dhirajs98
11-25 09:57 AM
I had bought a house 2 years back thinking that i will sell it after couple of years and make money. I know many people might have done that. I didnt knwo that having a house will become a burden for me wrt moving to a different place in search of a job. I do see jobs in cities outside my state and was thinking of applying for those jobs. My problem is that if i sell my house, i will have to pay from my own pocket.
Having a house in this market has become a pain as it has made me immobile with respect to good job offers.
I was thinking that incase i find a job in a different state and cannot travel back home frequently and also renting is not a good option then should i leave the house to the bank for foreclosure?
Will this affect my GC process. I have no plans of buying a house in coming years.
What might be an outcome of foreclosure, keeping in mind that i am wiating for my GC process.
If anyone had an experiecne like this or may know someone, please share ur thought..
My suggestion is to explore short selling to avoid foreclosure. This will not affect your credit as foreclosure does. And mortgage lenders are going ahead with this option.
Having a house in this market has become a pain as it has made me immobile with respect to good job offers.
I was thinking that incase i find a job in a different state and cannot travel back home frequently and also renting is not a good option then should i leave the house to the bank for foreclosure?
Will this affect my GC process. I have no plans of buying a house in coming years.
What might be an outcome of foreclosure, keeping in mind that i am wiating for my GC process.
If anyone had an experiecne like this or may know someone, please share ur thought..
My suggestion is to explore short selling to avoid foreclosure. This will not affect your credit as foreclosure does. And mortgage lenders are going ahead with this option.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
mallu
08-16 11:46 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006_II-F-Name_Checks.pdf
Has anything happened so far by recommendation of USCIS Ombudsman ? The position looks like a 'toothless tiger' .
Has anything happened so far by recommendation of USCIS Ombudsman ? The position looks like a 'toothless tiger' .
wc_user
10-12 06:42 PM
wow.. I finally got my receipt numbers.. I called USCIS and it seems it was just entered into the system today. It starts with LIN...
EB3 India
PD-Dec02, I-140-Nov06 TSC
July 2, Got the receipt for I-485 and EAD today
EB3 India
PD-Dec02, I-140-Nov06 TSC
July 2, Got the receipt for I-485 and EAD today
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
jayleno
01-13 03:31 PM
Looks like Obmudsman office have acknowledged the problem. Just read this on their site
......
However, the Ombudsman understands that USCIS may deny the Form I-485 in cases of portability (the ability to change jobs) before first issuing a Notice of Intent to Deny in certain limited circumstances. These include, for example, where the beneficiary is ineligible for the benefits of the Form I-485 by statute, or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the Form I-485 was pending for 180 days........
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1221837986181.shtm
Once again a big Thank You to all of the volunteers behind this campaign.
......
However, the Ombudsman understands that USCIS may deny the Form I-485 in cases of portability (the ability to change jobs) before first issuing a Notice of Intent to Deny in certain limited circumstances. These include, for example, where the beneficiary is ineligible for the benefits of the Form I-485 by statute, or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the Form I-485 was pending for 180 days........
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1221837986181.shtm
Once again a big Thank You to all of the volunteers behind this campaign.
more...
Hassan11
05-23 02:39 PM
Dakota Newfie,
Can you explain more what is a processing date?? is this different from priority date?? what do you mean by retrogressed from Sep to Aug 06?? is this for all countries??
For those of us who have become "current" with the latest VB movements, I have some discouraging news for you: at least for the Nebraska Processing Center, the current processing date for an employment-based I-485 has retrogressed from September to August,2006. Only a small step backwards but a step backwards all the same.
Can you explain more what is a processing date?? is this different from priority date?? what do you mean by retrogressed from Sep to Aug 06?? is this for all countries??
For those of us who have become "current" with the latest VB movements, I have some discouraging news for you: at least for the Nebraska Processing Center, the current processing date for an employment-based I-485 has retrogressed from September to August,2006. Only a small step backwards but a step backwards all the same.
