conundrum
04-30 11:06 AM
does the new 180 days rule apply to these numbers if they are not counting the ones stuck in name check?
wallpaper Boston Bruins center Tyler
indio0617
03-09 10:20 AM
Sen Feingold: Amendment regarding US naturalization...
smuggymba
01-07 04:50 PM
not related but when I was buying a new car, I was told that they can only finance until the visa is valid:mad:.........the other dealership didn't ask any questions.
Just try somewhere else. good luck.
Just try somewhere else. good luck.
2011 previous Lightning playoff
srhari
07-14 04:01 PM
Simply send the check of $5 to Immigration Voice at the address listed in the first post as if you were paying a utility bill. That way your bank will send IV a check of $5.00 (or whatever amount you want it to) and IV gets the WHOLE $5 and no fees are deducted.
Thanks for the information. Just paid $20 using online Bill Pay from BOA (Confirmation #: 7YBC0-Y1MRW).
Thanks for the information. Just paid $20 using online Bill Pay from BOA (Confirmation #: 7YBC0-Y1MRW).
more...
rick_rajvanshi
07-06 05:41 PM
7/06/2007: Temporary Restraining Order of July Visa Bulletin Lawsuit Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois as Separate from AILF Class Action
* On July 6, 2007, the attorneys of Azulay, Horn & Seiden lawfirm filed this lawsuit individually in Illinois.
* On July 6, 2007, the attorneys of Azulay, Horn & Seiden lawfirm filed this lawsuit individually in Illinois.
ragz4u
03-08 02:18 PM
This will go on until 1.00 pm and there will not be any session in the afternoon tomorrow.
Senator Specter is going to talk to Sen. Bill Frist so that all Judiciary Committee members turn up tomorrow
Senator Specter is going to talk to Sen. Bill Frist so that all Judiciary Committee members turn up tomorrow
more...
Hope_GC
07-18 01:33 PM
Scheduled a Recurring $50 Payment monthly...
2010 Lightning vs Bruins
chandsri81
05-14 10:35 AM
thanks! thats encouraging..they already gave us a conditional approval last week asking for some documents, which I sent immediately. They didn't even open my documents for a week, and then the underwriter came back asking for some more things including this I94..these people are crazy! Today's my deadline and i still haven't heard anything
I will let you know if they refuse the give us a loan..thanks again for the help!
I will let you know if they refuse the give us a loan..thanks again for the help!
more...
singhsa3
09-12 02:23 PM
Looks like backward clock is the most popular idea so far.
Now,
There are two scenarios someone suggested to me in the office:
Scenario 1: Send these indiviudually (one per person).
Scenario 2: Send collectively a set of 10 backward clocks, with a greivance/protest letter , where as 10 represents month of October and signed by IV.
Now,
There are two scenarios someone suggested to me in the office:
Scenario 1: Send these indiviudually (one per person).
Scenario 2: Send collectively a set of 10 backward clocks, with a greivance/protest letter , where as 10 represents month of October and signed by IV.
hair Boston Bruins head coach
zinchak
09-11 09:01 PM
Just saw the post and make a small contribution of $100 (Google Order #749561768968518)
Thanks for doing this guys. Sorry I won't be able to make it to DC.
Thanks for doing this guys. Sorry I won't be able to make it to DC.
more...
superdude
08-02 07:29 PM
It is better to wait till you get your receipt.
Hello gurus,
I applied 485 on July 25th,2007. Now can i travel outside of USA, or have to wait until i receive the receipt? Please help as soon as you can.
Hello gurus,
I applied 485 on July 25th,2007. Now can i travel outside of USA, or have to wait until i receive the receipt? Please help as soon as you can.
hot Boston Bruins center Patrice
Milind123
09-15 09:54 PM
Today whole day i was busy bcoz of ganesh chathurthi......hope fund threads are doing good and thank you dvrao4 for the contributions. please attend rally we need people like you. thanks.
