485Mbe4001
06-08 11:57 AM
I would agree with the others that name check is a black hole. I had contacted congressman and senators during 'meet the lawmakers', but my contact at the congressmans office said that there is nothing that he can do to help me expediate the name check.
After 3.5 years waiting for my PD to be current i took an infopass appointment only to find out that i am stuck in name check. I had no reason to think about namecheck, i dont even have a parking ticket. Even the immigration officer said that there is nothing much he can do about it. For all other RFE's etc we can provide documentation etc. there is nothing you can do to speed up your name check. if you are stuck then just pray that you get out of this hell hole.
There is a yahoo group called namechecktrackker that was started by an IV member, it has about 1000 members.
FBI has also stopped responding to congressional requests and WOM. refer to aytes memo of Dec 2006
http://www.cyrusmehta.com/related/Ayetes_Memo_on_Name_Checks.pdf
I would actually also suggest requesting a meeting with both senators and congressperson in your area, rather than sending a webfax.
After 3.5 years waiting for my PD to be current i took an infopass appointment only to find out that i am stuck in name check. I had no reason to think about namecheck, i dont even have a parking ticket. Even the immigration officer said that there is nothing much he can do about it. For all other RFE's etc we can provide documentation etc. there is nothing you can do to speed up your name check. if you are stuck then just pray that you get out of this hell hole.
There is a yahoo group called namechecktrackker that was started by an IV member, it has about 1000 members.
FBI has also stopped responding to congressional requests and WOM. refer to aytes memo of Dec 2006
http://www.cyrusmehta.com/related/Ayetes_Memo_on_Name_Checks.pdf
I would actually also suggest requesting a meeting with both senators and congressperson in your area, rather than sending a webfax.
wallpaper jessica simpson fat jeans.
delax
07-20 02:28 PM
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
weasley
02-12 05:38 AM
True. We need members like desi3933 ( got GC and citizenship), United Nations (think he got GC) who spend time here and provide real details. I have read many posts of Desi3933 which are really helpful and he does speak with facts.
we need folks such as desi3933 here. No where he vented any frustration. Take your garbage and frustration some where else.
we need folks such as desi3933 here. No where he vented any frustration. Take your garbage and frustration some where else.
2011 anorexic jessica simpsons
ajthakur
07-14 06:09 PM
I know I acted irresponsibly. Under the circumstances I had to. The person employing me was trying to use me for (something) for which my conscience didnt allow. So the decision to quit was best. I can't write all the circumstances here. I knew I could get into problems with immigration department for my irrational yet moral decision to quit company before 180 days. I think this problem with USCIS is far more acceptable than doing something for your employer that your heart doesnt allow you to.
Of course, you know your problems best, but it was obviously irresponsible of you to quit before letting 180 days pass after applying for 485.
Here is the problem. The letter of employment you send to CIS must have a start date which will expose your violation of the 180 day rule. So unless you lie here, you are likely in in trouble. Your best bet is to suck it up and return to your sponsoring employer. That will ensure your case 100%. Any other option is risky.
Go to a knowledged attorney. Khanna, Murthy, Gotcher etc., are the names I know.
Of course, you know your problems best, but it was obviously irresponsible of you to quit before letting 180 days pass after applying for 485.
Here is the problem. The letter of employment you send to CIS must have a start date which will expose your violation of the 180 day rule. So unless you lie here, you are likely in in trouble. Your best bet is to suck it up and return to your sponsoring employer. That will ensure your case 100%. Any other option is risky.
Go to a knowledged attorney. Khanna, Murthy, Gotcher etc., are the names I know.
more...
mallu
02-15 04:25 PM
What is the current % of India/China folks in USA now that threaten to affect diversity ? Also how many (% ) from Italy,Ireland,UK etc ?
Anything published ? Just curiosity ( not questioning any current laws )..
Anything published ? Just curiosity ( not questioning any current laws )..