Macaca
07-22 08:27 AM
Lou Dobbs Tonight 03/28/2007 (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/28/ldt.01.html): "It's pretty remarkable. Four hundred thousand H1 visas each year."
Temporary Admissions of Nonimmigrants to the United States: 2005 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/2005_NI_rpt.pdf) By ELIZABETH M. GRIECO | DHS, Jul 2006
Nonimmigrant visas allow foreign nationals to travel to a U.S. port of entry, such as an international airport, a seaport, or a land border crossing. However, they do not guarantee entry. At the port of entry, an immigration officer of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authorizes a traveler’s admission into the United States and the period of stay (i.e., the length of time the bearer of a nonimmigrant visa is allowed to remain in the United States) for that visit. The initial authorized stay is noted in the DHS Form I-94 Form issued to the nonimmigrant by CBP.
Many visas are valid for several years, allowing those visa holders to enter the United States multiple times. Nonimmigrants on long-term visas, however, are still issued an authorized period of stay by CBP each time they are admitted.
TECS is the primary source for data collected from the Arrival-Departure Record, also known as DHS Form
I-942. Nonimmigrants arriving by air, land, or sea are required to complete Form I-94, with two important exceptions. Canadians who travel to the United States as tourists or on business generally do not need the I-94 Form. Also, certain Mexicans who have a nonresident alien Border Crossing Card, commonly known as a laser visa or a multiple-entry nonimmigrant visa, may not be required to complete the I-94 Form for entry. These exceptions are significant because Canadian and Mexican citizens make up the vast majority of all nonimmigrant admissions.
This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Flow Report examines the number and characteristics of nonimmigrant admissions in 20051 recorded by the Treasury Enforcement Communications Systems (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
The data presented in this report are derived from the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection. TECS compiles and maintains information collected from nonimmigrants by DHS Form I-94, which asks for dates of arrival and departure as well as limited demographic information, such as name, sex, nationality, and date of birth.
I-94 Forms issued at air and sea ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for a single entry only. Each time a nonimmigrant enters the United States via air or sea, the arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and the information is entered into the data system. Conversely, each time a nonimmigrant leaves the United States via air or sea, the
departure portion is collected and the additional data is recorded into TECS.
By comparison, I-94 Forms issued at land border ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for multiple entries during an authorized period of admission. The arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and entered into the data system only at the time of initial form issuance and admission. Thus, while a nonimmigrant may enter the United States at a land border port of entry numerous times using the same I-94 Form, the arrival information recorded in TECS refers to the initial entry only. Also, a nonimmigrant who has been issued a multiple-entry I-94 and who leaves the United States via the land border is not required to surrender the departure portion of the form if the authorized period of admission is still valid and the nonimmigrant intends to return before the I-94 Form has expired.
The information from the departure portion of the form is recorded into TECS after the nonimmigrant surrenders the form. Although TECS records both arrival and departure data, the information presented in this report is based on arrival data only.
Many nonimmigrants, such as students, diplomats, and temporary workers, enter and leave the United States more than once each year, and the TECS system separately records each new issuance of an I-94 Form at arrival and each I-94 Form collected at departure. Since the arrival data are collected each time a new I-94 Form is issued, and an individual might enter more than once in a fiscal year, the count of admissions exceeds the number of individuals arriving.
In 2005, for example, there were 32 million I-94 admissions recorded by TECS, but only 26.9 million individuals entered the United States (see Table 2). Of those 26.9 million, 88 percent arrived once while 12 percent arrived two or more times during the year. This report uses TECS data to describe the number and characteristics of the 32 million I-94 admissions and not the 26.9 million individual nonimmigrants.
There is no limit on the total number of nonimmigrants admitted each year.
There are also limits on the number of petitions approved for initial employment for certain categories of temporary workers. For example, in 2005, high-skilled H-1B visas for certain first-time applicants were limited to 65,000. In general, there are few limitations on the number of immediate family members who can enter the country with nonimmigrant visa holders.
