a1b2c3
09-28 02:44 PM
Do you see any possible forward movements in Nov 08 bulletin? EB2? EB3?
Any educated guesses, rumours, inside news etc? Not that it will change anything but by now USCIS would have taken stock of the situation and possibly updated their demand projections
Here is some historical data for EB2-I (not that it will exactly help..)
oct 05 - nov 99
nov 05 - nov 99
dec 05 - july 00
jan 06 - jan 01
.....
oct 06 - jun 02
nov 06 - jan 03
dec 06 - jan 03
jan 07 - jan 03
.....
oct 07 - apr 04
nov 07 - apr 04
dec 07 - jan 02 :)
jan 08 - jan 00
Feb-Mar 08 - U
Apr 08 - Dec 03
May 08 - Jan 04
.....
oct 08 - apr 03 :)
nov 08- jun 03
dec 08 - ??
Any educated guesses, rumours, inside news etc? Not that it will change anything but by now USCIS would have taken stock of the situation and possibly updated their demand projections
Here is some historical data for EB2-I (not that it will exactly help..)
oct 05 - nov 99
nov 05 - nov 99
dec 05 - july 00
jan 06 - jan 01
.....
oct 06 - jun 02
nov 06 - jan 03
dec 06 - jan 03
jan 07 - jan 03
.....
oct 07 - apr 04
nov 07 - apr 04
dec 07 - jan 02 :)
jan 08 - jan 00
Feb-Mar 08 - U
Apr 08 - Dec 03
May 08 - Jan 04
.....
oct 08 - apr 03 :)
nov 08- jun 03
dec 08 - ??
wallpaper self clit piercing. actual
alterego
10-05 01:17 PM
Look at this part of Wall Street Journal :
Look at this. Even when the conversation if totally on "high-killed workers", there is always and has to be always, a line or a sentence about illegal immigrants. Somehow, you cannot discuss anything about anything unless you have one line about illegal immigrants. The only sensible reason to discuss illegal immigration in same topic as "attract and retain" the "high-skilled workers" is that if there are people who are high-skilled, need to be "attracted and retained" and also happen to be "illegal".
So folks, look around yourself, do you find anyone who is "high skilled", "illegal" and also need better laws to be "attraced and retained". NASA folks and folks from silicon valley, please check the cubicle next to you to find an illegal rocket scientist or an undocumented microchip designer. Those damned illegal rocket scientists and doctors.
Hey WSJ...listen up !!! Are you being facetious, or are you really not as competant as people think you are ?
To add to this point. This is AFTER the implosion of CIR on the Senate floor. CIR was supposed to be the reason issues around legal highly skilled immigration were deferred.
So, after deferral, implosion of CIR, we yet get a line clumping these two. It is almost like a nicotine addict trying to break the habit. Media can be so close minded.
All I can say is what IV has done to try to separate these two issues, is nothing short of herculean. Now atleast we are seeing some semblance of a separation. I think the Rally in DC was a highly significant moment in this regard. I am also pleasantly surprised to see as much attention given to the immigrant visa issue (ie green cards) as was to the rest of it. Previously highly skilled immigration was thought to be tantamount to H1b visas. The issue of permanent green cards was a footnote.
Look at this. Even when the conversation if totally on "high-killed workers", there is always and has to be always, a line or a sentence about illegal immigrants. Somehow, you cannot discuss anything about anything unless you have one line about illegal immigrants. The only sensible reason to discuss illegal immigration in same topic as "attract and retain" the "high-skilled workers" is that if there are people who are high-skilled, need to be "attracted and retained" and also happen to be "illegal".
So folks, look around yourself, do you find anyone who is "high skilled", "illegal" and also need better laws to be "attraced and retained". NASA folks and folks from silicon valley, please check the cubicle next to you to find an illegal rocket scientist or an undocumented microchip designer. Those damned illegal rocket scientists and doctors.
Hey WSJ...listen up !!! Are you being facetious, or are you really not as competant as people think you are ?
To add to this point. This is AFTER the implosion of CIR on the Senate floor. CIR was supposed to be the reason issues around legal highly skilled immigration were deferred.
So, after deferral, implosion of CIR, we yet get a line clumping these two. It is almost like a nicotine addict trying to break the habit. Media can be so close minded.
