ronhira
01-13 04:34 PM
IV already has easy, non controversial provisions that takes care of all.
1) Recapture all lost visas.
2) NO Country caps
3) Do not count dependants.
Just these 3 will make all categories current.
so what's the problem..... y don't iv get these provisions done? what r we waiting for?
1) Recapture all lost visas.
2) NO Country caps
3) Do not count dependants.
Just these 3 will make all categories current.
so what's the problem..... y don't iv get these provisions done? what r we waiting for?
wallpaper Leon Panetta Gives First
garybanz
12-14 05:18 PM
--What you said sounds very interesting. But it got me thinking, what if the merit is equally distributed by the country of origin and there is a limit to the opportunities this country can provide?
Let us say there are 140,000 EB visas given every year. Based on pure merit and sans any regard to nationality. Don't you think it could potentially lead to more visas being consumed by one country?
What if this country wants to ensure diversity to its social fabric?? How do they go about doing that?
For diversity this country has diversity lottery visa this is for the society to have people of different countries/ languages/ foods/ dresses/ colors etc
, EB visa is for the economy to get the talent it needs to be competitive in this world. There is a huge difference.
Let us say there are 140,000 EB visas given every year. Based on pure merit and sans any regard to nationality. Don't you think it could potentially lead to more visas being consumed by one country?
What if this country wants to ensure diversity to its social fabric?? How do they go about doing that?
For diversity this country has diversity lottery visa this is for the society to have people of different countries/ languages/ foods/ dresses/ colors etc
, EB visa is for the economy to get the talent it needs to be competitive in this world. There is a huge difference.
lotsofspace
02-13 11:48 PM
How about facts? In 2006, Philippines received 23,733 EB visas, India - 17,169. No other country received more. China received 9,484.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table10d.xls
can you also please care to do the percentage with total applicants ?
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table10d.xls
can you also please care to do the percentage with total applicants ?
2011 CIA Director Leon Panetta,
GetGC08
07-28 04:17 PM
Hello,
I have filled I-140 in last week of March 2008. My priority date(the day I file labor) is 15-Sep-2007. My labor got approved.
My I-140 is under EB2 India.
Today I checked status of my I-140 on https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do
It says :
Application Type: I140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD
On July 25, 2008, we mailed a notice requesting initial evidence in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence requested. Meanwhile, processing of this case is on hold until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the evidence requested and a decision is made, you will be notified by mail. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your mailing address.
How much serious this is?? it says "REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT"
I am waiting for RFI/RFE details as USCIS mailed it on July, 25 2008.
Is there any difference between "REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT" and "REQUEST FOR EVIDENCE(ADDITIONAL)"?
Is this means that they are processing my case?? Once I will give response to this RFE & they find everything fine than they will approve it(Hopefully) !!!!!!!
I will really appreciate your response.
Please reply me ASAP.
Thanks.
I have filled I-140 in last week of March 2008. My priority date(the day I file labor) is 15-Sep-2007. My labor got approved.
My I-140 is under EB2 India.
Today I checked status of my I-140 on https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do
It says :
Application Type: I140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD
On July 25, 2008, we mailed a notice requesting initial evidence in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence requested. Meanwhile, processing of this case is on hold until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the evidence requested and a decision is made, you will be notified by mail. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your mailing address.
How much serious this is?? it says "REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT"
I am waiting for RFI/RFE details as USCIS mailed it on July, 25 2008.
Is there any difference between "REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT" and "REQUEST FOR EVIDENCE(ADDITIONAL)"?
Is this means that they are processing my case?? Once I will give response to this RFE & they find everything fine than they will approve it(Hopefully) !!!!!!!
I will really appreciate your response.
Please reply me ASAP.
Thanks.
more...
srikondoji
06-26 02:17 PM
That was an attempt to get an award for a fancy rumour.
Yes, you can laugh.:D
Is this a joke..let me know if i can laugh at this one.
Yes, you can laugh.:D
Is this a joke..let me know if i can laugh at this one.
samay
07-15 05:15 PM
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.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
When was your I-140 approved. Was it approved sometime back. If so that might be one of the reasons that you received a RFE. The CIS wants to confirm that a job offer still exists.