BlueSunD
03-07 10:57 PM
Hi Sparky! Well a quick google search turned some results, hope you find them usefull,
Some video tutoriasl, from begginer, to more advanced: http://www.ibiblio.org/bvidtute/
These seem nice, some of the basics of modeling are shown:
http://www.vrotvrot.com/xoom/tutorials.html
And these are introductory tutoriasl to Blender from Blender.org, those look really nice and easy to follow along:
http://www.blender3d.org/Education/index_old.php?sub=
and another one... almost the same
http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Using_Blender.80.0.html
Some video tutoriasl, from begginer, to more advanced: http://www.ibiblio.org/bvidtute/
These seem nice, some of the basics of modeling are shown:
http://www.vrotvrot.com/xoom/tutorials.html
And these are introductory tutoriasl to Blender from Blender.org, those look really nice and easy to follow along:
http://www.blender3d.org/Education/index_old.php?sub=
and another one... almost the same
http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Using_Blender.80.0.html
more...
greyhair
02-09 08:20 PM
They wasted 580 EB3 India visas last year (2009).
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
No disrespect meant but what's this? Faux News? As per the law, there is no quota of 2802 green cards for EB3 India. Its a ceiling not a quota. The difference is with ceiling of 7% USCIS can allocate lower number than 7% of 28.6% of 140,000 to EB3 India. If it would be 7% quota, then it would be fair to ask for our "right" for another 580 more green cards. That's why this is not real information, its Faux news.
desi3933 has correctly mentioned the relevant stats. Just in case you missed it:
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
This is the reason I do not find that immigration business shop credible any more.
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
No disrespect meant but what's this? Faux News? As per the law, there is no quota of 2802 green cards for EB3 India. Its a ceiling not a quota. The difference is with ceiling of 7% USCIS can allocate lower number than 7% of 28.6% of 140,000 to EB3 India. If it would be 7% quota, then it would be fair to ask for our "right" for another 580 more green cards. That's why this is not real information, its Faux news.
desi3933 has correctly mentioned the relevant stats. Just in case you missed it:
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
This is the reason I do not find that immigration business shop credible any more.
2010 Jessica Simpson is fat?
ramus
09-10 12:03 PM
So are you coming then?
Thanks.
Perfect Weather For Marching
80 High 61 Low Sunny 10% Chance Of Showers
Thanks.
Perfect Weather For Marching
80 High 61 Low Sunny 10% Chance Of Showers
more...
nixstor
07-02 10:56 PM
This is because Rajiv Khanna and Murthy do not like each other and compete with each other. Murthy is on the board of AILA and Rajiv is not. So murthy will promote the lawsuit and rajiv will not.
Competition is a good thing. How ever, your post sounded like they feud with each other no matter how much genuine the issue is. Why would any of them would like to be at the end of losing if they know for sure that the other is winning? Any sane mind will join the bandwagon, esp when their business interests are at stakes.
Keeping it aside, I did not mean to dampen any one's spirits on filing a law suit. I had similar thoughts in my mind and it just happened to be similar to Rajiv Khanna's. I could be wrong in this case. I will be very happy if we come out in flying colors in this law suit. How ever my preference is to get more and more media/blog attention and try to get recapture/ability to file 485 based on the momentum we build because of this screw up by DOS & USCIS.
Competition is a good thing. How ever, your post sounded like they feud with each other no matter how much genuine the issue is. Why would any of them would like to be at the end of losing if they know for sure that the other is winning? Any sane mind will join the bandwagon, esp when their business interests are at stakes.
Keeping it aside, I did not mean to dampen any one's spirits on filing a law suit. I had similar thoughts in my mind and it just happened to be similar to Rajiv Khanna's. I could be wrong in this case. I will be very happy if we come out in flying colors in this law suit. How ever my preference is to get more and more media/blog attention and try to get recapture/ability to file 485 based on the momentum we build because of this screw up by DOS & USCIS.
hair Jessica Simpson Fat New Songs
Abhinaym
08-11 10:13 AM
It's out now EB2 I and C are 08JAN05.
Visa Bulletin September 2009 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4558.html)
Visa Bulletin September 2009 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4558.html)
more...
GC_sufferer
07-04 10:58 PM
nixstor,
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Ramba, is that mean they might use less than 140K visas in 2007, because the name check may not be cleared for all 20K applictions in 3 months.
First, with out name check cleared by FBI, no 485 will be approved. Assiging visa number to a 485 appliction initally, nothing to do with name check. If the applicant is threat to the security of the country, his/her 485 will be denied and they will take back the already assigned number. Both are two different issues.