All I can say is what IV has done to try to separate these two issues, is nothing short of herculean. Now atleast we are seeing some semblance of a separation. I think the Rally in DC was a highly significant moment in this regard. I am also pleasantly surprised to see as much attention given to the immigrant visa issue (ie green cards) as was to the rest of it. Previously highly skilled immigration was thought to be tantamount to H1b visas. The issue of permanent green cards was a footnote.
sorcerer666
04-21 02:24 PM
Please watch your language. Its a valid question. If you and your spouse have good jobs here and children are in school....moving back to support your parents may not be so feasible both economically and also for many other reasons. If you don't have useful and helpful suggestions to relieve the problem then please refrain from making attacks and have respect for others. you don't fully know or understand the person's circumstances
There was nothing wrong with my language! What was her question ?? Lobby for the new visa category?? Is she willing to go lobby or donate ?? This is her second post in this forum..., I asked her, why not move back?? Did she give a reason ?? If her circumstances are that bad, then start a movement!! Has she offered any solutions??
There was nothing wrong with my language! What was her question ?? Lobby for the new visa category?? Is she willing to go lobby or donate ?? This is her second post in this forum..., I asked her, why not move back?? Did she give a reason ?? If her circumstances are that bad, then start a movement!! Has she offered any solutions??
2011 self clit piercing.
franklin
09-20 03:34 PM
Agreed - everyone, lets put this to rest.
I did not mean any offense to people who couldn't attend attend for valid reasons, more those that didn't care at all to help.
I did not mean any offense to people who couldn't attend attend for valid reasons, more those that didn't care at all to help.
more...
gc_rip
06-13 02:04 PM
Did anyone ever get the copy of I140 by filing G639?
Please share your experiences.
Please share your experiences.
bkarnik
11-06 01:14 PM
Friends:
What I have done below is present a couple of races that are interesting to follow tomorrow from the immigration perspective. This list is not all inclusive and only includes the House races that have been listed on the Cook Political Report (www.cookpolitical.com) as competitive. I went through the list and compared that with the representatives on the "House Immigration Reform Caucus" as chaired by Rep. Tom Tancredo. Here are the results:
The 10 following races are considered as toss-ups.
J.D.Hayworth AZ-05 LOST
Marilyn Musgrave CO-04 WON
Geoff Davis KY-04 WON
Gil Gutknecht MN-01 [/B]LOST[/B]
Charlie Bass NH-02 LOST
John Sweeney NY-20 LOST
Charles Taylor NC-11 LOST
Jean Scmidt OH-02 POSS.WIN
Thelma Drake VA-02 WON
Barbara Cubin WY-AL TOO CLOSE TO CALL, leads by 822 votes
The following 6 races are considered lean republican
Rick Renzi AZ-01 WON
John Doolittle CA-04 WON
Brian Bilbray CA-50 WON
Hefley (OPEN SEAT) CO-05 (WON by another GOP (Lamborn))
Otter ID-01 (WON by another GOP (Sali))
Randy Kuhl NY-29 WON
The following 5 races are considered likely republican
Ric Keller FL-08 WON
Bilirakis (OPEN SEAT) FL-09 (WON by the son, another GOP Bilirakis)
Jeb Bradley NH-01 LOST
Robin Hayes NC-08 (TOO CLOSE TO CALL, Hayes leads bu 468 votes)
Pat Tiberi OH-12 WON
The following one race is considered lean democratic
Bob Beauprez (OPEN SEAT) CO-07 WON by DEMOCRAT
Bottom line: The current house immigration caucus boasts 104 members. Of which, 4 will be gone come January 2007. From the remaining, IF all the tossups were to go democratic, the list would come down to 90 members.
I will update the thread with the final results Nov. 7th.
Nov. 7th update: As seen above, from the original 104, the list is now down to 95 members. With the House majority in the Democratic hands, this loss in the caucus is likely to be magnified since they are now the minority in the minority.
What I have done below is present a couple of races that are interesting to follow tomorrow from the immigration perspective. This list is not all inclusive and only includes the House races that have been listed on the Cook Political Report (www.cookpolitical.com) as competitive. I went through the list and compared that with the representatives on the "House Immigration Reform Caucus" as chaired by Rep. Tom Tancredo. Here are the results:
The 10 following races are considered as toss-ups.