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.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
When was your I-140 approved. Was it approved sometime back. If so that might be one of the reasons that you received a RFE. The CIS wants to confirm that a job offer still exists.
more...
walking_dude
02-13 11:13 AM
This theory that 'AILA/AILF lawsuit threat overturned July VB' is out of touch with the reality. Threatening lawsuit was bad for AILA. They were not involved in the discussions that finaly resulted in reversal. IV was a participant but AILA was not.
We shouldn't repeat their mistake. The moment IV files a lawsuit, USCIS will stop discussing with us. We will be off the discussion table. Only place they'll talk to us will be in the courtroom. We also shouldn't forget the pressure applied by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren on USCIS and DOS. She was ready to wash their dirty linen in public. No doubt, she was influenced by rally in San Jose - which happens to be her constituency.
3 year EAD/AP, AC21 interpretation are rules that USCIS makes, there's no way a judge can dictate what rules a government department should make. You wrote "there is nothign to lose but a lot to win" . Like someone pointed out we won't even be recovering 10k -20k spent on it, even if we win. We'll be getting into a case which has no chances or very slim chances of winning.
If we lose the case, there's no going back to discussions with USCIS. They won't be entertaining us after we sued them. It's a grave risk you should understand. I feel tired at having to explain it the Nth time to some of you who still consider AILA as a messiah. Nothing happens because of just one factor. It's a combination of several factors that ultimately produces results. There are no silver bullets that fix every problem. Its the reality.
it is the threat of a massive lwsuit from immigration lawyers association that made uscis backtrack and open up july 2 filing..we are all benefeciaries of that.
itz not our flowers or the rally that did the trick it is the threat of lawsuit.
if we consult lawyers we can check if we have a case and on what grounds. even f not anything else we may win on things like 3 yr AP relaxed ac21 rules etc. these are operational policies and dont need congress. USCIS can change these rules.
there is nothign to lose but a lot to win.
we can even appeal on the grounds that USCIS policies led us in to a bonded labor situation unable to change employer , foregone career choices and income potential..etc.. this violates the concept of free will and just labor practices. Many rules in AC21 and AP still try to tie us down to the employer who has already enjoyed > 5 years of our hardwork.
We shouldn't repeat their mistake. The moment IV files a lawsuit, USCIS will stop discussing with us. We will be off the discussion table. Only place they'll talk to us will be in the courtroom. We also shouldn't forget the pressure applied by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren on USCIS and DOS. She was ready to wash their dirty linen in public. No doubt, she was influenced by rally in San Jose - which happens to be her constituency.
3 year EAD/AP, AC21 interpretation are rules that USCIS makes, there's no way a judge can dictate what rules a government department should make. You wrote "there is nothign to lose but a lot to win" . Like someone pointed out we won't even be recovering 10k -20k spent on it, even if we win. We'll be getting into a case which has no chances or very slim chances of winning.
If we lose the case, there's no going back to discussions with USCIS. They won't be entertaining us after we sued them. It's a grave risk you should understand. I feel tired at having to explain it the Nth time to some of you who still consider AILA as a messiah. Nothing happens because of just one factor. It's a combination of several factors that ultimately produces results. There are no silver bullets that fix every problem. Its the reality.
it is the threat of a massive lwsuit from immigration lawyers association that made uscis backtrack and open up july 2 filing..we are all benefeciaries of that.
itz not our flowers or the rally that did the trick it is the threat of lawsuit.
if we consult lawyers we can check if we have a case and on what grounds. even f not anything else we may win on things like 3 yr AP relaxed ac21 rules etc. these are operational policies and dont need congress. USCIS can change these rules.
there is nothign to lose but a lot to win.
we can even appeal on the grounds that USCIS policies led us in to a bonded labor situation unable to change employer , foregone career choices and income potential..etc.. this violates the concept of free will and just labor practices. Many rules in AC21 and AP still try to tie us down to the employer who has already enjoyed > 5 years of our hardwork.
2010 Leon Panetta: US spy chief
ronhira
01-13 08:28 PM
how'll this affect those on ead or ac21...... it seems that this has no affect on us if we r using ead with the sponsoring employer or ac21 employer..... is that correct?
more...
joshraj
07-26 01:27 PM
Question for Lawyer or Senior Members of Forum:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I myself is currently in H1B and my wife on H4. We both have EAD and AP which we�re never activated since we had our H1 and H4 and my wife has not started working.
She should be starting work very soon and hence we would like to renew her EAD and AP. Also as part of her new job she needs to travel oustide US. So the question I had is whether she can travel outside US on her currenty valid AP with the application for renewal of AP/EAD in processing with USCIS.
