images Juniors Maxi Party Dresses 
sbabunle
07-02 09:46 AM
bheemi
Nobody is invincible or above the law here. If we have the right resource
we could do that. Remember Pres: Clinton was impeached once.. As an organization our main problem is money. People often visit here to find a remedy for their proble, or to get some information. But the contributing members are very less. If we have right resources and right reasons we can bring anyone to their knees
babu
YOU PEOPLE understand first what i kept in the reply. I did not blame IV for doing other efforts..I am talking about facts about USCIS..So dont make fool us or yourself as IV or any other organization will not be able to attack USCIS..Bcoz USCIS is monarch..
Nobody is invincible or above the law here. If we have the right resource
we could do that. Remember Pres: Clinton was impeached once.. As an organization our main problem is money. People often visit here to find a remedy for their proble, or to get some information. But the contributing members are very less. If we have right resources and right reasons we can bring anyone to their knees
babu
YOU PEOPLE understand first what i kept in the reply. I did not blame IV for doing other efforts..I am talking about facts about USCIS..So dont make fool us or yourself as IV or any other organization will not be able to attack USCIS..Bcoz USCIS is monarch..
wallpaper wear short dresses,
GeetaRam
07-29 12:53 PM
Add CareFirst - Blue Cross Blue Shield
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
texanmom
09-26 11:46 AM
I just got a call from Eilene Zimmerman regarding the article and she promised me that she is working on fixing the error soon
If we make a big enough noise, perhaps we can get CNN to write an article focusing on our issues. Please continue to press for changes.
If we make a big enough noise, perhaps we can get CNN to write an article focusing on our issues. Please continue to press for changes.
2011 formal dresses for juniors
GCard_Dream
03-18 05:35 PM
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
more...
javadeveloper
01-30 12:15 PM
have you submitted the new G-28 form when you changed employers?
You can go back to your original GC sponsoring employer also right?
You can go back to your original GC sponsoring employer also right?
ca_gc
02-14 02:13 AM
"If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally."
This is a blatant lie. India is not using up ALL the H1B Visas, how can it use up ALL EB Immigration visas.
ROW will have to wait more than the present if there are no per country quotas, which they would not like. Who wants to give up their advantage ? To hell with the Indians and Chinese. They will fight anyways and anything good coming out of it can be shared by everyone.
This is a blatant lie. India is not using up ALL the H1B Visas, how can it use up ALL EB Immigration visas.
ROW will have to wait more than the present if there are no per country quotas, which they would not like. Who wants to give up their advantage ? To hell with the Indians and Chinese. They will fight anyways and anything good coming out of it can be shared by everyone.
more...
karanp25
07-14 06:49 PM
7/13 LUD is inconclusive. There's a separate thread on IV discussing this where EB-2 folks have seen a 07/13 LUD w/o AC-21. Do you remember seeing a change in your I-140 LUD after approval in 2006 and before last week when they generated your RFE?
if there was a LUD, this is a high possibility that your previous employer revoked I-140.
This RFE can not be generated out of the blues. Using H-1B Xfr instead of EAD has absolutely nothing to do with validity of your AC-21. At least i am not aware of any correlation between the two.
I dont remember that. I saw my online profile with USCIS just now. There is a LUD for yesterday 07/13/2008 on my 140 approved in 2006.
if there was a LUD, this is a high possibility that your previous employer revoked I-140.
This RFE can not be generated out of the blues. Using H-1B Xfr instead of EAD has absolutely nothing to do with validity of your AC-21. At least i am not aware of any correlation between the two.
I dont remember that. I saw my online profile with USCIS just now. There is a LUD for yesterday 07/13/2008 on my 140 approved in 2006.
2010 Dresses for juniors - modern
alex99
04-07 05:04 PM
HI BharatPremi,
Thanks for your response.
are the cases with 'Received Regional Office' status should be counted as Certified cases?.
Regards,
Alex
Thanks for your response.
are the cases with 'Received Regional Office' status should be counted as Certified cases?.
Regards,
Alex
more...
optimystic
03-17 03:36 PM
What I am saying is spill over from ROW goes to EB2 first. It does not split to EB2 and EB3 evenly. So more people from EB2 gets visa granted and thus people who joined EB2 bandwagon from EB3 and had earlier PD, they get Visa quickly. Now generally this spillover does not go to EB3 from EB2 having high demand from EB2 and thus EB3 get stuck with conventional numbers with 7% country limit and thus EB3 numbers move slowly. But if that spillover happens for both EB3 and 2 equally than EB3 can also move little bit quickly which is not the case. Thus shortening the queue by switching over to EB2 does not give full advantage to remained lot of EB3.
Bottom line, people moving away from EB3 to EB2 queue does provide relief to people remaining in the EB3 queue. Since now there's 'x' less number of people competing for the 7% visa numbers.
Its a different matter that the spillover from ROW is going to benefit EB2 queue more than it does EB3. But that's a different point. And in fact, if EB2 starts moving faster because of this spill over, hopefully more Eb3 people jump ship to Eb2 queue . In that case the ROW spillover is indirectly going to help people who stay back in Eb3 queue.
As for myself, I have Eb3 India PD of May 2001, which is very close to the front of the queue. So none of this queue jumping or spillover will affect my status much :) . On the other hand the USCIS' ability to sanely act in a FIFO order does ! But thats impervious to any external factors :)
Bottom line, people moving away from EB3 to EB2 queue does provide relief to people remaining in the EB3 queue. Since now there's 'x' less number of people competing for the 7% visa numbers.
