chanduv23
04-30 02:26 PM
It is 2.25 pm and I still can't access the webcast. It was working fine 1h ago or so...
I am not getting audio but able to see
I am not getting audio but able to see
villamonte6100
04-01 02:49 PM
C�mon boy I�m not asking to make Steve miller their VP operation and use that million dollar in grants to fund that project. What I�m asking is �can you tell us how many applications you received of which chargeability and in which EB categories� and assurance that they will issue EADs and APs in less than 90 days. To ask this you don�t need citizen rights you are asking a public agency a service which they are supposed to provide and they are charging us to do that�
There is a simple answer your question.
Why don't you write a letter to USCIS and outline every question you want answered.
And Please let us know what they say.
There is a simple answer your question.
Why don't you write a letter to USCIS and outline every question you want answered.
And Please let us know what they say.
walking_dude
07-06 12:54 AM
IV will become ready for elections when we have real candidates with real faces. I request all real candidates to publish their photos and accomplishments, their ideas for the organization; so that we can choose the best person for the job.
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
I feel that initiator of this thread is not trying a coup d'�tat. He is merely pointing to the fact that every organization runs by elected officials. Having a life term president and core group is only heard in autocratic systems but not in a democratic one. What are we as an organization?
Why are we afraid of discussing new ideas? Why shouldn't we open up IV organization for elections? There is nothing wrong in declaring the rules and then playing by those rules.
So I completely support the guy who came up with this suggestion.
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
I feel that initiator of this thread is not trying a coup d'�tat. He is merely pointing to the fact that every organization runs by elected officials. Having a life term president and core group is only heard in autocratic systems but not in a democratic one. What are we as an organization?
Why are we afraid of discussing new ideas? Why shouldn't we open up IV organization for elections? There is nothing wrong in declaring the rules and then playing by those rules.
So I completely support the guy who came up with this suggestion.
Milind123
09-12 05:35 PM
Thanks IV...way to go.
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Not at all modest, I would say it is really nice contribution. Thanks
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Not at all modest, I would say it is really nice contribution. Thanks
more...
ChalapathiChitturi
12-27 03:27 AM
My case is not yet approved, I Filed on Aug 01 st, Vermont Service Center.
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
gc_on_demand
04-30 03:14 PM
Hahaha... Oppenheim just got caught in his words by that guy ... yoooooo!
can you share more detail on that incident ?
can you share more detail on that incident ?
more...
Rajeev
08-12 02:18 PM
My guess is that we have discussed enough about the bill. Next in the line is the dream act for children of undocumented immigrants. Do we want to have a campaign to add children of legal immigrants to the bill or we want to only discuss the implications about the act, once it is passed by house and senate.
immi_seeker
09-28 10:10 PM
This is very bad . considering the fact that people have been put in to this endless wait of retrogression. FY2006 they wasted 11k visas and the whole year dates were retrogressed for most of the countries
more...
muni_k
06-10 11:10 AM
snhn
what is a DWI?thanks.
what is a DWI?thanks.
Sachin_Stock
08-23 10:09 AM
Those who initiated the panic attack, I want them to explain what so frightening about this memo!? Please put forth your points.
more...
nk2006
10-21 05:24 PM
Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
Thanks Ramba for your insights.
Whatever the reasons - its apparent USCIS is not following the AC21 regulations and it is not fair. I believe, AC21 regulations are made with an objective of improving immigration rules for 21st century (and thus the name American Competetiveness for 21st century) and provide some mobility for the applicants while their GC applications are pending. The delay in application processing is still relevant (actually its more severe) - irrespective of whether its caused by processing or because of lack of visa numbers. AC21 regulations never mentioned about the origin of delay or the longivity of applicant with original company. Changing interpretation of a rule they made, that too without notice is unfair and maybe even unlawful.
So far I was thinking that its a case of misinformed IO rejecting I485 once they see a I140 revocation. But rejecting MTR on the grounds that employee has left the company on his/her own and so does not have intent of continuing in the job is just plain twisting of their own rules. And we need a much bigger effort - if its a case of a few misinformed USCIS employees incorrectly rejecting I485 - then it could have been fixed with a low key effort that we are doing. We are seeing more rejections based on unknown "interpretations" - and even MTR getting rejected - it kind of gives a feeling that they have a bigger agenda here and we need to fight on a bigger scale.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
Thanks Ramba for your insights.
