JunRN
08-29 03:17 PM
NSC's receipting up-date is like fooling us around. It seems to me that if they touched one application with a date - July 24 - then it will declare in the Receipting up-date that it is already processing July 24 cases and yet, they are not yet finished with July 2 to 23 applications.
wallpaper Vibe surfers paradise gold
Greatdesi
08-31 11:13 AM
There was and continues to be lot of discussion around multiple 485s. When USCIS is adjudicating a 485, they look at other pending 485s and cancel them. I had two 485s - 1 on EB3 and the other EB2. EB2 became current recently. They approved the EB2 one and rejected the EB3. So you can have multiple 485s.
ashishgour
09-21 10:53 AM
Hi,
Are there any one who filed at NSC on July 23rd and not received the receipt so far?
Thanks,
-rk.
I am in the same boat...with approved 140 from TSC.
So I believe my case might have been transferred to TSC.
Are there any one who filed at NSC on July 23rd and not received the receipt so far?
Thanks,
-rk.
I am in the same boat...with approved 140 from TSC.
So I believe my case might have been transferred to TSC.
2011 Demarmels middot; Q1 Tower
maag
04-10 02:29 PM
did anyone did canada landing having no or expired visa & already used advance parole( i used advance parole for travel to India and my i-94 shows my status as AOS)
I am still not able to decide on whether to give up canada landing or not.
Had spent 6K to do all these and when its time to land........... lot of confusions
Just can't decide what to do....i see no timeline as to how long GC will take.
I am still not able to decide on whether to give up canada landing or not.
Had spent 6K to do all these and when its time to land........... lot of confusions
Just can't decide what to do....i see no timeline as to how long GC will take.
more...
sdrk
07-19 06:50 PM
^^^^^
GC08
07-08 12:38 PM
Previous years Oct Visa Bulletins doesn't look encouraging at all, EB-3 India moved by a week and other categories move by a month or 2. With USCIS taking huge no. of applications in june'07 the future of oct'07 seems to be pretty bleak, It is quiet depressing. We surely need this legislation of ability to file 485 even if visa dates not current.
And also recapture lost visa #s in previous several years automatically and increase efficiency in adjudicating cases (including name check, etc.). :D
And also recapture lost visa #s in previous several years automatically and increase efficiency in adjudicating cases (including name check, etc.). :D
more...
gc_chahiye
10-08 01:11 PM
Being a 2001 PD myself I fully sympathize with you for your trauma and support your notion that the Immigration System should give weightage to the number of years in the US, I do not support the notion of ending retrogression. Given that there are only a finite number of visa quotas, ending retrogression will make the GC a game of Inky-Pinky-Ponky. Either they give it to everyone (all the 800000 that applied) or they do FIFO based on date of entry in the US. If not, the present system of retrogression at least ensures that a person who came into the US in 2007 does not win the Inky-Pinki-Ponky game before a person like me in the queue since 2001. I agree that some extremely unfortunate people like you lose out, but it is still fairer than having no retrogression with the quota limitations in place, as that would be totally unfair.
I totally miss your point: why is ending retrogression bad? Because all 800K people might get the GC within 6 months? Whats wrong with that? Its not fair to those who have waited longer than others? Dont be a member of the "just because I suffered I want everyone else to suffer" That makes you no different from that talkshow host (who is now a citizen) on the radio channel recently who said he waited 10 years to get his GC, so everyone else also should, otherwise its not "fair"
Or, are you mixing up ending retrogression with making dates current? No thats not what we want. We want dates made current after the visa supply = demand. Just making all VBs like the July VB is pointless, and does lead to lots of uncertainties. By ending retrogression I mean making sure we have enough visa numbers for all who have been qualified by DOL (LC) and USCIS (I-140), by:
- ending per-country quota
- not counting dependents
- recapturing wasted visa numbers.
I totally miss your point: why is ending retrogression bad? Because all 800K people might get the GC within 6 months? Whats wrong with that? Its not fair to those who have waited longer than others? Dont be a member of the "just because I suffered I want everyone else to suffer" That makes you no different from that talkshow host (who is now a citizen) on the radio channel recently who said he waited 10 years to get his GC, so everyone else also should, otherwise its not "fair"
Or, are you mixing up ending retrogression with making dates current? No thats not what we want. We want dates made current after the visa supply = demand. Just making all VBs like the July VB is pointless, and does lead to lots of uncertainties. By ending retrogression I mean making sure we have enough visa numbers for all who have been qualified by DOL (LC) and USCIS (I-140), by:
- ending per-country quota
- not counting dependents
- recapturing wasted visa numbers.