J.D.Hayworth AZ-05 LOST
Marilyn Musgrave CO-04 WON
Geoff Davis KY-04 WON
Gil Gutknecht MN-01 [/B]LOST[/B]
Charlie Bass NH-02 LOST
John Sweeney NY-20 LOST
Charles Taylor NC-11 LOST
Jean Scmidt OH-02 POSS.WIN
Thelma Drake VA-02 WON
Barbara Cubin WY-AL TOO CLOSE TO CALL, leads by 822 votes
The following 6 races are considered lean republican
Rick Renzi AZ-01 WON
John Doolittle CA-04 WON
Brian Bilbray CA-50 WON
Hefley (OPEN SEAT) CO-05 (WON by another GOP (Lamborn))
Otter ID-01 (WON by another GOP (Sali))
Randy Kuhl NY-29 WON
The following 5 races are considered likely republican
Ric Keller FL-08 WON
Bilirakis (OPEN SEAT) FL-09 (WON by the son, another GOP Bilirakis)
Jeb Bradley NH-01 LOST
Robin Hayes NC-08 (TOO CLOSE TO CALL, Hayes leads bu 468 votes)
Pat Tiberi OH-12 WON
The following one race is considered lean democratic
Bob Beauprez (OPEN SEAT) CO-07 WON by DEMOCRAT
Bottom line: The current house immigration caucus boasts 104 members. Of which, 4 will be gone come January 2007. From the remaining, IF all the tossups were to go democratic, the list would come down to 90 members.
I will update the thread with the final results Nov. 7th.
Nov. 7th update: As seen above, from the original 104, the list is now down to 95 members. With the House majority in the Democratic hands, this loss in the caucus is likely to be magnified since they are now the minority in the minority.
more...
urdost
09-04 10:41 AM
My checks got cashed on friday (NSC). more info in my signature...
2010 self piercing. self piercing
slammer
01-13 12:40 PM
It's here guys :
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4417.html
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4417.html
more...
logiclife
02-01 06:05 PM
HAs anyone seen this.
How is this going to effect our efforts for lobbying
Check this out
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060201/ap_on_go_co/lobbying_ethics
---
Sunil
The rule passed applies mainly to former members of congress who now work as lobbyist. The rule says that those lobbyists, who used to be members of congress(senate or house) cannot go to house floor or the house Gym.
This does not affect our efforts due to many reasons:
1. House floor and house Gym is not the exclusive place for lobbying. Lobbying can be done at a lot of places in Washington DC besides the house floor or the Gym of the house. This rule is only lip-service really. It serves one purpose: after the abramoff scandal, you will not see lobbyist of the ex-congressman variety physically present in the house floor or the house gym lifting weights with the congressmen.
2. Lobbying - the legwork and logistics - happens mostly at the staff level. The top guys only establish initial working relationship. The rest of the work happens between the staff of the lobbyist and the staff of the congress member.
3. None of the firms we are talking to are tainted by the Abramoff scandal. The ones that were tainted are already closed anyways.
4. This rule or that rule is not going to slow down the business of lobbying significantly. Its is nature of Washington DC. Its not going anywhere. These rules will only prevent congress members from accepting gifts and freebies from lobbyist. And actually that's a good thing.
How is this going to effect our efforts for lobbying
Check this out
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060201/ap_on_go_co/lobbying_ethics
---
Sunil
The rule passed applies mainly to former members of congress who now work as lobbyist. The rule says that those lobbyists, who used to be members of congress(senate or house) cannot go to house floor or the house Gym.
This does not affect our efforts due to many reasons:
1. House floor and house Gym is not the exclusive place for lobbying. Lobbying can be done at a lot of places in Washington DC besides the house floor or the Gym of the house. This rule is only lip-service really. It serves one purpose: after the abramoff scandal, you will not see lobbyist of the ex-congressman variety physically present in the house floor or the house gym lifting weights with the congressmen.
2. Lobbying - the legwork and logistics - happens mostly at the staff level. The top guys only establish initial working relationship. The rest of the work happens between the staff of the lobbyist and the staff of the congress member.
3. None of the firms we are talking to are tainted by the Abramoff scandal. The ones that were tainted are already closed anyways.
4. This rule or that rule is not going to slow down the business of lobbying significantly. Its is nature of Washington DC. Its not going anywhere. These rules will only prevent congress members from accepting gifts and freebies from lobbyist. And actually that's a good thing.
hair her clitoris pierced for
overseas
08-26 06:07 PM
As if things weren't enough complex, today my friend told me one more thing about finger prints. His PD is 2004 Sep EB2, so he called USCIS to know the status of his application. Then they told him that his finger prints got expired (as per them they expire after every 15 months). So they will invoke the notice to get him an appointment for finger prints. They also mentioned if finger prints have expired then they can't process the application unless it gets renewed.
Although this is first hand information, I was very surprised and not sure whether or not to believe the information given by USCIS call center.
Although this is first hand information, I was very surprised and not sure whether or not to believe the information given by USCIS call center.
more...
gcbikari
04-15 12:59 PM
link (http://www.desicrunch.com/)
I think we should start a Employer Hall of shame and nominate employers who are either cheating the employees or the Immigration system.
This will help future employees and the immigration community as whole.
I am not sure if there are any legal implication to starting something on IV on this
I think we should start a Employer Hall of shame and nominate employers who are either cheating the employees or the Immigration system.