Thank You All for Your Help!
Regards,
Josh
Dear Sir/Madam,
I myself is currently in H1B and my wife on H4. We both have EAD and AP which we�re never activated since we had our H1 and H4 and my wife has not started working.
She should be starting work very soon and hence we would like to renew her EAD and AP. Also as part of her new job she needs to travel oustide US. So the question I had is whether she can travel outside US on her currenty valid AP with the application for renewal of AP/EAD in processing with USCIS.
Thank You All for Your Help!
Regards,
Josh
hair CIA Director Leon Panetta
ganguteli
04-01 11:02 PM
Are you 'high skilled'?
Your logic suggests otherwise!
There is no word as high-skilled in the law. We all are in the skilled category. High is probably added by the media. Maybe because most people are computer programmers and it seems tough to an average Joe.
Your logic suggests otherwise!
There is no word as high-skilled in the law. We all are in the skilled category. High is probably added by the media. Maybe because most people are computer programmers and it seems tough to an average Joe.
more...
chanduv23
03-16 01:07 PM
Verify with another lawyer also, basically your experience starts only after you graduate (after getting your degree and not after finishing college ie say you completed ur degree in may 2000 and recieved your degree in Dec 2000, your experience prior to Dec 2000 may not count)
Do verify this with a good lawyer.
Do verify this with a good lawyer.
hot Leon Panetta, Director of the
MunnaBhai
06-27 05:55 PM
According to the AILA, approximately 40,000 visas remain in all employment-based categories, other than EW, for FY2007, according to its sources, and that the USCIS has far more than 40,000 adjustment applications in the backlog queue that are ready for approval, not to mention the additional numbers which will be consumed in concular immigrant visa processing. It is thus possible that the cap may reach within a short period in July, even though no one can predict it until after July 2, 2007. The USCIS at this time does not have any policy announced with reference to July 2007 I-485 filings which are filed after certain date in July when the total number is exhausted. However, considering the fact that the USCIS currently rejects the "Other Worker" category I-485 applications even though June 2007 Visa Bulletin show current for certain applicants because the "other worker" category quota was exhausted on June 5, 2007. This raises a serious concern because as we reported earlier today, the USCIS appears to be picking up the speed of processing of backlog I-485 applications in anticipation of flood of July 485 applications. The USCIS hands may be tied, should the EB visa numbers for FY 2007 is exhausted before the end of July.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
http://www.immigration-law.com/
more...
house staff Leon Panetta speaks
glus
02-13 07:19 AM
Clear up your mind for a little while and consider this:
The whole working world lives by on one simple rule ..... GETTING PEOPLE OFF YOUR BACK.
The bigger PITA (pain-in-the-ass) you are... the higher is the priority you get.
As a community we will need to become a PR nightmare for govt. officals... simply being an inconvenience is not going to cut it... we will have to become a "a cactus that is stuck in the colon".
USCIS says EBs are retrogressed because there are XXXXX people in the queue. Why is the queue so long? Because they wasted numbers in the past and kept the queue long. This is pure operational inefficiency that is resulting in monetary, emotional and mental loss to about a million people.
This is a valid ground for a class action lawsuit.
By filing this suit, we will become the "cactii in the colon" that they will have to address. And you know what the easy out of court settlement will be..... RECAPTURE!
We will keep lobbying and crying as we usually do.. But this thing has a far better shot than anything else.
Class actions are not performed easily. First,one needs to show that an agency acted illegally and that action caused many people harm. The fact that USCIS did not use all the visa numbers is not automatically illegal. The law says that the MAXIMUM number of visas, for example, in the EB is 140,000 per fiscal year. It does not say what's the minimum. I am not an attorney, but if that were an easy case, many times would someone else have tried it. Good idea, but as far as I know, difficult to fight from a legal point of view. I'll ask my attorney about this and will keep you posted.
The whole working world lives by on one simple rule ..... GETTING PEOPLE OFF YOUR BACK.
The bigger PITA (pain-in-the-ass) you are... the higher is the priority you get.
As a community we will need to become a PR nightmare for govt. officals... simply being an inconvenience is not going to cut it... we will have to become a "a cactus that is stuck in the colon".
USCIS says EBs are retrogressed because there are XXXXX people in the queue. Why is the queue so long? Because they wasted numbers in the past and kept the queue long. This is pure operational inefficiency that is resulting in monetary, emotional and mental loss to about a million people.