From How many H-1B visa workers? Counts vary (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=114543&postcount=737) VALLEY EMPLOYERS AMONG TOP USERS By Chris O'Brien (cobrien@mercurynews.com or (415) 298-0207) | Mercury News, 07/15/2007
A company that wants H-1B visas files an application with the U.S. Department of Labor. The Labor Department screens the applications, then passes them to the Department of Homeland Security, which includes the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Applications approved by the immigration service are then forwarded to the U.S. Department of State, which actually issues the visas.
There's a startling lack of publicly available data about the program, which makes it almost impossible to know which companies are getting the controversial visas and why. And much of the data that does exist is disputed by one side or another.
Oracle was issued 1,022 H-1B visas in calendar year 2006, a figure that includes renewals of previously issued visas. But Robert Hoffman, an Oracle spokesman, said his company could only confirm that it made 170 new H-1B hires in the federal government's fiscal year 2007, which runs from October to September.
The list is dominated by India-based outsourcing companies, such as Wipro and Infosys, which at No. 1 and No. 2 respectively received 3,143 and 3,125 new visas. The only Silicon Valley company on the list was Intel, ranked No. 13 with 613. Microsoft was fifth with 1,297.
But another list circulating on Capitol Hill told a somewhat different story. That list was also from the Homeland Security Department and included the number of new visas as well as the number of renewal visas.
According to that list, Oracle outranked Intel, receiving 1,022 visas in 2006. Intel received 828, as did Cisco; Yahoo received 347; and Hewlett-Packard received 333.
But Shotwell, the tech-industry lobbyist, said such tallies are misleading because companies often file multiple applications for a single person or large blanket applications for a number of positions they might not ultimately need because they want as many as possible before the cap is reached.
The federal government awarded 124,096 H-1B visas in the fiscal year ending October 2005, the most recent annual totals available. That includes renewed visas, which don't count against the annual cap.
From Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2005 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/H1B_FY05_Characteristics.pdf) November 2006
Number of H1B petitions approved for initial employment is 116,927. (page 5)
The number of approved petitions exceeds the number of individual H-1B workers because more than one U.S. employer may file a petition on behalf of an individual H-1B worker. (page 5)
Blogged at All Reader Comments (http://app.businessweek.com/UserComments/combo_review?action=all&style=wide&productId=20045&pageIndex=5) for A Green Light on the Road to Green Cards (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070717_923080.htm?chan=search)
Temporary Admissions of Nonimmigrants to the United States: 2005 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/2005_NI_rpt.pdf) By ELIZABETH M. GRIECO | DHS, Jul 2006
Nonimmigrant visas allow foreign nationals to travel to a U.S. port of entry, such as an international airport, a seaport, or a land border crossing. However, they do not guarantee entry. At the port of entry, an immigration officer of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authorizes a traveler’s admission into the United States and the period of stay (i.e., the length of time the bearer of a nonimmigrant visa is allowed to remain in the United States) for that visit. The initial authorized stay is noted in the DHS Form I-94 Form issued to the nonimmigrant by CBP.
Many visas are valid for several years, allowing those visa holders to enter the United States multiple times. Nonimmigrants on long-term visas, however, are still issued an authorized period of stay by CBP each time they are admitted.
TECS is the primary source for data collected from the Arrival-Departure Record, also known as DHS Form
I-942. Nonimmigrants arriving by air, land, or sea are required to complete Form I-94, with two important exceptions. Canadians who travel to the United States as tourists or on business generally do not need the I-94 Form. Also, certain Mexicans who have a nonresident alien Border Crossing Card, commonly known as a laser visa or a multiple-entry nonimmigrant visa, may not be required to complete the I-94 Form for entry. These exceptions are significant because Canadian and Mexican citizens make up the vast majority of all nonimmigrant admissions.
This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Flow Report examines the number and characteristics of nonimmigrant admissions in 20051 recorded by the Treasury Enforcement Communications Systems (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
The data presented in this report are derived from the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) of the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection. TECS compiles and maintains information collected from nonimmigrants by DHS Form I-94, which asks for dates of arrival and departure as well as limited demographic information, such as name, sex, nationality, and date of birth.