Welcome back Libra. Without you the thread slipped off the screen a few times; but chanduv23 was kind enough to bump it.
Welcome back Libra. Without you the thread slipped off the screen a few times; but chanduv23 was kind enough to bump it.
more...
house of the Boston Bruins tries
9years
11-30 02:05 PM
Just noticed there is an update on LUD on my previous EAD (not the current one). Not sure what that means though. Still waiting for response after sending interfiling letter.
Thank you for the update. I don't have any updates or LUDs. Best of luck to you.
Thank you for the update. I don't have any updates or LUDs. Best of luck to you.
tattoo Lightning vs. Bruins playoffs:
pmb76
09-13 04:54 PM
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
I agree with you gctest. Interfiling EB3-->EB2 is the 2nd biggest scam perpetrated on the EB community after labor substitution. We must stop this dead in its tracks. It will lead to massive retrogressions in EB2 and keep the truly deserving candidates waiting for ever. USCIS just devises new laws on the fly without understanding its impact on the whole. I would call this rule very short-sighted and stupid. Nonetheless we need action at this point to do whatever we can to stop this mindlessness.
I am with you on this campaign. Gave you green.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
I agree with you gctest. Interfiling EB3-->EB2 is the 2nd biggest scam perpetrated on the EB community after labor substitution. We must stop this dead in its tracks. It will lead to massive retrogressions in EB2 and keep the truly deserving candidates waiting for ever. USCIS just devises new laws on the fly without understanding its impact on the whole. I would call this rule very short-sighted and stupid. Nonetheless we need action at this point to do whatever we can to stop this mindlessness.
I am with you on this campaign. Gave you green.
more...
pictures Boston Bruins vs.
baburob2
03-15 06:25 PM
Overall no big progress w.r.t our title's though Brownback's comment on immigration numbers is good.
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
Senate Judiciary Committee Continues Slow Progress in Markup of Immigration Reform Legislation
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 06031540 (posted Mar. 15, 2006)"
The Senate Judiciary Committee continued its consideration today of draft legislation on comprehensive immigration reform sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. The Committee officially took up the bill, known as the �Chairman�s Mark,� on March 2 but has made very slow progress to date.
The following is a very brief summary of the amendments that were addressed during today�s session. See our previous update on last week�s markup sessions. We will continue to update you as action on the bill continues.
1. The Committee passed by a voice vote a compromise amendment by Feingold that would preserve some level of judicial review over naturalization applications.
2. A Specter 2nd degree amendment to a Sessions amendment on evading inspection passed.
3. A Leahy amendment on security-related issues passed by voice vote.
4. A Kennedy amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s retroactive provisions was debated and deferred.
5. A Feinstein amendment to modify the provisions of the Mark relating to border security was deferred for future action.
6. A Durbin amendment to strike the Mark�s criminalization of unlawful status was once again deferred for future consideration. Feinstein attempted to offer a 2nd degree amendment that would provide aliens with a 60-day grace period for visa overstays before they are subject to criminal prosecution under INA � 275(a), but Specter would not allow it since Durbin�s underlying amendment was set aside.
7. A Durbin amendment to ameliorate the Mark�s smuggling provision so as not to criminalize humanitarian assistance was once again debated and deferred. Kyl spoke in opposition to the amendment. Cornyn had a second degree that Hatch thought was insufficient. Hatch, Schumer and Biden spoke in opposition to Cornyn�s 2nd degree. Cornyn was not convincing, but Kyl did some damage.
8. A Sessions amendment to affirm the inherent authority of state and local law enforcement personnel to enforce federal civil immigration laws during the normal course of carrying out their duties was discussed. Specter offered a 2nd degree that would limit the inherent authority of states and localities to the enforcement of the criminal provisions of the immigration laws. Sessions would only support the 2nd degree if the provisions of the Mark criminalizing unlawful presence remain intact. Thus, if the Durbin amendment to strike those provisions passes, Sessions wants to revisit the Specter 2nd degree. Specter�s 2nd degree passed by voice vote.