2010 Surfers Paradise on the Gold
blackberry
08-27 09:52 AM
Bump..
more...
chmur
07-27 06:28 PM
Chmur; I appreciate your post. For the sake of a discussion could you share what is the temporary relief that you are seeking. I am curious to know the details. Is it
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
None ....
Eb3-I has to explain it's position and request DOS to suggest an alternative method to mitigate the starving under the given laws.
As suggested earlier which requires change in law and which does not is not clear to any of us. DOS itself has had contradictory implementations over the years.
I am baffled that you think anyone of us can actually dictate DOS what to do.
1. Revert back to the vertical spillover rule. OR
2. Revert back to vertical spillover rule and after EB3-ROW becomes current split the visas equally between EB2-I and EB3-I OR
3. Keep the horizontal spill over in place but any spill over from EB2 ROW should go equally to EB2-Retro and EB3 (ROW and Retro) category.
Let me offer my answers to the questions above:
1. In this case EB3-I is no better off as EB3ROW and EB2-I has to become current before any excess visas can go to EB3-I.
2. Completely negates the categorization as laid out by law after the initial handout is done equally. Is a hybrid approach where the vertical rule would be enforced so long as EB2 and EB3 (both ROW) are current. But after that a selective interpretation of the vertical rule is sought where EB2-I and EB3-I share it equally. The basis of this selective interpretation appears to be length of wait - nowhere does the INA state that length of wait can be used as a basis for negating categorization of EB category.
3. Is against the law - read my earlier post. Again selectively uses horizontal spill over till EB2 ROW demand is satisfied and then use vertical spill over to share visas between EB2-Retro and EB3 category.
I completely respect your right to lobby for change. However I am a little baffled as to how this change can be sought without changing law. Even if the change is approved, I see a strong possibility of a counter EB2 movement to nullify this change. I would appreciate any details from you anybody else on this. Cheers
None ....
Eb3-I has to explain it's position and request DOS to suggest an alternative method to mitigate the starving under the given laws.
As suggested earlier which requires change in law and which does not is not clear to any of us. DOS itself has had contradictory implementations over the years.
I am baffled that you think anyone of us can actually dictate DOS what to do.
hair Surfers Paradise, 31/2877 Gold
gsc999
07-06 07:22 PM
I saw your earlier post from this thread, where you are asking if it is ok to protest without having a permit. It seems you do not have aproper permit yet.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=98957#post98957
It seems you are member of this Chinese website http://www.mitbbs.com/, we welcome you to Immigration voice. We want to support you in this march but we need to have proper permits. Is it ok to reschedule this to 14th July so that we can gather the necessary permits and also inform all our Bay area members?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=98957#post98957
It seems you are member of this Chinese website http://www.mitbbs.com/, we welcome you to Immigration voice. We want to support you in this march but we need to have proper permits. Is it ok to reschedule this to 14th July so that we can gather the necessary permits and also inform all our Bay area members?
more...
pyaradesi
07-20 10:02 PM
I have a question reg. the unfair vertical spill devised by USCIS when allocating the visa numbers after the initial allocation is completed.
If the country needs EB1 categories first then the EB2 categories and then EB3 then why did they allocate equal numbers to all the three categories initially. If they needed more EB1 or EB 2 compared to EB 3 numbers they should have given 3x of numbers to EB1, 2x of numbers to EB2, and only 1x or less than that to EB3 when doing the initial allocation itself.
Its only due to some genius person's invention that USCIS decided to implement vertical spill over instead of doing a hoirzontal spill over of the numbers which will be fair.
Now the EB2 folks are going to comeback and say that EB2 deserve more rights and all that blah blah aka the fight people give whenever somebody tries to remove the unfair quota system in India. Grow up and behave like an educated person.
You can say that EB2 folks earn more... give me a break I know many EB3 folks who earn atleast 2 times more than whan an average EB2 guy earns. Its just a matter of luck(in the current scenario) that a person got applied in EB2 or EB3 category
You are taking it personally, this is not a question of you being skilled, deserving, fair skinned, blue eyed, or hairless. Why not all the spillover to to the family based gcs?
Think of it, uniting families is more important for a nation.
Why do you think even in the FB there are categories, how come there is not a quota for spouses of US citizens?
You are either not qualified for EB2 or your job is not qualified for EB2, now whose fault is it? Again, its not how much you earn, it is not how lucky you are. The EB category was not some boon, your HR manager, your lawyer, your manager came together and made the decision, last but not least your agreed to all this. EB2 is not some elitist club, you are welcome to join it, go talk to your HR manager, he controls the membership.