This is a valid ground for a class action lawsuit.
By filing this suit, we will become the "cactii in the colon" that they will have to address. And you know what the easy out of court settlement will be..... RECAPTURE!
We will keep lobbying and crying as we usually do.. But this thing has a far better shot than anything else.
Class actions are not performed easily. First,one needs to show that an agency acted illegally and that action caused many people harm. The fact that USCIS did not use all the visa numbers is not automatically illegal. The law says that the MAXIMUM number of visas, for example, in the EB is 140,000 per fiscal year. It does not say what's the minimum. I am not an attorney, but if that were an easy case, many times would someone else have tried it. Good idea, but as far as I know, difficult to fight from a legal point of view. I'll ask my attorney about this and will keep you posted.
tattoo Leon Panetta CIA Director Leon
rsdang
07-29 05:29 PM
Friend wants to get married to his GF who is here on an F1 visa
He has had his GC for 2 years now
Questions?
- Can he get any paperwork for his spouse befor becoming a citizen?
- What is the fastest route for him to get his GF the GC?
Thanks
Randeep
He has had his GC for 2 years now
Questions?
- Can he get any paperwork for his spouse befor becoming a citizen?
- What is the fastest route for him to get his GF the GC?
Thanks
Randeep
more...
pictures Leon Panetta, Sylvia Panetta
mallu
02-15 06:38 PM
probably true but because most of them are on H4 which means someone else in their family is H1.
I don't know what % of that group consists of H4 spouse of H1 folks. But i believe a good percentage of those applied through the TOEFL,GRE route.
I don't know what % of that group consists of H4 spouse of H1 folks. But i believe a good percentage of those applied through the TOEFL,GRE route.
dresses Leon Panetta: Defender of hot
viva
01-29 02:51 AM
pappu- i got the message. sorry, if i became overzealous. just wanted to help iv...
i will not raise any more questions asking non-contributing members to contribute.
go iv .....go core team!
i will not raise any more questions asking non-contributing members to contribute.
go iv .....go core team!
more...
makeup Leon Panetta, former CIA
tikka
07-04 07:39 AM
http://indiapost.com/article/immigration/597/
On July 1, 2007, the Visa Numbers in the Employment-based Second and Third Preferences will become current. The USCIS Service Centers in Nebraska and Texas will be deluged with Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) applications.
An update on AILA Infonet expresses concern that the USCIS may start rejecting I-485 filings before July 31, 2007 even though, historically, applicants have had the benefit of the whole month to file before the State Department announces retrogression for the following month.
In fact, the cut-off date for the "Other Worker" was October 1, 2001 in the June 2007 Visa Bulletin. Yet, the USCIS began rejecting I-485 filings under the Other Worker category with priority dates of October 1, 2001 or earlier when the agency was informed by the State Department that the visa allocation for this category had been exhausted on June 5, 2007.
AILA believes that the rejection policy is contrary to the regulation at 8 CFR �245.1(g) (1), and has urged USCIS to reverse its policy, which it has refused to do so. In any event, June 2007 is almost over, and even if USCIS reverses its erroneous policy later in July, would it still be able to accept I-485 applications that were due in June 2007? In July 2007, the Other Worker category becomes Unavailable.
Regarding the "Current" dates in July 2007, the AILA Update indicates that USCIS has approximately 40,000 visas remaining in all employment-based categories for 2007, and that USCIS already has far more than that number of I-485 applications in the backlog queue ready for approval. Remember that there was a similar deluge of I-485 filings prior to the earlier retrogression of October 1, 2005.
If these have already been pre-approved, they will exhaust the supply of existing immigrant visas and there is a likelihood that USCIS may start rejecting I-485 filings before the month of July is over. AILA has not yet predicted the exact date in July when this will happen. Despite the rush to file, one cannot underscore the importance of filing complete I-485 applications. If the I-485 does not contain the medical examination report, it will get rejected as the document is considered "initial evidence."
The same applies to birth certificates, marriage certificates and other essential documents. It is also important to file with the correct filing fees for the I-485 ($325 + $70 for the biometrics fee). The accompanying I-765 application for temporary employment authorization is $180 and the I-131 application for Advance Parole is $180. It is also important to make full and truthful disclosure of any unauthorized unemployment on the Form G-325A.
