican Senate staffs were going into negotiations with Democrats and making it clear they were united in oppositiion to a foreign-worker surge at this time of 5-year-high unemployment and financial industry collapse.
Sen. Menendez apparently is not bothered by the 5-year-high official unemployment rate -- or even by the 292,000 additional American workers who went on unemployment in August alone. He is insisting that if we keep E-Verify, then we have to add another 550,000 foreign workers next year to the 1.1 million immigrants already scheduled to come.
(AS A REMINDER: E-Verify is the central tool for taking away the job magnet from illegal immigration. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to kill it so outlaw businesses will have more freedom to hire illegal workers. E-Verify is the on-line system that businesses can type into for each new hire and find out if they are an illegal alien.
(If you live in Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia -- or any other of the places that have started mandating that businesses use E-Verify -- your efforts to combat illegal immigration will be halted. )
This is from numberusa website on sept 18th with link on the home page.
H.R. 5882 � "Recapturing Unused Employer-Sponsored Visas"
This legislation is similar to the measure that Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) used before Summer recess to hijack debate on E-Verify reauthorization. The bill�s sponsor, Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif), claims it would �recapture unused employer-sponsored visas� from as far back as 1991 and then add them to the current numerical cap of 140,000 employer-sponsored visas that are available each year. Current law, however, clearly states that any employer-sponsored visas not used in one year are allocated to the family-preference categories in the following year. That means that there are no �unused� visas from past years to �recapture.�
Moreover, these extra green cards would be for foreign workers to take engineering jobs, health care jobs, construction jobs, manufacturing jobs and just about every other job that Americans have been losing in this economy. In order to qualify, a foreign worker doesn't need more than 2 years of on-the-job training � and they aren't even required to have a high school diploma. Our country doesn't need these workers - our workers need these jobs!
Another problem i see here....
this ROY BECK is CEO & Founder of NumbersUSA is doing a backdoor calls directly to Harry Reid to kill this and other bills ....
Check his Today's Blog
Link (http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/september-22-2008/e-verify-will-die-if-congress-doesnt-act.html)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has two honorable choices:
* No. 1: Go around Sen.Menendez who has a "hold" on H.R. 6633, the "clean" E-Verify re-authorization bill passed by the House. Sen. Reid can bring this back-room filibuster to the Senate floor for a vote. If he does this, there easily will be the 60 votes necessary to stop Menendez and allow an overwhelming majority vote to pass H.R. 6633. (Reid reportedly doesn't want to do this because he doesn't want to force some of his Democrats to have to go on record just before the election.)
* No. 2: Avoid a vote altogether by talking to Menendez privately, persuading him that what he is doing is threatening the reputation of the Democratic Party just before elections and get him to withdraw his "hold" on H.R. 6633. (This way, Reid could then bring H.R. 6633 to the floor in the "hot-wire" fashion which will pass by voice vote.)
Either way, the American worker and public wins. It is all about Reid doing one of those two things.
This is why we want you to put particular pressure on Democratic Senators to put an end to Menendez' shameful grandstanding. Fortunately, Senate Republicans are standing firm against Menendez.
The weakest and most vulnerable American workers -- and non-workers -- will benefit the most from your willingness to step forward and take action this week.
SEN. MENENDEZ' E-VERIFY BLACKMAIL DEAL
After we told you that some Republican Senate staffers were working with Sen. Menendez (D-N.J.) for massive increases in foreign workers, you hammered Republican offices for not holding the line for a "clean" E-Verify bill.
Your efforts really worked. By the end of this last week, Republican Senate staffs were going into negotiations with Democrats and making it clear they were united in oppositiion to a foreign-worker surge at this time of 5-year-high unemployment and financial industry collapse.
Sen. Menendez apparently is not bothered by the 5-year-high official unemployment rate -- or even by the 292,000 additional American workers who went on unemployment in August alone. He is insisting that if we keep E-Verify, then we have to add another 550,000 foreign workers next year to the 1.1 million immigrants already scheduled to come.
(AS A REMINDER: E-Verify is the central tool for taking away the job magnet from illegal immigration. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to kill it so outlaw businesses will have more freedom to hire illegal workers. E-Verify is the on-line system that businesses can type into for each new hire and find out if they are an illegal alien.
(If you live in Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia -- or any other of the places that have started mandating that businesses use E-Verify -- your efforts to combat illegal immigration will be halted. )
hairstyles maria sharapova
xyzgc
01-15 02:53 PM
My argument was on when your file will be looked at the first time. Of course, to get visa number numerous conditions, such as PD Currency, name-check, various documents, etc., have to be met. What I meant is that your file will be looked at the first time, only after cases physically received at the center reviewing your case (no matter what RD is shown on your receipt) before your case was recieved, have been looked at.