If the country needs EB1 categories first then the EB2 categories and then EB3 then why did they allocate equal numbers to all the three categories initially. If they needed more EB1 or EB 2 compared to EB 3 numbers they should have given 3x of numbers to EB1, 2x of numbers to EB2, and only 1x or less than that to EB3 when doing the initial allocation itself.
Its only due to some genius person's invention that USCIS decided to implement vertical spill over instead of doing a hoirzontal spill over of the numbers which will be fair.
Now the EB2 folks are going to comeback and say that EB2 deserve more rights and all that blah blah aka the fight people give whenever somebody tries to remove the unfair quota system in India. Grow up and behave like an educated person.
You can say that EB2 folks earn more... give me a break I know many EB3 folks who earn atleast 2 times more than whan an average EB2 guy earns. Its just a matter of luck(in the current scenario) that a person got applied in EB2 or EB3 category
You are taking it personally, this is not a question of you being skilled, deserving, fair skinned, blue eyed, or hairless. Why not all the spillover to to the family based gcs?
Think of it, uniting families is more important for a nation.
Why do you think even in the FB there are categories, how come there is not a quota for spouses of US citizens?
You are either not qualified for EB2 or your job is not qualified for EB2, now whose fault is it? Again, its not how much you earn, it is not how lucky you are. The EB category was not some boon, your HR manager, your lawyer, your manager came together and made the decision, last but not least your agreed to all this. EB2 is not some elitist club, you are welcome to join it, go talk to your HR manager, he controls the membership.
hot Surfers Paradise, Gold
ds37
11-18 07:34 AM
done.
more...
house Location: Gold Coast
buddyinsd
08-25 01:40 AM
Congrats man...U took off as well :)
Got CPO today..
Priority Date: Feb 21, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
Thanks every one
Got CPO today..
Priority Date: Feb 21, 2006
EB2 India, NSC
Thanks every one
tattoo Hilton Surfers Paradise in
Mount Soche
11-06 02:27 PM
I'm a july filer (July 16th)
have gotten EAD
Case status online says AP approved on Nov 2nd.
But NO FP.
Opened a SR on Oct 19th but don't have an appointment.
Called again yesterday and was told to call back on Nov 19th if I still don't have FP appointment.
Of the 6 filers at my job, only 2 got FP...very strange.
FYI, when I called the USCIS, they said it is very unusual not to get FP right after receipt notices. Apparently, the FP appointments are sent "automatically" after the receipts are generated/sent etc. That's what the USCIS rep told me anyways and she opened a SR on her own based on the info I gave her that my FP appointment hadn't arrived after over 100 days.
have gotten EAD
Case status online says AP approved on Nov 2nd.
But NO FP.
Opened a SR on Oct 19th but don't have an appointment.
Called again yesterday and was told to call back on Nov 19th if I still don't have FP appointment.
Of the 6 filers at my job, only 2 got FP...very strange.
FYI, when I called the USCIS, they said it is very unusual not to get FP right after receipt notices. Apparently, the FP appointments are sent "automatically" after the receipts are generated/sent etc. That's what the USCIS rep told me anyways and she opened a SR on her own based on the info I gave her that my FP appointment hadn't arrived after over 100 days.
more...
pictures Paradise beach, Gold Coast
snathan
04-24 02:46 PM
Hi JaiHind/Balaji,
Are you alrite? Mehul already passed away on March 2nd 2008 and now you want him to take second opinion. Please read the whole story before you comment.
Are you alrite? Mehul already passed away on March 2nd 2008 and now you want him to take second opinion. Please read the whole story before you comment.
dresses on Surfers Paradise, Gold
desi3933
06-28 10:11 PM
Employers can (at least they do) discriminate EAD holders. Here is an example and related link:
Fog Creek Software - Intern in Software Development (http://www.fogcreek.com/Jobs/SummerIntern.html)
"Permanent legal right to work in the United States. Because student visas (J1, F1, etc) are time-limited, we regret that we can't consider interns on student visas."
They key word here is "Permanent legal right to work in the United States". EADs (485 based EAD as well as F1 based EADs) have a limit of 1 year/2 year/29 months etc. Based on this Fog Creek Software will not hire an EAD holder. Can we do some thing about this blatant violation of the law?
As per I-9 form
The refusal to hire an individual because the documents presented have a future expiration date may also constitute illegal discrimination.
Any person wrongly discriminated due to EAD expiration date has the option of seeking claims for damages caused by the other party in court of law. I am not aware of any case involving such facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice
Fog Creek Software - Intern in Software Development (http://www.fogcreek.com/Jobs/SummerIntern.html)
"Permanent legal right to work in the United States. Because student visas (J1, F1, etc) are time-limited, we regret that we can't consider interns on student visas."