Some may have worked after their F-1 OPT had expired and others may have been involved in self-employment home businesses. The fact that an applicant has worked without authorization for short periods of time should not render him or her ineligible to file for Adjustment of Status. Section 245(k) of the Immigration and Nationality Act protects status violations up to 180 days from the last lawful admission into the United States.
For example, if an applicant worked without authorization between October and December 2006, and then left the United States and entered on January 1, 2007 in H-1B status, so long as this individual has not violated status for more than 180 days since January 1, 2007, he or she would still be eligible to file the I-485. For those with longer periods of status violations, Section 245(i) may also render them eligible to file an I-485.
To be eligible under Section 245(i), the applicant must have been the beneficiary of a labor certification or employment or family-based immigrant visa petition (Form I-140 or Form I-130) prior to April 30, 2001. If the filing was between January 15, 1998 and April 30, 2001, he or she must also establish physical presence in the US as of December 21, 2000.
If one is filing under Section 245(i), the I-485 must be accompanied by Supplement A and an additional penalty fee of $1,000. Finally, it is also important to disclose criminal arrests and convictions, however minor. Of course, those who have a criminal record must seek the advice of an attorney prior to filing the I-485.
While not all minor arrests or convictions will lead to inadmissibility, some may and it is important to find out whether the applicant is eligible for a waiver. If one is filing an I-140 concurrently with the I-485, note that the USCIS announced on June 28, 2007 that it was temporarily suspending premium processing for 30 days from July 2, 2007 due to the heavy rush in applications.
Cyrus D. Mehta
On July 1, 2007, the Visa Numbers in the Employment-based Second and Third Preferences will become current. The USCIS Service Centers in Nebraska and Texas will be deluged with Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) applications.
An update on AILA Infonet expresses concern that the USCIS may start rejecting I-485 filings before July 31, 2007 even though, historically, applicants have had the benefit of the whole month to file before the State Department announces retrogression for the following month.
In fact, the cut-off date for the "Other Worker" was October 1, 2001 in the June 2007 Visa Bulletin. Yet, the USCIS began rejecting I-485 filings under the Other Worker category with priority dates of October 1, 2001 or earlier when the agency was informed by the State Department that the visa allocation for this category had been exhausted on June 5, 2007.
AILA believes that the rejection policy is contrary to the regulation at 8 CFR �245.1(g) (1), and has urged USCIS to reverse its policy, which it has refused to do so. In any event, June 2007 is almost over, and even if USCIS reverses its erroneous policy later in July, would it still be able to accept I-485 applications that were due in June 2007? In July 2007, the Other Worker category becomes Unavailable.
Regarding the "Current" dates in July 2007, the AILA Update indicates that USCIS has approximately 40,000 visas remaining in all employment-based categories for 2007, and that USCIS already has far more than that number of I-485 applications in the backlog queue ready for approval. Remember that there was a similar deluge of I-485 filings prior to the earlier retrogression of October 1, 2005.
If these have already been pre-approved, they will exhaust the supply of existing immigrant visas and there is a likelihood that USCIS may start rejecting I-485 filings before the month of July is over. AILA has not yet predicted the exact date in July when this will happen. Despite the rush to file, one cannot underscore the importance of filing complete I-485 applications. If the I-485 does not contain the medical examination report, it will get rejected as the document is considered "initial evidence."
The same applies to birth certificates, marriage certificates and other essential documents. It is also important to file with the correct filing fees for the I-485 ($325 + $70 for the biometrics fee). The accompanying I-765 application for temporary employment authorization is $180 and the I-131 application for Advance Parole is $180. It is also important to make full and truthful disclosure of any unauthorized unemployment on the Form G-325A.
Some may have worked after their F-1 OPT had expired and others may have been involved in self-employment home businesses. The fact that an applicant has worked without authorization for short periods of time should not render him or her ineligible to file for Adjustment of Status. Section 245(k) of the Immigration and Nationality Act protects status violations up to 180 days from the last lawful admission into the United States.
For example, if an applicant worked without authorization between October and December 2006, and then left the United States and entered on January 1, 2007 in H-1B status, so long as this individual has not violated status for more than 180 days since January 1, 2007, he or she would still be eligible to file the I-485. For those with longer periods of status violations, Section 245(i) may also render them eligible to file an I-485.