Yes, I completely agree with your argument. It makes total sense. I was bothered by your observation that PDs cutoffs are not honored at all. That doesn't seem true.
Thus, even if you name check is cleared, your PD is Current, and you provided all required documents, if there are cases physically received before your case was received (no matter what RD is shown on your receipt) which are still to be looked at (at least once), your file will not be looked at.
Agreed with that. Your case may not even be assigned RD. There is a backlog there as well. And this has been further compounded by the July 07 fiasco. Folks keep arguing with me, hey this is a major victory for IVians. How so, may I ask? It has clogged EB3-I like hell. This has given USCIS a reason not to process it further and dedicate resources to it. Most folks who got their EADs, after being eligible for it out of order, have not even used it. It may have benifitted EB3 spouses of some folks in the short run but it has messed it up completely in the longer run. I'm not EB3-I but I can't help stating this.
USCIS were very bad at calculating the size of the window. (Infamous July 07 is a glaring example of this one. How can you suddenly make everyone current? Beats my understanding completely!)
They would suddenly raise the cutoff dates and have a big window. And then they would go by RDs within that window. So even if your case had older PD, it could happen you didn't get a visa number because your RD was of a later date and visa numbers simply got over by the time they got to you. Instead, they should have some weighted average of RD + PD, within a window.
More importantly, they should NOT raise cutoff PDs dates arbitrarily. Hopefully, with the database revamping these administrative fallacies are corrected and such thing won't happen in future.
Yes, I completely agree with your argument. It makes total sense. I was bothered by your observation that PDs cutoffs are not honored at all. That doesn't seem true.
Thus, even if you name check is cleared, your PD is Current, and you provided all required documents, if there are cases physically received before your case was received (no matter what RD is shown on your receipt) which are still to be looked at (at least once), your file will not be looked at.
Agreed with that. Your case may not even be assigned RD. There is a backlog there as well. And this has been further compounded by the July 07 fiasco. Folks keep arguing with me, hey this is a major victory for IVians. How so, may I ask? It has clogged EB3-I like hell. This has given USCIS a reason not to process it further and dedicate resources to it. Most folks who got their EADs, after being eligible for it out of order, have not even used it. It may have benifitted EB3 spouses of some folks in the short run but it has messed it up completely in the longer run. I'm not EB3-I but I can't help stating this.
USCIS were very bad at calculating the size of the window. (Infamous July 07 is a glaring example of this one. How can you suddenly make everyone current? Beats my understanding completely!)
They would suddenly raise the cutoff dates and have a big window. And then they would go by RDs within that window. So even if your case had older PD, it could happen you didn't get a visa number because your RD was of a later date and visa numbers simply got over by the time they got to you. Instead, they should have some weighted average of RD + PD, within a window.
More importantly, they should NOT raise cutoff PDs dates arbitrarily. Hopefully, with the database revamping these administrative fallacies are corrected and such thing won't happen in future.
gunabcd
06-28 03:57 PM
This is not good. My PERM labor is stuck in Atlanta, I was hoping to apply I-140 pp since my 6th year H1 is expiring Dec, 07. If I can get my I-140 approved then I'll have to leave.
1. If your labor was filed in Nov 06 or earlier then you can file for 7th year extension (based on rule that labor pending for more than 365 days)
2. I'm not 100% sure but i think when your labor is approved if PDs are current, you can file i-140, 485, EAD together and get EAD by before your visa expires and you would be fine.
3. Labor substitution will not be allowed after July 17th, and there are a lot approved labors whose beneficiaries have left the company. Employers are willing to use these labors for whatever they get (excuse me!). If you really want to stay in US, find an approved labor with PD older than Nov 06 and then file I140/485/EAD, if you don't get EAD by Dec 07 then file 7th year ext based on the GC pending more than 365 days. Hurry up for labor..
1. If your labor was filed in Nov 06 or earlier then you can file for 7th year extension (based on rule that labor pending for more than 365 days)
2. I'm not 100% sure but i think when your labor is approved if PDs are current, you can file i-140, 485, EAD together and get EAD by before your visa expires and you would be fine.
3. Labor substitution will not be allowed after July 17th, and there are a lot approved labors whose beneficiaries have left the company. Employers are willing to use these labors for whatever they get (excuse me!). If you really want to stay in US, find an approved labor with PD older than Nov 06 and then file I140/485/EAD, if you don't get EAD by Dec 07 then file 7th year ext based on the GC pending more than 365 days. Hurry up for labor..
nat23
10-05 10:39 AM
It would be great if couple of members from Cincinatti area could pay a visit to Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio. This would drive our point further plus we can also use the 800,000 number that is floating around
No comments:
Post a Comment