Another myth: USCIS processed 60,000 485 in June. It is wrong. They processed 60,000 485 over the period of 6 months to 5 years. And they just approved in June, based on earlier processing.
Ramba, is that mean they might use less than 140K visas in 2007, because the name check may not be cleared for all 20K applictions in 3 months.
hot Jessica-simpson-fat-02
deepimpact
09-11 03:12 PM
Check with latest Inventory data - 05/2010
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
Demand data:
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
Demand data:
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
more...
house Jessica Simpson
am100
07-06 01:23 AM
Did u Used AC21 or changes job after applying I-485 Or is it a stright forward case.
Thanks in advance for the reply.
Sorry for the late response. I was actually out of country when my GC got approved. Just got back today.
I did not use AC 21. I have been with the same employer throughout the process. However, I changed job location after 140 approval. Hence, I had to refile labor (PERM) from new location but ported the older PD. Since, my PD was not current, I did not loose any time even with refiling labor. Hope this helps. Please let me know if if you have any more questions.
Thanks in advance for the reply.
Sorry for the late response. I was actually out of country when my GC got approved. Just got back today.
I did not use AC 21. I have been with the same employer throughout the process. However, I changed job location after 140 approval. Hence, I had to refile labor (PERM) from new location but ported the older PD. Since, my PD was not current, I did not loose any time even with refiling labor. Hope this helps. Please let me know if if you have any more questions.
tattoo jessica simpson weight gain
ashatara78
03-10 04:38 PM
The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
more...
pictures Jessica+simpson+fat+again+
Jaime
09-10 01:04 PM
Process stops if you get laid off and No grace period - No matter whether you have a PhD or Masters from a U.S. university and have been stuck in the green card process for 10 years. If you get laid off after all your contributions and frustrations you are automatically "out of status" that very second, and are expected to LEAVE THE U.S. IMMEDIATELY, doesn't matter if you have kids in school, a mortgage, etc. You'd better leave immediately or you risk being deported and "barred from the U.S." for 10 years (didn't know? Look at the law)
dresses Jessica Simpson is a fat
pappu
12-13 12:50 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
more...
makeup Jessica Simpson Fat
reddymjm
04-23 06:34 PM
for sharing the news
girlfriend suzuki gsxr streetfighter,jan , here are Seems jessica simpson fat
CADude
02-20 06:32 PM
If possible, please change it without any delay? EB3 is only able to cross past May 2001 for 3 times in last 3 years where EB2 are enjoying GC most of time. No point in playing wait game with EB3 India. Otherwise, you will wait for-ever. :)
Does anyone want to make a guess of when EB3 India 2002 will become current ? I am thinking of changing the case to EB2.. Should I change my case or should I wait for EB3 to be current ?
Does anyone want to make a guess of when EB3 India 2002 will become current ? I am thinking of changing the case to EB2.. Should I change my case or should I wait for EB3 to be current ?
hairstyles Jessica Simpson Fat : Has a
needhelp!
09-26 12:07 PM
I see the updated text. Good job IV folks!
But it does seem out of place because the whole article is about H1..
But it does seem out of place because the whole article is about H1..
anurakt
11-17 12:40 PM
I am on page with you. I did it 3 weeks back. Now I am starting the whole labor at the new company , making almost 140K (60% more) with a fortune 20 company . Good position and happier......
I did the same and didn't hung up myself on GC .... life is more than GC let us live our life.
I did the same and didn't hung up myself on GC .... life is more than GC let us live our life.
nojoke
03-01 04:03 AM
Commodity prices like crudeoil,steel,wood used in construction are at lowest since a decade.The commodity prices will not go back to 2006 levels not in near future,so already constructed houses have lost almost 70% value in them.Bail out or another help will not sort this issue.Only free market has to solve the issue.For housing to get to 2006 levels there should be huge housing boom in China,India where they have huge populations.People in India are poor so they cant afford a house even if they want one.China wont spend they are intersted in buying US treasuries.So the only option for the bank is to write off these houses.Govt help for home owners will be only a drop in the ocean.
Very true
Very true
No comments:
Post a Comment