snathan
08-21 11:11 PM
Have the chubby guy u take care of contact the local congressman/senator/newspaper and tell them a sob story about how no one will take care of him except you and maybe you will get lucky.
One thing you can do, when you are deported, take the porky along. Less expense for the US health care.:D
I am not sure why you guys are so harsh when someone is asking for guidance and help. If you have lot of time please go after the antis...there are lot of websites to rant your farustartion. If you can not give any useful information...please refrain from posting. It just gives very bad light.
One thing you can do, when you are deported, take the porky along. Less expense for the US health care.:D
I am not sure why you guys are so harsh when someone is asking for guidance and help. If you have lot of time please go after the antis...there are lot of websites to rant your farustartion. If you can not give any useful information...please refrain from posting. It just gives very bad light.
wallpaper Hairstyles with Bangs
natrajs
04-24 10:01 AM
Congrats Googler!
I just checked my status and saw my I-485 CASE APPROVED status.My Good luck and Best wishes to all the people on this forum on their GC.
EB2, NSC PD 10/02
I-485 RD - 02/2007
Approval Notice - April 23'08
Congrats and Best Wishes
I just checked my status and saw my I-485 CASE APPROVED status.My Good luck and Best wishes to all the people on this forum on their GC.
EB2, NSC PD 10/02
I-485 RD - 02/2007
Approval Notice - April 23'08
Congrats and Best Wishes
scorpion00
06-08 06:02 PM
so no spill over from EB2 ROW which is current ,to India and China EB2.
I guess many folks were having high hopes for this in the last quarter.
I guess many folks were having high hopes for this in the last quarter.
2011 Bangs Hairstyles for womens
chanduv23
09-28 02:33 PM
Hi Chandu,
Not all GC holders are against the aspiring GC seekers. In fact, I am promoting IV actively to many older GC holders and exposing how bad the system is now when compared to their days. [Say from 10 years ago]. I am trying my best to help many, who are in line with what ever little knowledge I gained during this process. I will be happier one and only if this broken system is fixed and the process is made transparent. I only wish that this will happen during my life time :p
Thanks
PS: I did not had IV during the time when I started my GC process :mad:
Sorry about the generalization. I was refering to Senthil1 kind of folks, not folks like you. Thanks for all the support. My friend got a green card as recently as a month back, he struggled for a long time before he got one, I asked him if he wants to come for the rally and he told me "MRRRRRRRR I GOT MY GREEN CARD, YOU ARE ASKING THE WRONG PERSON FOR THE RALLY" and the same person told me "SOMETHING MUST HAPPEN TO THESE ROTTEN CONSULTING COMPANIES, THEY ARE RUINING THE SYSTEM" he got his GC from a small consulting company and after getting his GC he says these companies must not exist - he wants to shut thee door behind him
Not all GC holders are against the aspiring GC seekers. In fact, I am promoting IV actively to many older GC holders and exposing how bad the system is now when compared to their days. [Say from 10 years ago]. I am trying my best to help many, who are in line with what ever little knowledge I gained during this process. I will be happier one and only if this broken system is fixed and the process is made transparent. I only wish that this will happen during my life time :p
Thanks
PS: I did not had IV during the time when I started my GC process :mad:
Sorry about the generalization. I was refering to Senthil1 kind of folks, not folks like you. Thanks for all the support. My friend got a green card as recently as a month back, he struggled for a long time before he got one, I asked him if he wants to come for the rally and he told me "MRRRRRRRR I GOT MY GREEN CARD, YOU ARE ASKING THE WRONG PERSON FOR THE RALLY" and the same person told me "SOMETHING MUST HAPPEN TO THESE ROTTEN CONSULTING COMPANIES, THEY ARE RUINING THE SYSTEM" he got his GC from a small consulting company and after getting his GC he says these companies must not exist - he wants to shut thee door behind him
more...
illinois_alum
08-02 10:28 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...
GC is not a right. The corporations are completely within their rights to decide whether they want to sponsor someone's GC (and of course the big question being can they sponsor by following the due process if qualified citizens or existing perm residents are available for the job)
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...
GC is not a right. The corporations are completely within their rights to decide whether they want to sponsor someone's GC (and of course the big question being can they sponsor by following the due process if qualified citizens or existing perm residents are available for the job)
logiclife
04-23 04:22 PM
-------------
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
You may want to start a new thread with an appropriate title, to get more attention from members in Northern CA.
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
You may want to start a new thread with an appropriate title, to get more attention from members in Northern CA.
more...
ss777
05-15 02:27 PM
I totally agree with first para..but your client CIO getting promotion out of a Phoenix university degree surprises me..many people discouraged me from going there as they dont require GMAT to start with.
That surprised me also. He may be an exception but the fact that he was tapped for a management post that needs a management degree makes it imperative that his MBA played a good role. I am not saying Pheonix MBA is great. My point is Online MBA is valued in the industry.
That surprised me also. He may be an exception but the fact that he was tapped for a management post that needs a management degree makes it imperative that his MBA played a good role. I am not saying Pheonix MBA is great. My point is Online MBA is valued in the industry.
2010 Medium Hairstyles with Bangs
amsgc
02-05 09:24 PM
It is very important that we point this out to Lawmakers/public when they begin drafting the CIR.
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
more...
walking_dude
10-29 10:22 PM
I'm surprised only 70 members are interested in accurate prediction of future VB movements, and orderly processing of 485 applications instead of the current random lottery!