9. A Sessions amendment that would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide information to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) related to aliens who may have violated certain immigration laws passed by a voice vote. The broadly worded amendment would encompass visa overstayers, other civil violators, and even members of vulnerable populations such as asylum-seekers who are improperly documented but seeking relief. Leahy and Kennedy voted against the amendment and Leahy spoke in opposition to overloading the NCIC database with individuals who do not belong in it. A Specter 2nd degree amendment that would provide a procedure for requesting removal from the database and modify the group of individuals included in it passed by voice vote.
10. A Sessions amendment that would require at least one law enforcement agency in each state to enter into a � 287(g) cooperative enforcement agreement to enforce immigration laws against alien smugglers was considered. Sessions accepted a Coburn 2nd degree amendment that would clarify: (1) that such agreements would be purely voluntary, and (2) that the �287(g) enforcement authority would not be limited to alien smuggling. There was no quorum to vote on these, however, and they were set aside.
Part way through the markup, Specter attempted to jump to a debate on the issue of the undocumented population, noting that he has reiterated to Senate Majority Leader Frist that he (Specter) opposes bringing immigration reform to the Senate Floor before the Senate Judiciary Committee had completed its consideration of the Chairman�s Mark. Biden and Kennedy voiced their support of Specter�s desire to complete work in Committee. Kennedy added, �this issue is NOT going away, like some other issues,� and urged deferral of the Title VI discussion until tomorrow (Title VI contains the provisions dealing with the undocumented population). He added that we need to deal with ALL aspects of reform to have real, lasting border security�going forward with any of these components alone will fail.
Durbin said that, to defeat the House bill (H.R. 4437), the Committee needs to pass a strong bipartisan bill with the support of about 12 members. He feels the Committee should do an extra markup session on a day when there is no other Senate business. �We need to watch the House,� noted Durbin, adding: �They have a bill we need to fight at all costs. We need bipartisan support out of this Committee.�
Brownback stated that the Committee has started a process to create broad bipartisan support for good policy, and that this is the most significant legislation of the year. �We have serious problems with immigrant numbers,� he said. �We can�t live with these and need to change them. McCain/Kennedy would deal with this. How do we get the Mark to deal with these numbers? We need a way NOT to end up here again after 10 years. We can�t move too quickly.�
Cornyn described the process as akin to �digging out of a big hole,� noting that with enforcement done first, other issues would get simpler. He believes we need to impose circularity---not permanent immigration.
Coburn said that, like it or not, we have to deal with issue of the undocumented population. He urged the Committee to split the bill in two and do enforcement first, and work to reach consensus on other parts later in the year. �No one in the country trusts us on this issue because we haven�t enforced our existing laws,� he said.
Feinstein stated her concerns about the process, and also spoke out against comprehensive immigration reform and in favor of her more limited agricultural pilot program idea. She said she had met with Senator Craig (the sponsor of AgJobs) yesterday to see if they could work out their differences but there has been no resolution yet. She also expressed much frustration with Frist�s artificial timeline. She indicated her opposition to the House bill, and said that consensus was needed in the Committee (she believes the Committee has come to some consensus on the enforcement pieces but little else). She urged Specter to go back to Frist and ask for more time.
Sessions said we need to focus on enforcement now, and then have a national discussion later on the other elements of immigration reform. He believes Congress needs to focus on enforcement to build credibility with the public. �I�m not prepared to repeat 1986,� he said. �We should slow down.�
Specter repeatedly voiced his concern about �line-jumping,� arguing that the McCain/Kennedy bill would �leap frog� the current undocumented population over individuals who have been waiting in the backlogs. He also said that he�d prefer it if the legislation contained a path to citizenship but, as Chair, was trying to balance both sides.