I-94 Forms issued at air and sea ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for a single entry only. Each time a nonimmigrant enters the United States via air or sea, the arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and the information is entered into the data system. Conversely, each time a nonimmigrant leaves the United States via air or sea, the
departure portion is collected and the additional data is recorded into TECS.
By comparison, I-94 Forms issued at land border ports of entry, in most cases, can be used for multiple entries during an authorized period of admission. The arrival portion of the I-94 Form is collected and entered into the data system only at the time of initial form issuance and admission. Thus, while a nonimmigrant may enter the United States at a land border port of entry numerous times using the same I-94 Form, the arrival information recorded in TECS refers to the initial entry only. Also, a nonimmigrant who has been issued a multiple-entry I-94 and who leaves the United States via the land border is not required to surrender the departure portion of the form if the authorized period of admission is still valid and the nonimmigrant intends to return before the I-94 Form has expired.
The information from the departure portion of the form is recorded into TECS after the nonimmigrant surrenders the form. Although TECS records both arrival and departure data, the information presented in this report is based on arrival data only.
Many nonimmigrants, such as students, diplomats, and temporary workers, enter and leave the United States more than once each year, and the TECS system separately records each new issuance of an I-94 Form at arrival and each I-94 Form collected at departure. Since the arrival data are collected each time a new I-94 Form is issued, and an individual might enter more than once in a fiscal year, the count of admissions exceeds the number of individuals arriving.
In 2005, for example, there were 32 million I-94 admissions recorded by TECS, but only 26.9 million individuals entered the United States (see Table 2). Of those 26.9 million, 88 percent arrived once while 12 percent arrived two or more times during the year. This report uses TECS data to describe the number and characteristics of the 32 million I-94 admissions and not the 26.9 million individual nonimmigrants.
There is no limit on the total number of nonimmigrants admitted each year.
There are also limits on the number of petitions approved for initial employment for certain categories of temporary workers. For example, in 2005, high-skilled H-1B visas for certain first-time applicants were limited to 65,000. In general, there are few limitations on the number of immediate family members who can enter the country with nonimmigrant visa holders.
From How many H-1B visa workers? Counts vary (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=114543&postcount=737) VALLEY EMPLOYERS AMONG TOP USERS By Chris O'Brien (cobrien@mercurynews.com or (415) 298-0207) | Mercury News, 07/15/2007
A company that wants H-1B visas files an application with the U.S. Department of Labor. The Labor Department screens the applications, then passes them to the Department of Homeland Security, which includes the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Applications approved by the immigration service are then forwarded to the U.S. Department of State, which actually issues the visas.
There's a startling lack of publicly available data about the program, which makes it almost impossible to know which companies are getting the controversial visas and why. And much of the data that does exist is disputed by one side or another.
Oracle was issued 1,022 H-1B visas in calendar year 2006, a figure that includes renewals of previously issued visas. But Robert Hoffman, an Oracle spokesman, said his company could only confirm that it made 170 new H-1B hires in the federal government's fiscal year 2007, which runs from October to September.
The list is dominated by India-based outsourcing companies, such as Wipro and Infosys, which at No. 1 and No. 2 respectively received 3,143 and 3,125 new visas. The only Silicon Valley company on the list was Intel, ranked No. 13 with 613. Microsoft was fifth with 1,297.
But another list circulating on Capitol Hill told a somewhat different story. That list was also from the Homeland Security Department and included the number of new visas as well as the number of renewal visas.
According to that list, Oracle outranked Intel, receiving 1,022 visas in 2006. Intel received 828, as did Cisco; Yahoo received 347; and Hewlett-Packard received 333.
But Shotwell, the tech-industry lobbyist, said such tallies are misleading because companies often file multiple applications for a single person or large blanket applications for a number of positions they might not ultimately need because they want as many as possible before the cap is reached.
The federal government awarded 124,096 H-1B visas in the fiscal year ending October 2005, the most recent annual totals available. That includes renewed visas, which don't count against the annual cap.