Its a different matter that the spillover from ROW is going to benefit EB2 queue more than it does EB3. But that's a different point. And in fact, if EB2 starts moving faster because of this spill over, hopefully more Eb3 people jump ship to Eb2 queue . In that case the ROW spillover is indirectly going to help people who stay back in Eb3 queue.
As for myself, I have Eb3 India PD of May 2001, which is very close to the front of the queue. So none of this queue jumping or spillover will affect my status much :) . On the other hand the USCIS' ability to sanely act in a FIFO order does ! But thats impervious to any external factors :)
hair Poofy Dresses For Juniors
immique
07-03 01:42 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
how can you argue that quota system in EB categories is fair when there is no quota system in H1 visas? do you really think it is fair that a person from retrogressed country wait for 7-10 years in the same category or even a higher EB category when a similar person in other countries see their application cleared in a few months. just imagine yourself being in the less favorable/retrogressed category. EB system is based on qualifications and not the country of Origin. I don't have any issue regarding diversity. diversity is good but I don't think penalizing qualified individuals from a few countries just based on the country of Origin bodes well for the future of immigration especially when US is trying to attract high skilled immigrants.
how can you argue that quota system in EB categories is fair when there is no quota system in H1 visas? do you really think it is fair that a person from retrogressed country wait for 7-10 years in the same category or even a higher EB category when a similar person in other countries see their application cleared in a few months. just imagine yourself being in the less favorable/retrogressed category. EB system is based on qualifications and not the country of Origin. I don't have any issue regarding diversity. diversity is good but I don't think penalizing qualified individuals from a few countries just based on the country of Origin bodes well for the future of immigration especially when US is trying to attract high skilled immigrants.
more...
sodh
07-24 10:49 PM
They are talking about Allien#.
If you were on OPT you will have Allien# but the EB Catogery gets an allien# after they apply for AOS.
If you were on OPT you will have Allien# but the EB Catogery gets an allien# after they apply for AOS.
hot Choosing dresses for your
karanp25
07-14 06:23 PM
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
more...
house white party dresses for
go_gc_way
01-01 10:44 PM
bump /\/\/\/\/\
tattoo prom dresses edinburgh
dskhabra
03-17 09:46 AM
Guy you are forgetting the 7% per country quota for issuing GC. Applicants from a particular country can only get 7% of the total GC available in a year.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
That's true but when unused numbers are used for retrogressed countries then 7% cap is not followed. You can see more than 9800 approvals for India in the last three years. But still it's a looooonnnngggggg wait...........
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
That's true but when unused numbers are used for retrogressed countries then 7% cap is not followed. You can see more than 9800 approvals for India in the last three years. But still it's a looooonnnngggggg wait...........
more...
pictures Cute Party Dresses for Juniors
smuggymba
09-10 12:53 PM
My PD is March 2010 EB2 so i'm not even in this race yet but help me in understanding one thing.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
dresses formal dresses for juniors
actaccord
03-13 09:15 AM
/\/\/\/\/
more...
makeup red party dresses for juniors.
shreekhand
07-12 10:15 PM
What is the need for all this ? The visa bulletin is out but no one cares to read it I guess. Every bulletin has these or words to this effect.
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
girlfriend Juniors Party Dresses.
xyzgc
01-17 12:39 PM
If he had lost his job, he wouldn't bull-shitting around like this on public forums.
Its always easy when some one else loses his/her job to go like "what! what!!!" and pretend to be shell-shocked,while your job is still intact. Sounds like some bollywood-style melodrama.
Its always easy when some one else loses his/her job to go like "what! what!!!" and pretend to be shell-shocked,while your job is still intact. Sounds like some bollywood-style melodrama.
hairstyles Party Dresses Juniors 2011.
ajthakur
07-14 05:47 PM
Should I send a AC21 letter to USCIS along with my new employment letter?
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
ajthakur,
Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.
Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
ajthakur,
Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.
Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.
Gravitation
02-20 05:18 PM
Ok guys before you shoot it down heres my calc for EB2 pending apps from 2000 to Dec 2003. Obviously its a rough estimate, who knows how many eb3s switched, labor subs etc etc etc.
From pending apps from 2000 to 2003 dec are about 96. Assume represents 1% of total population so it would be 9600. Each app has about 1.5 dependents so about 15,000? If you assume as lower say 0.5% then number would obviously increase to 29,000.
Ok now shoot me down.
I had done some calculations long ago, it guestimated that 5~6% of people are registered with traciitt.
From pending apps from 2000 to 2003 dec are about 96. Assume represents 1% of total population so it would be 9600. Each app has about 1.5 dependents so about 15,000? If you assume as lower say 0.5% then number would obviously increase to 29,000.
Ok now shoot me down.
I had done some calculations long ago, it guestimated that 5~6% of people are registered with traciitt.
rimzhim
04-04 03:54 PM
So, only "US-educated folks" are entitled for H1? Is that what you are saying? And only that is a principled stand and rest everything is falsehood?
IEEE believes that ppl educated in the US should not be sent back and should actually stay here. I agree with that stance. After all, they want what is best for ppl born here and those who have been educated here. It is IEEE-USA :)
IEEE believes that ppl educated in the US should not be sent back and should actually stay here. I agree with that stance. After all, they want what is best for ppl born here and those who have been educated here. It is IEEE-USA :)