To be eligible under Section 245(i), the applicant must have been the beneficiary of a labor certification or employment or family-based immigrant visa petition (Form I-140 or Form I-130) prior to April 30, 2001. If the filing was between January 15, 1998 and April 30, 2001, he or she must also establish physical presence in the US as of December 21, 2000.
If one is filing under Section 245(i), the I-485 must be accompanied by Supplement A and an additional penalty fee of $1,000. Finally, it is also important to disclose criminal arrests and convictions, however minor. Of course, those who have a criminal record must seek the advice of an attorney prior to filing the I-485.
While not all minor arrests or convictions will lead to inadmissibility, some may and it is important to find out whether the applicant is eligible for a waiver. If one is filing an I-140 concurrently with the I-485, note that the USCIS announced on June 28, 2007 that it was temporarily suspending premium processing for 30 days from July 2, 2007 due to the heavy rush in applications.
Cyrus D. Mehta
girlfriend Senate confirms Leon Panetta
ItIsNotFunny
02-13 10:50 AM
I cannot agree more with the posts from lord_labaku and kuhelica2000. In 2000, during the startup boom I used to work with so-called "experts" in say java that would have a inflated resume, but absolutely no knowledge of what is happening. I am sure based on how their resume was structured, all of them are in the EB2 queue (I am in EB3 BTW). Last year in Nov, a group of us were talking about GC wait times when a friend who was about to apply for labor quoted..."but I do not need to worry, I am applying in Eb2". I have seen posts on this site where people have solely focussed on EB2. If EB2 becomes current, then these dudes would stop supporting IV....
Removing the limited quota per country seems to be the ideal solution. But it would help if we do not focus only on the category our application is in. It would help if , after some of us get our GC, we still continue our support for IV.
Be careful what you are talking on public forum.
Please also keep in mind, some personal experience can not be generalized.
Removing the limited quota per country seems to be the ideal solution. But it would help if we do not focus only on the category our application is in. It would help if , after some of us get our GC, we still continue our support for IV.
Be careful what you are talking on public forum.
Please also keep in mind, some personal experience can not be generalized.
hairstyles Leon Panetta speaks in
Winner
09-23 01:36 PM
Has anybody really tried to get a mortgage recently? I have been denied by 8 lenders so far simply because I don't have a green card. Most lenders have tightened their underwriting guidelines. They will give mortgages only to U.S.Citizens or somebody who is a permanent resident aka having a green card. There are very very few lenders who will give mortgages to somebody on a visa and the rates may not be very favorable.
I used www.MemberhomeLoan.com
I used www.MemberhomeLoan.com
ghouse1742
03-31 11:18 AM
Then to whom would you support? Tell me one political party which is not involved in either mass riots or corruption or deceit or governance failures etc etc etc.
Yes, people can say that Gujarat riots happened when Modi was at helm. But, don't you see why it happened. It was an aftermath of a train was burned and hundreds innocent lives had lost. I don't think any government would have controlled the anger after that incident. That was bound to happen.
No one has to debate who were murdered so mercilessly in the train. These were innocent people. No one has to debate who were killed after that....2000 innocent people....your logic that innocent people should be murdered and raped and burnt when other innocent people are killed does not make sense. In the end "INNOCENTS" are the ones harmed. It is debatable whether the riots were stoppable or not, but atleast dont support the person, views or murder of 2000 children, women and men.
Yes, people can say that Gujarat riots happened when Modi was at helm. But, don't you see why it happened. It was an aftermath of a train was burned and hundreds innocent lives had lost. I don't think any government would have controlled the anger after that incident. That was bound to happen.
No one has to debate who were murdered so mercilessly in the train. These were innocent people. No one has to debate who were killed after that....2000 innocent people....your logic that innocent people should be murdered and raped and burnt when other innocent people are killed does not make sense. In the end "INNOCENTS" are the ones harmed. It is debatable whether the riots were stoppable or not, but atleast dont support the person, views or murder of 2000 children, women and men.
justAnotherFile
06-28 08:10 PM
As per Macaca's logic, pre Oct 2005 PDs will take up all the numbers available for EB2 Indai for 2007, in June and July.
If that is the case why was the Bulletin for july not set to Oct or Nov 2005 and instead made current. Surely USCIS does not want to deal with all the extra workload if it does not have to.
If that is the case why was the Bulletin for july not set to Oct or Nov 2005 and instead made current. Surely USCIS does not want to deal with all the extra workload if it does not have to.