From Characteristics of Specialty Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2005 (http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/H1B_FY05_Characteristics.pdf) November 2006
Number of H1B petitions approved for initial employment is 116,927. (page 5)
The number of approved petitions exceeds the number of individual H-1B workers because more than one U.S. employer may file a petition on behalf of an individual H-1B worker. (page 5)
Blogged at All Reader Comments (http://app.businessweek.com/UserComments/combo_review?action=all&style=wide&productId=20045&pageIndex=5) for A Green Light on the Road to Green Cards (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070717_923080.htm?chan=search)
more...
Sunx_2004
01-07 02:12 PM
Rajpatelemail,
Overcome your fears, If you don't ask answer is no. No one before July 2007 thought that dates will become current for all categories but it did happened.
To me it seems a genuine demand, We need to bring this arguement/demand forward in very rational way keeping emotions aside.
Remember, This is in addition to whatever we are doing to expedite the GC.
Cheers
Guys... I am all to do anything for GC, that itself is big thing..
Anybody in this thread who support this idea and was here since 1998
pls come forward...
Then you really know , what it is about...
Upto GC, it is fine to do any movement/lead..perfectly acceptable.
But do not waste energy and aggressivness on citizenship related things. It rather damages the effort, just by adding citizenship related things.
It is as equal as what happened in the past, that adding illegal and legal based reform in teh single capsule blowed out everything and no benefit came out finally.
Now
i am asking you guys in this thread...
who support this idea and was here since 1998 or atleast from 2000
(Pls note you shd have started your GC process on or before 2000. Then you know the things.
If you came in 1998 and started GC just 1 or 2 years back..You may not be knowing the reality.)
pls come forward...
I am not questioning or discouraging your intentions/enthu/aggressiveness...
I am asking not to waste the energy on useless things.
Pls concentrate on GC related things which will benefit everybody.
People laugh for the resolutions you suggested , if they can be proposed to any legislative member.
Overcome your fears, If you don't ask answer is no. No one before July 2007 thought that dates will become current for all categories but it did happened.
To me it seems a genuine demand, We need to bring this arguement/demand forward in very rational way keeping emotions aside.
Remember, This is in addition to whatever we are doing to expedite the GC.
Cheers
Guys... I am all to do anything for GC, that itself is big thing..
Anybody in this thread who support this idea and was here since 1998
pls come forward...
Then you really know , what it is about...
Upto GC, it is fine to do any movement/lead..perfectly acceptable.
But do not waste energy and aggressivness on citizenship related things. It rather damages the effort, just by adding citizenship related things.
It is as equal as what happened in the past, that adding illegal and legal based reform in teh single capsule blowed out everything and no benefit came out finally.
Now
i am asking you guys in this thread...
who support this idea and was here since 1998 or atleast from 2000
(Pls note you shd have started your GC process on or before 2000. Then you know the things.
If you came in 1998 and started GC just 1 or 2 years back..You may not be knowing the reality.)
pls come forward...
I am not questioning or discouraging your intentions/enthu/aggressiveness...
I am asking not to waste the energy on useless things.
Pls concentrate on GC related things which will benefit everybody.
People laugh for the resolutions you suggested , if they can be proposed to any legislative member.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
reddy77
01-25 04:08 PM
Thanks Guys for your responses, I will try KLM ...
Recently, my friends flow KLM to hyd via JFK. they came back safe. I will let you know the exp once i talk to them.
Recently, my friends flow KLM to hyd via JFK. they came back safe. I will let you know the exp once i talk to them.
more...
Robert Kumar
04-03 07:27 AM
Don't know.
Thanks.
Can somebody please give us the link of the document that shows how many applied , yearwise.
Thanks.
Can somebody please give us the link of the document that shows how many applied , yearwise.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
sony9
10-02 08:45 PM
Hi,
just for information i am mentioning here. for this only i registered newly.
one of our friend got GC approval today. both wife and husband got. priority date is 2003 august eb2. mine is 2005 ending eb3. we can consider that as 2006 starting eb3. but when we get dont know. really frustating thing this like many especially who are in eb3. praying for changing the rules to be good for all.