This will help future employees and the immigration community as whole.
I am not sure if there are any legal implication to starting something on IV on this
hot self clit piercing. clit piercing clips. clitoris-piercing;
darslee
07-10 11:51 AM
Yes, you are right....he did indeed use "passive resisitance" in South Africa. We all learned about it in school and I can remember the idea making a HUGE impact on me as a kid.
So I guess it does more than "work in a foreign land"....it can change individual's worldviews!
So I guess it does more than "work in a foreign land"....it can change individual's worldviews!
more...
house self clit piercing. self pierced. Self-pierced amp; lifted. Self-
god_bless_you
03-01 12:44 PM
I am sending my second contribution by Check today!
Yesterday night I have send around 100 emails to my friends and collegues here in USA regarding the efforts IV is making and helping out ! Some of them are already got their GCs but they know the Pains during this process.,
I requested all of them to pass information to other immigrants friends!!
Yesterday night I have send around 100 emails to my friends and collegues here in USA regarding the efforts IV is making and helping out ! Some of them are already got their GCs but they know the Pains during this process.,
I requested all of them to pass information to other immigrants friends!!
tattoo self clit piercing. self piercing earrings.
vbkris77
07-02 03:40 PM
When we are dealing with DOJ, why do we need significant volume ?
When dealing with representatives ( lawmakers ) we need large volume to make any impact.
Here we are talking about DOJ, who would make a decision based on the legal validity of our request.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
So that we get enough attention... I wrote one awhile back, still no luck.
When dealing with representatives ( lawmakers ) we need large volume to make any impact.
Here we are talking about DOJ, who would make a decision based on the legal validity of our request.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
So that we get enough attention... I wrote one awhile back, still no luck.
more...
pictures self clit piercing. Clit Ring Piercing. Clit Ring Piercing.
singhsa3
08-13 09:27 PM
Please contribute
dresses self clit piercing. self
superdoc
09-19 11:43 PM
Hi,
I have a question about leave of absense. Does it mean that you are still employed with them if you apply for LOA? If yes then you cannot work for another employer at the same time, not on H1B atleast.
I would like the gurus to share their opinion of the following option:
Join the new job and start working there. If there is an RFE in future then you can go to your old employer and ask for a offer letter (with the promise that you may or may not joined them) and also one from your current (old) employer. If the adjucating officer says that the letter from the current employer does not qualify under the same/similar category then you can show him the letter from the old employer offering you a job. This will satisfy the requirements of having a job offer at the time of adjudication. Though in this case you will have to join your old employer.
Gurus: Is this possible? Or are there kinks in this theory?
LOA...means I am still employed without benefits ...at my old company.
what you said makes sense..this is how I am looking at it
-join new company
-donot send in ac 21 paperwork
-if i have rfe send in paperwork from present employer which will only be a generic letter----(i don't know how much detail uscis likes)
-the reason i want to do LOA is that this way i will be sure they will not revoke i -140
-what do the gurus feel ?
BTW--gave u green --thanks for the reply
I have a question about leave of absense. Does it mean that you are still employed with them if you apply for LOA? If yes then you cannot work for another employer at the same time, not on H1B atleast.
I would like the gurus to share their opinion of the following option:
Join the new job and start working there. If there is an RFE in future then you can go to your old employer and ask for a offer letter (with the promise that you may or may not joined them) and also one from your current (old) employer. If the adjucating officer says that the letter from the current employer does not qualify under the same/similar category then you can show him the letter from the old employer offering you a job. This will satisfy the requirements of having a job offer at the time of adjudication. Though in this case you will have to join your old employer.
Gurus: Is this possible? Or are there kinks in this theory?
LOA...means I am still employed without benefits ...at my old company.
what you said makes sense..this is how I am looking at it
-join new company
-donot send in ac 21 paperwork
-if i have rfe send in paperwork from present employer which will only be a generic letter----(i don't know how much detail uscis likes)
-the reason i want to do LOA is that this way i will be sure they will not revoke i -140
-what do the gurus feel ?
BTW--gave u green --thanks for the reply
more...
makeup self clit piercing. clit
GotGC??
06-28 12:39 PM
makes sense...they are expecting alot of 140/485 combine filings in July and by issuing this bulletin they have stopped people from filing 140 in PP
When I saw the huge movement in June followed by the July bulletin, I'd thought to myself - it's a question of time before they suspend/terminate the 140 PP. The PP demand would come not from people who are filing 140/485 together (because that would be only people who just got the LCs) but rather people who had already applied 140 but not 485, or those who 140 is pending but 485 got current.