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
hair Kids Hairstyles Girls Indian
sammas
07-12 04:01 PM
F. DETERMINATION OF THE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON IMMIGRANTS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA)
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
more...
snthampi
06-11 12:32 PM
Just sent email to senators.
hot pictures of emo hairstyle
gsc999
04-20 02:00 PM
Sure. Thanks for letting us know.
I will also post this message at our Northern California Yahoo group.
I will also post this message at our Northern California Yahoo group.
more...
house long hair with angs. long
GCKaMaara
03-12 10:59 AM
It doesn't make sense on either side:
1. IV is not going to change its policy of hiding information. If you are comfortable with the approach then contribute otherwise don't.
2. Shouting and bashing here on website will gain nothing.
Do something creative. I think the basic problem is not hiding information. Basic problem is that as a non-profit organization, we don't have elections. We as a group have no rights to choose who is core. But thats how it is.
1. IV is not going to change its policy of hiding information. If you are comfortable with the approach then contribute otherwise don't.
2. Shouting and bashing here on website will gain nothing.
Do something creative. I think the basic problem is not hiding information. Basic problem is that as a non-profit organization, we don't have elections. We as a group have no rights to choose who is core. But thats how it is.
tattoo Funky Emo Hairstyles,2011
danu2007
11-20 10:54 PM
Today I got the second letter from USCIS regarding this request. The letter says they accepted the request and put in the pending que.
Also the letter says, "your request is deemed to constitute an agreement to pay any fees that may be chargeable up to $25.00" and continues and finally it says "most requests do not require any fees and if fees in excess of $25.00 are required, we will notify you beforehand"
Jusy wondering any one got this reply..
Also the letter says, "your request is deemed to constitute an agreement to pay any fees that may be chargeable up to $25.00" and continues and finally it says "most requests do not require any fees and if fees in excess of $25.00 are required, we will notify you beforehand"
Jusy wondering any one got this reply..
more...
pictures Hairstyles with Bangs
pv2715
07-13 10:24 AM
It is not a contradiction to the previous statement.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
Yagw,
I understand this is a mute point of debate for most of us and I am trying to clarify a statement made in the PDF document for the benefit of people whose PDs fall under these days. Under the operational guidelines issued, it appears that any PD that falls under days 1-7 of calendar month falls under the cutoff day 1 and so on.
Cut-off-date = 1 ==> PDs before 1st can file (i.e mar-01 cut-off date mean pds till apr-30 can file)
Cut-off-date = 8 ==> PDs before 8 can file (i.e pds 1 to 7 since they are in one bucket)
Cut-off-date = 15 ==> PDs before 15 can file (specifically pds in bucket 8-14 can file)
etc...
Hope it helps. As others predicted, I really think the numbers will not move back. You will get your GC soon.
Yagw,
I understand this is a mute point of debate for most of us and I am trying to clarify a statement made in the PDF document for the benefit of people whose PDs fall under these days. Under the operational guidelines issued, it appears that any PD that falls under days 1-7 of calendar month falls under the cutoff day 1 and so on.
dresses Hairstyles with Bangs
vin13
11-11 09:23 AM
The conference call was not organized by core. It was just 2 of us who discussed on the donor forum and came up with a draft letter to get clarrification from DOS. I suggest the first step is to get clarrification of the quarterly spillover with DOS regarding their process. Can any of you get an appointment with Charles Oppenheim (Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at DOS)?
After working several hours and we come up with the draft which was posted earlier on this thread. And for that, someone gives me a Red.....
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
After working several hours and we come up with the draft which was posted earlier on this thread. And for that, someone gives me a Red.....
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
more...
makeup Medium Side Swept Bangs
immigrant2007
08-12 04:04 PM
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
Such is our seriousness, the thread barely started it was at the bottom of the list just awaiting its natural death. Whereas the most meningless threads are at the top of the list. If people can not EB3 backlog seriously then i am sure they don't deserve any GCs.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
Such is our seriousness, the thread barely started it was at the bottom of the list just awaiting its natural death. Whereas the most meningless threads are at the top of the list. If people can not EB3 backlog seriously then i am sure they don't deserve any GCs.
girlfriend Rihanna trendy bob haircut
rajeshalex
07-01 08:19 PM
I strongly support this idea. And may be we can become petition with max number of persons signing this/ set record. That way it might get more popularity
hairstyles Hairstyles with Bangs
vicky007
04-26 02:59 PM
Here is a link confirming the above:
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?content=5551
The strange thing here is that it says TSA and not FBI will be doing the backgound check, where as i am sure i heard on the NPR report that it will be the FBI which will do the initial Name Check.
Regards.
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?content=5551
The strange thing here is that it says TSA and not FBI will be doing the backgound check, where as i am sure i heard on the NPR report that it will be the FBI which will do the initial Name Check.
Regards.
eb3_nepa
07-28 01:21 PM
Ok people.
With all due respect to Lord Ganesha. This discussion is going nowhere.
Please consider taking some time and becoming a member of the HIGH FIVE campaign.
All IV asks you for is JUST $5.00. Thats IT.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20183
Thanks.
With all due respect to Lord Ganesha. This discussion is going nowhere.
Please consider taking some time and becoming a member of the HIGH FIVE campaign.
All IV asks you for is JUST $5.00. Thats IT.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20183
Thanks.
sc3
10-16 04:45 PM
Read your above sentence, then read your below sentence. If I try to find a relation between these two sentences I do not know what you are talking.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
No comments:
Post a Comment