God is with all of us. we too will get soon that good news.
Thank you.
just for information i am mentioning here. for this only i registered newly.
one of our friend got GC approval today. both wife and husband got. priority date is 2003 august eb2. mine is 2005 ending eb3. we can consider that as 2006 starting eb3. but when we get dont know. really frustating thing this like many especially who are in eb3. praying for changing the rules to be good for all.
God is with all of us. we too will get soon that good news.
Thank you.
more...
Macaca
12-05 03:59 PM
JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, Lou, you�ve been well known for years now, especially dealing with the issue of American corporations exporting jobs and criticizing that whole process of exporting American jobs overseas.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
vdlrao
03-29 06:08 PM
Based on your calculations , Experts, please let us know what to expect, if 12000 GC are released for EB2. Where will the cutoff come and stop..
Can you please post that link that shows how many are waiting year-wise.
12000 GCs for EB2 India and China means, with out any doubt it fetches 5 months forward movement.
But at present scenario EB2 China is at 22JUL06 and Eb2 India is at 08 May 2006.
On an average EB2 India has a demand of 1.5k per month.
EB2 China has a demand of 700 per month.
So the EB2 India moves 7 months ahead where as China moves 4 months ahead.
So both EB2 India and China will have the same Cut Off dates and it would/might be: May + 7 Months = December 2006 .
This is my assumtion.
.
Can you please post that link that shows how many are waiting year-wise.
12000 GCs for EB2 India and China means, with out any doubt it fetches 5 months forward movement.
But at present scenario EB2 China is at 22JUL06 and Eb2 India is at 08 May 2006.
On an average EB2 India has a demand of 1.5k per month.
EB2 China has a demand of 700 per month.
So the EB2 India moves 7 months ahead where as China moves 4 months ahead.
So both EB2 India and China will have the same Cut Off dates and it would/might be: May + 7 Months = December 2006 .
This is my assumtion.
.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
perm2gc
05-09 02:04 PM
When where you laid off Hunter ?
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
bazuka6
10-29 11:21 PM
From IV: IV commends the initiative taken by it's members nk2006, pd_recpaturing, ItsNotfunny and others. As these members have observed, we all know that any one who has filed for AOS/I-485 can potentially be hit with this issue, especially in the current job market situations. If you believe in the old adage prevention is better than cure, this is an action item you have to subscribe to. It will be only a matter of time the number of such denials is going to spike.
In recent weeks there has been a spate of I485 denials by USCIS in the AC21 cases. In most of these cases, the underlying I-140 has been revoked by previous employer. But AC21 regulations and related memo�s require that I485�s should not be denied based on that � provided I485 has been pending for more than 180 days and the applicant has changed to a new job that is same or similar. USCIS has been rejecting cases without even issuing a NOID � again required by AC21 regulations. So USCIS is not following AC21 regulations and related field memo�s for whatever the reasons.
Obviously this will have a very bad impact on us � in addition to tremendous amount of stress it can have very bad economic implications including loss of job. In the current economic conditions we cannot afford to lose the job change flexibility provided by AC21 regulations. IV has started a campaign to fight this.
After a brief campaign to write to Ombudsman, it has been decided to intensify this campaign and write to various officials in USCIS hierarchy. IV core members have been actively involved in coming up with a strategy and are actively supporting this effort. By sending large number of letters we can draw their attention to this issue and resolve as quickly as possible. There are other strategies that are being discussed and will be underway soon to tackle this issue. This is the first and the most important step up on which other steps depend.
I request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716
To achieve positive results we need to send these letters in large numbers - please send them today and let everyone else be aware of this effort. Thank you.
Request to core/web site admin: can you please add a link to this thread on the IV main page to get better coverage to this campaign - thanks.
Please change Dear Madam to Dear Ms. Velarde....