This change could at least benefit those who have a "normal" 140 in the pipeline, but that's doubtful because I'm sure these resources would get sucked into the tsunami of 485s in July.
The fact that it says they'll reconsider this after Aug 1 suggests that they do not anticipate too may 485 filings in Aug => chances of retrogression in Aug bulletin is now higher, if it does not retrogress mid-month!
When I saw the huge movement in June followed by the July bulletin, I'd thought to myself - it's a question of time before they suspend/terminate the 140 PP. The PP demand would come not from people who are filing 140/485 together (because that would be only people who just got the LCs) but rather people who had already applied 140 but not 485, or those who 140 is pending but 485 got current.
This change could at least benefit those who have a "normal" 140 in the pipeline, but that's doubtful because I'm sure these resources would get sucked into the tsunami of 485s in July.
The fact that it says they'll reconsider this after Aug 1 suggests that they do not anticipate too may 485 filings in Aug => chances of retrogression in Aug bulletin is now higher, if it does not retrogress mid-month!
girlfriend hair self pierced.
Macaca
06-16 07:46 PM
In its Response to the Ombudsman’s 2006 Annual Report recommendation (AR 2006 – 01), USCIS agreed in principle to provide a breakdown of all incomplete cases by the number of months pending and application type.
Given the constraints of existing legacy case management systems, USCIS would today need to perform a cumbersome, labor intensive, recurring manual audit of all pending files in order to compile the suggested data. Such audits would be cost prohibitive.
USCIS has opted not to use its limited financial resources to extract data from current systems and prefers to spend it on prospective systems that are years in the planning. For example, USCIS has not made corrections to the CLAIMS 3 system to capture data on applicants’ priority date information, country of nationality, and the preference category under which the application is filed that USCIS must review before the application is accepted for green card processing.
Failing to correct the system annually results in hundreds, if not thousands, of wasted hours by all levels of USCIS leadership in trying to account for an often asked question by Congress, the Ombudsman, stakeholders, and others: “Exactly how many employment-based green card applications does the agency have pending?” USCIS still cannot answer that question today with certainty.
Given the constraints of existing legacy case management systems, USCIS would today need to perform a cumbersome, labor intensive, recurring manual audit of all pending files in order to compile the suggested data. Such audits would be cost prohibitive.
USCIS has opted not to use its limited financial resources to extract data from current systems and prefers to spend it on prospective systems that are years in the planning. For example, USCIS has not made corrections to the CLAIMS 3 system to capture data on applicants’ priority date information, country of nationality, and the preference category under which the application is filed that USCIS must review before the application is accepted for green card processing.
Failing to correct the system annually results in hundreds, if not thousands, of wasted hours by all levels of USCIS leadership in trying to account for an often asked question by Congress, the Ombudsman, stakeholders, and others: “Exactly how many employment-based green card applications does the agency have pending?” USCIS still cannot answer that question today with certainty.
hairstyles self clit piercing. self piercing earrings. Self+piercing+earrings; Self+
webm
05-22 11:46 AM
from august 29 to July 28 is moving forward?
never mind.
I am confused your words..make sense now..
never mind.
I am confused your words..make sense now..
GCVivek
04-20 02:33 PM
This is not to put you down but to help you. How long have you been in the US? If more than 1 year, I would suggest taking a course to improve your written and spoken English. It is way too bad. :o and will help you in the long run in case your Eb3 gets approved and you stay as PR in the USA.
2 year back my I-140 got rejected due to same reason 3+2 degree. I have 3 years Bsc in Computer science and 2 years Master of Computer Mgmt. They raise the question on 3 year Bachealor dagree. My lawyer send the reply along with degree evaluation and we try to say my 3+2 equal to 4+2 of USA and USCIS didn't buy this argument. after that lawyer told me that no hope in MTR or appeal. So we file again in Eb3.
Now i see based on your reply if have taken this approach in appeal then i might have got approval in appeal.
2 year back my I-140 got rejected due to same reason 3+2 degree. I have 3 years Bsc in Computer science and 2 years Master of Computer Mgmt. They raise the question on 3 year Bachealor dagree. My lawyer send the reply along with degree evaluation and we try to say my 3+2 equal to 4+2 of USA and USCIS didn't buy this argument. after that lawyer told me that no hope in MTR or appeal. So we file again in Eb3.
Now i see based on your reply if have taken this approach in appeal then i might have got approval in appeal.
chanduv23
07-09 01:12 PM
I saw the thread about the negative comments on Fox... Can you please direct me to MSNBC's coverage on this?
Look for the Brian Williams thread
Look for the Brian Williams thread
No comments:
Post a Comment