Whatever the reasons - its apparent USCIS is not following the AC21 regulations and it is not fair. I believe, AC21 regulations are made with an objective of improving immigration rules for 21st century (and thus the name American Competetiveness for 21st century) and provide some mobility for the applicants while their GC applications are pending. The delay in application processing is still relevant (actually its more severe) - irrespective of whether its caused by processing or because of lack of visa numbers. AC21 regulations never mentioned about the origin of delay or the longivity of applicant with original company. Changing interpretation of a rule they made, that too without notice is unfair and maybe even unlawful.
So far I was thinking that its a case of misinformed IO rejecting I485 once they see a I140 revocation. But rejecting MTR on the grounds that employee has left the company on his/her own and so does not have intent of continuing in the job is just plain twisting of their own rules. And we need a much bigger effort - if its a case of a few misinformed USCIS employees incorrectly rejecting I485 - then it could have been fixed with a low key effort that we are doing. We are seeing more rejections based on unknown "interpretations" - and even MTR getting rejected - it kind of gives a feeling that they have a bigger agenda here and we need to fight on a bigger scale.
9years
12-03 08:03 AM
Congrats 9Years. What a big relief ...... Right !!! Finally DONE. I am waiting for the same moment .....
Hi Vayumahesh,
Thank you and you will get it soon. Best of luck.
Hi Vayumahesh,
Thank you and you will get it soon. Best of luck.
more...
vdlrao
06-10 12:48 PM
It is simple. If the number of pending EB2 Apps before April 1st 2004 (India and China combined) is less than the number of spill over visa numbers, then there will be some forward movement in EB2 next month. If not, the dates will remain the same or may even retrogress.
what I am trying to say is USCIS works effectively for EB2 category as because they dont have much work in other EB categories.
what I am trying to say is USCIS works effectively for EB2 category as because they dont have much work in other EB categories.
GCard_Dream
07-06 01:00 PM
I see that we all are very busy fighting amongst ourselves. Did all of you get a chance to "Digg" the story so it gets maximum publicity possible? This is the only story so far that carefully analyzes the 485 fiasco and longer it runs the better it will be for us.
Please take a min and digg it. You'll be doing yourself a favor.
Please take a min and digg it. You'll be doing yourself a favor.
more...
nixstor
06-10 12:24 PM
Just to summarize what's going to happen with VB in final Quarter.
Two words: Nothing Positive
CIS and DOS officials are meeting every week after July 07 fiasco. They have a better handle on the visa number utilization than they ever had in the past years. As a result they have max utilization of visa numbers and don't be surprised if DOS decides to move EB2 India and China a month or two back. Neither India EB2 nor China EB2 is going to move past Oct 2004 before Oct 08 bulletin.
Two words: Nothing Positive
CIS and DOS officials are meeting every week after July 07 fiasco. They have a better handle on the visa number utilization than they ever had in the past years. As a result they have max utilization of visa numbers and don't be surprised if DOS decides to move EB2 India and China a month or two back. Neither India EB2 nor China EB2 is going to move past Oct 2004 before Oct 08 bulletin.
Canadian_Dream
06-02 08:18 PM
You are correct, it only uses I-140 application as a basis of setting the cut-off (Not I-485).
In my opinion:
Date of Introduction: May 15 2007
Effective Date: Oct 01 2008
Scenarios:
Scenario 1: I-140 Filed after Introduction and Approved before effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 2: I-140 Filed after Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases have to refile.
Scenario 3: I-140 Filed before Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 4: I-140 not filed becasue of backlogged labor. They retain the priority date but have to restart in the new system, whatever that means.
Only bad scenario is 2 and 4. The other bad aspect is reduced supply of immigrant visa 90,000.
Hey Canadian Dream:
I know things might change , i wish this law doesnt pass through at all. But in its form this is interpretation of major members and attorneys in current stage. Please correct me if i am wrong.
I might agree with your conclusion of start date, but Now coming to to cases :
Petetion for an employment based visa = I 140 , that were filed prior to the date of intro ( for our sake its Oct 2008 or May 15 2007 ) that were pending or approved , shall be treated as if such provision remained effective.
An approved petition may server as basis for issuance of an immigrant visa.
and for all people who are still in Labor stage will preserve their priority date.
Now based on this , if you have filed an I140 before the date of enactment what ever it might one should be fine. Once dates becomes current and I140 approved one can file for 485 in previous system.
I dont see any conclusion based on 485 is approved or not its just adjustment of status once PD become current , i think its all 140 that determines you are approved as an immigrant or not.