Madam can be taken out of context (esp in Washington ;) )
I mailed all 4 after changes
In recent weeks there has been a spate of I485 denials by USCIS in the AC21 cases. In most of these cases, the underlying I-140 has been revoked by previous employer. But AC21 regulations and related memo�s require that I485�s should not be denied based on that � provided I485 has been pending for more than 180 days and the applicant has changed to a new job that is same or similar. USCIS has been rejecting cases without even issuing a NOID � again required by AC21 regulations. So USCIS is not following AC21 regulations and related field memo�s for whatever the reasons.
Obviously this will have a very bad impact on us � in addition to tremendous amount of stress it can have very bad economic implications including loss of job. In the current economic conditions we cannot afford to lose the job change flexibility provided by AC21 regulations. IV has started a campaign to fight this.
After a brief campaign to write to Ombudsman, it has been decided to intensify this campaign and write to various officials in USCIS hierarchy. IV core members have been actively involved in coming up with a strategy and are actively supporting this effort. By sending large number of letters we can draw their attention to this issue and resolve as quickly as possible. There are other strategies that are being discussed and will be underway soon to tackle this issue. This is the first and the most important step up on which other steps depend.
I request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716
To achieve positive results we need to send these letters in large numbers - please send them today and let everyone else be aware of this effort. Thank you.
Request to core/web site admin: can you please add a link to this thread on the IV main page to get better coverage to this campaign - thanks.
Please change Dear Madam to Dear Ms. Velarde....
Madam can be taken out of context (esp in Washington ;) )
I mailed all 4 after changes
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
shahuja
01-31 10:03 AM
congrats prashantc..
Hello All,
In delhi consulate i know they keep the passport and are not giving away any slips (221(g)) or any color slips.
all they say "pending processing". Is this same as Administrative processing ? how do we differentiate if this delay due is due to PIMS or some other reason like security/name check/ or any etc problem. This is such a doubtful situation specially for people who have been waiting for more than 2 weeks ?
If you have knowledge ..do shed some light.
thanks
shahuja
Hello All,
In delhi consulate i know they keep the passport and are not giving away any slips (221(g)) or any color slips.
all they say "pending processing". Is this same as Administrative processing ? how do we differentiate if this delay due is due to PIMS or some other reason like security/name check/ or any etc problem. This is such a doubtful situation specially for people who have been waiting for more than 2 weeks ?
If you have knowledge ..do shed some light.
thanks
shahuja
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
endlessloop
06-20 10:05 PM
I have an employment-based petition and I'm presently unemployed. From what I understand, the sponsoring employer can hire me when I get my green card. So, when I get my EAD, which is most probably in 3 months, can I use it to work for whomever I wish?
If an employer files for your green card and you do not work for the employer, it is considered a visa fraud. Also, you have to wait for 180 days after applying for I-485 to be eligible to work for an employer other than the one who filed your labor.
Since you are in the country illegally, it would probably be faster for you to get permanent residency if the new immigration bill passes.
If an employer files for your green card and you do not work for the employer, it is considered a visa fraud. Also, you have to wait for 180 days after applying for I-485 to be eligible to work for an employer other than the one who filed your labor.
Since you are in the country illegally, it would probably be faster for you to get permanent residency if the new immigration bill passes.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
gvenkat
09-23 08:08 PM
All we need is just 233,816(page 2) visas(forget about country limit, EB category etc). In that case in 2 years we will have 280,000(140,000 * 2) visas. So should we all get GC in two years with that logic.
If only USCIS can think along those lines. :confused:
If only USCIS can think along those lines. :confused:
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
JazzByTheBay
09-10 10:43 AM
Still waiting too. :(
Created InfoPass for week after next.
still waiting
Created InfoPass for week after next.
still waiting
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
desi3933
08-25 11:24 AM
>> Guys, I am also not going anywhere, . I am here for 10 years now and its my life and I like it.
Thats sum it nicely. Nobody wants to go back.
Though you are sending "I am going back unless you fix it" cards, you are actually not serious about it. Great. Just Great.
And you think, that will fix the system.
To the "brave" person who gave me red dot with this comment
u r a sicko...even after getting citizenship u r here and that says a lot...looks like you've no friends and family. Feel sorry for u - Loner.