They key word here is "Permanent legal right to work in the United States". EADs (485 based EAD as well as F1 based EADs) have a limit of 1 year/2 year/29 months etc. Based on this Fog Creek Software will not hire an EAD holder. Can we do some thing about this blatant violation of the law?
As per I-9 form
The refusal to hire an individual because the documents presented have a future expiration date may also constitute illegal discrimination.
Any person wrongly discriminated due to EAD expiration date has the option of seeking claims for damages caused by the other party in court of law. I am not aware of any case involving such facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice
more...
makeup Vibe Hotel Gold Coast, Surfers
akhilmahajan
02-26 11:21 AM
There are 2 ways you can contribute.
1) Write out a $20 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
3561 Homestead Road #375
Santa Clara, CA 95051-5161
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.ph...d=26&Itemid=44
2) Just sign on to www.Paypal.com and send money to donations@immigrationvoice.org.
1) Write out a $20 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
3561 Homestead Road #375
Santa Clara, CA 95051-5161
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.ph...d=26&Itemid=44
2) Just sign on to www.Paypal.com and send money to donations@immigrationvoice.org.
girlfriend Surfers Paradise Gold Coast
ragz4u
05-02 12:38 PM
I am not sure about that. Most of the EB3 guys have advance degrees (including me) but not necessarily with US degrees.
I would not agree that most folks in EB3 have advanced degrees. Most do not. They have lot of experience though
believe me...you would think that people with advanced degrees would have applied in EB2...but there are cases where people have had to apply in EB3 category even with an advanced degree
I disagree with this too. Here are a few examples
1) A couple of years ago, when there was no retrogression, most folks did not want to take a chance and thought EB3 was a safer bet
2) Many Advanced Degree holders from US Univs joined a firm and their GC was applied immediately. But since they did not have enough work ex, they applied in EB3
3) Lots of scrupulous employers heard about retrogression and were actually very happy. They purposely filed even highly qualified folks as EB3 so that their abuse can be prolonged
4) Incompetent lawyers who felt they would not be able to prove the necessity of EB2
5) Sheer ignorance on the part of the beneficiary
I would not agree that most folks in EB3 have advanced degrees. Most do not. They have lot of experience though
believe me...you would think that people with advanced degrees would have applied in EB2...but there are cases where people have had to apply in EB3 category even with an advanced degree
I disagree with this too. Here are a few examples
1) A couple of years ago, when there was no retrogression, most folks did not want to take a chance and thought EB3 was a safer bet
2) Many Advanced Degree holders from US Univs joined a firm and their GC was applied immediately. But since they did not have enough work ex, they applied in EB3
3) Lots of scrupulous employers heard about retrogression and were actually very happy. They purposely filed even highly qualified folks as EB3 so that their abuse can be prolonged
4) Incompetent lawyers who felt they would not be able to prove the necessity of EB2
5) Sheer ignorance on the part of the beneficiary
hairstyles Surfers Paradise | Harcourts
ashwinr
02-10 12:11 AM
Hi,
Mostly a passive observer. I just contributed $50 through Paypal.
Unique Transaction ID #45308693SL5062504
Thanks.
Mostly a passive observer. I just contributed $50 through Paypal.
Unique Transaction ID #45308693SL5062504
Thanks.
googlegc
08-25 07:24 PM
Guys,
I just got my H1B Extension approved (8th year extension).
Original H1B was valid until Sept 2008. Changed companies after 180 days(of I485 application) and applied for H1 transfer and extension for 3 years via new company. Finally got it approved after 3 months for 3 years(until May 2011).
-Googlegc
I just got my H1B Extension approved (8th year extension).
Original H1B was valid until Sept 2008. Changed companies after 180 days(of I485 application) and applied for H1 transfer and extension for 3 years via new company. Finally got it approved after 3 months for 3 years(until May 2011).
-Googlegc
bbct
02-12 12:22 PM
If you have h4 stamp in your passport , you can go out of the country and comeback in and you would be back in h4 status. Short of that I don't see any other option. Ohers please chip in with your ideas.
Once your new status is approved you cannot go back to any prior status. Even if you have an unexpired H4 visa stamp in your passport, it becomes invalid. You would have to get the passport stamped again at the US Consulate.
Once your new status is approved you cannot go back to any prior status. Even if you have an unexpired H4 visa stamp in your passport, it becomes invalid. You would have to get the passport stamped again at the US Consulate.
No comments:
Post a Comment