===========================
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
In my opinion:
Date of Introduction: May 15 2007
Effective Date: Oct 01 2008
Scenarios:
Scenario 1: I-140 Filed after Introduction and Approved before effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 2: I-140 Filed after Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases have to refile.
Scenario 3: I-140 Filed before Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 4: I-140 not filed becasue of backlogged labor. They retain the priority date but have to restart in the new system, whatever that means.
Only bad scenario is 2 and 4. The other bad aspect is reduced supply of immigrant visa 90,000.
Hey Canadian Dream:
I know things might change , i wish this law doesnt pass through at all. But in its form this is interpretation of major members and attorneys in current stage. Please correct me if i am wrong.
I might agree with your conclusion of start date, but Now coming to to cases :
Petetion for an employment based visa = I 140 , that were filed prior to the date of intro ( for our sake its Oct 2008 or May 15 2007 ) that were pending or approved , shall be treated as if such provision remained effective.
An approved petition may server as basis for issuance of an immigrant visa.
and for all people who are still in Labor stage will preserve their priority date.
Now based on this , if you have filed an I140 before the date of enactment what ever it might one should be fine. Once dates becomes current and I140 approved one can file for 485 in previous system.
I dont see any conclusion based on 485 is approved or not its just adjustment of status once PD become current , i think its all 140 that determines you are approved as an immigrant or not.
===========================
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
more...
breddy2000
12-10 04:14 PM
Should Section 202(a)(5) be applied, the rate of number use in the Employment preference category would continue to be monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for oversubscribed countries. This action provides the best possible assurance that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while still ensuring that numbers remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to apply:
China and India: October through December 2005
It clearly states that "IF Section 202(a) were to apply(spillover rule) then the dates move as mentioned above. That means that it did not happen until now...
Question is since the section 202(a) is part of the law , does it state that they need to utilize this section 202(a) quarterly or at USCIS/DOS own descretion.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to apply:
China and India: October through December 2005
It clearly states that "IF Section 202(a) were to apply(spillover rule) then the dates move as mentioned above. That means that it did not happen until now...
Question is since the section 202(a) is part of the law , does it state that they need to utilize this section 202(a) quarterly or at USCIS/DOS own descretion.
Jimi_Hendrix
11-05 11:36 AM
Hi All,
I am an IV member living in Southern California. I wanted to give a loud 'hello' out to all members in this region. It will be great to know some of the members so that we can interact. Can you please post back a response with what counties you live in? This way we can get some idea about where members are residing.
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Jimi
I am an IV member living in Southern California. I wanted to give a loud 'hello' out to all members in this region. It will be great to know some of the members so that we can interact. Can you please post back a response with what counties you live in? This way we can get some idea about where members are residing.
Looking forward to your responses.
Cheers,
Jimi
pappu
09-13 05:31 PM
Today I was hoping to exceed my contribution of $300 from yesterday. Looks like it is not goint to happen today. But it will be a bummer if I can't match yesterday's contribution.
We (GCNaseeb, sunty, bala our special guest and I) need just two more shooter to make a contribution of $100 who have never contributed before.
Thanks Milind123 for your contributions and leading this effort
We (GCNaseeb, sunty, bala our special guest and I) need just two more shooter to make a contribution of $100 who have never contributed before.
Thanks Milind123 for your contributions and leading this effort
biomd
09-09 09:13 AM
My Contribution of $100 sent in today by Google. Will be attending the 18th Rally.
C U Guys!.
C U Guys!.
wellwishergc
07-06 10:59 AM
This is not really an issue that American citizens care about. The CIR bill got attention from the American citizens because it involved legalizing 12 million undocumented workers. So, do not expect citizens to talk on this issue. Well, if you tell an American citizen that there was a security lapse on part of USCIS, while approving the Green Cards, then it is a different issue and you will get his/her attention. However, think though! Are we trying for negative publicity for this issue? OR Would you rather try to see how we could use this opportunity to further optimize the process at USCIS?
See - lets not fight within ourselves. We both have the same cause but expressing differently.
Please read my other pots written to DDLMODES - my only intention was to say that if a "USCIS overhaul" has to happen that should be initiated by Senators.... For Senators to do something American peoples need to talk ( like they did for CIR)
Chat with you later - got a meeting.
See - lets not fight within ourselves. We both have the same cause but expressing differently.
Please read my other pots written to DDLMODES - my only intention was to say that if a "USCIS overhaul" has to happen that should be initiated by Senators.... For Senators to do something American peoples need to talk ( like they did for CIR)
Chat with you later - got a meeting.
No comments:
Post a Comment