Hope you are feeling better after venting out your frustration. It was so nice of you to leave "anonymous" comments.
Good Luck to you.
Wishing the very best for you!
Thats sum it nicely. Nobody wants to go back.
Though you are sending "I am going back unless you fix it" cards, you are actually not serious about it. Great. Just Great.
And you think, that will fix the system.
To the "brave" person who gave me red dot with this comment
u r a sicko...even after getting citizenship u r here and that says a lot...looks like you've no friends and family. Feel sorry for u - Loner.
Hope you are feeling better after venting out your frustration. It was so nice of you to leave "anonymous" comments.
Good Luck to you.
Wishing the very best for you!
like_watching_paint_dry
01-24 09:50 PM
Lets just do that..cmon guys ..unity is strength.. the Brits should know that! if not lets remind them..
I concur... I'm not flying BA ever again, my family members have had bad experiences with these folks. My $ is now reserved for more deserving airlines, even if the tickets are a couple of hundred bucks more expensive elsewhere. We can't just let them get away with behaving like Jade Goody all the time.
I concur... I'm not flying BA ever again, my family members have had bad experiences with these folks. My $ is now reserved for more deserving airlines, even if the tickets are a couple of hundred bucks more expensive elsewhere. We can't just let them get away with behaving like Jade Goody all the time.
SunJoshi
01-01 09:02 AM
Sorry, although this is an independent thread, I cannot help myself posting the same thing here. Dont want to miss a chance to spread info on this within our retrogression victims:
This according to washingtonpost.com's editorial. See the editorial here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...123100764.html
This House member is apparently retiring in 2007 after serving his current term.
Here is an extract from his article that hits the homerun when it comes to retrogression. (please read this article entirely to get to know what this guy is all about).
We rarely hear about the long and shameful wait of up to five years facing a person seeking to immigrate legally into the United States, or the legitimate cross-border business that finds roadblocks at every turn. Kolbe consistently pushed the government to treat the people caught in this bureaucratic wastelands with respect. To be sure, he was a strong advocate of tougher border enforcement, but he knew that enforcement should be only a single component of a much bigger strategy.
This man is honest, candid and outspoken and unpopular:( at home(arizona) because of that. But the keyword here is candid and well-informed:). If the EB retrogression is presented properly to him, he could be an effective voice in the house.
Now, does anyone live in Arizona's 8th congressional district who can do something here. Arizona's 8th is most of Tucson, eastern Pima County, all of Cochise County and parts of Pinal and Santa Cruz Counties.
The congressman's official site is http://www.house.gov/kolbe/
Logic,
This is good info. We must try to get a meeting with the congressman. I'm sure we can find someone from AZ to help. If not, one of us can travel there and present our case.
SJ
This according to washingtonpost.com's editorial. See the editorial here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...123100764.html
This House member is apparently retiring in 2007 after serving his current term.
Here is an extract from his article that hits the homerun when it comes to retrogression. (please read this article entirely to get to know what this guy is all about).
We rarely hear about the long and shameful wait of up to five years facing a person seeking to immigrate legally into the United States, or the legitimate cross-border business that finds roadblocks at every turn. Kolbe consistently pushed the government to treat the people caught in this bureaucratic wastelands with respect. To be sure, he was a strong advocate of tougher border enforcement, but he knew that enforcement should be only a single component of a much bigger strategy.
This man is honest, candid and outspoken and unpopular:( at home(arizona) because of that. But the keyword here is candid and well-informed:). If the EB retrogression is presented properly to him, he could be an effective voice in the house.
Now, does anyone live in Arizona's 8th congressional district who can do something here. Arizona's 8th is most of Tucson, eastern Pima County, all of Cochise County and parts of Pinal and Santa Cruz Counties.
The congressman's official site is http://www.house.gov/kolbe/
Logic,
This is good info. We must try to get a meeting with the congressman. I'm sure we can find someone from AZ to help. If not, one of us can travel there and present our case.
SJ
No comments:
Post a Comment