In other hurdles to the Judiciary Committee�s completion of work on the bill, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley, who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee, argued that the Finance Committee should have jurisdiction over the provisions of the Mark relating to the Social Security Act, adding that the IRS has raised serious concerns about some of these amendments. However, several other senators argued for consideration of these provisions in the Judiciary Committee. It is also possible that Grassley could exercise the Finance Committee�s authority by managing those amendments during floor debate.
The Committee disbanded about noon, due to a number of votes on the Senate Floor and the attendant low probability of maintaining a voting quorum in the Committee.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18835
dresses #3 Boston Bruins vs #5
GCwaitforever
04-02 11:59 AM
I don't know what to tell you guys.. I'm surprised to see how some people's thought process work.
I have no Idea what's wrong in requesting USCIS to release some data which would tell how many applications they received of which chargeability and in which EB categories’ This is the only information needed to stop predicting, everybody here can make almost exact estimate when they can expect their application Adjudicated. And also in the mean time they should provide us assurance that they will issue EADs and APs in less than 90 days. We are in a foreign country and we need to travel to our home countries, if we are stuck with 1 year approvals our file is always in process, how do you plan a trip ???
Death in the family is the only reason they recognize as urgency for travel.
We are Humans, we have family back in our home countries, marriage in the family or family visit is also urgent..
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...
The problem is paper-based application process of USCIS. They spend lots of time opening up mail and sorting out the applications. Sometimes, information is not all in one place or misplaced. Also USCIS emloyees have vested interest in continuing the status quo. If everything is filed electronically, you would see layoffs in USCIS.
Also they have other issues to deal with. There is a rush of naturalization applications last year. Similarly when crop season comes, they tend to agricultural workers visas. In these cases, staff is diverted from one paper mount to other. After getting the GC, let us apply for positions in DOL/USCIS and bring some positive process change internally.
I have no Idea what's wrong in requesting USCIS to release some data which would tell how many applications they received of which chargeability and in which EB categories’ This is the only information needed to stop predicting, everybody here can make almost exact estimate when they can expect their application Adjudicated. And also in the mean time they should provide us assurance that they will issue EADs and APs in less than 90 days. We are in a foreign country and we need to travel to our home countries, if we are stuck with 1 year approvals our file is always in process, how do you plan a trip ???
Death in the family is the only reason they recognize as urgency for travel.
We are Humans, we have family back in our home countries, marriage in the family or family visit is also urgent..
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...
The problem is paper-based application process of USCIS. They spend lots of time opening up mail and sorting out the applications. Sometimes, information is not all in one place or misplaced. Also USCIS emloyees have vested interest in continuing the status quo. If everything is filed electronically, you would see layoffs in USCIS.
Also they have other issues to deal with. There is a rush of naturalization applications last year. Similarly when crop season comes, they tend to agricultural workers visas. In these cases, staff is diverted from one paper mount to other. After getting the GC, let us apply for positions in DOL/USCIS and bring some positive process change internally.
more...
makeup Lightning vs Boston Bruins
diptam
08-11 09:21 PM
Srikondo man,
I dont care your fight with 'buddyinus' or your friendship with 'frankzulu' and whether you were travelling by air/car/ship - I would like to ask you a SIMPLE question.
You started this thread saying that USCIS has a "deadline" for completing stuffs last Monday or last last Friday.... All of us trusted you that time - Could you please give us a responsible answer or status Update.
I hope you will reply this time.
Thanks,
frankzulu,
thanks buddy. ignore that intelligent person.
He seems to be living in different world.
I hope moderators or admin or atleast pappu privately restrain this guy from his vitrious talk.
Coming to attending the rally, lets get some more folks from manchester, nashua area and plan on to attend this event.
--sri
I dont care your fight with 'buddyinus' or your friendship with 'frankzulu' and whether you were travelling by air/car/ship - I would like to ask you a SIMPLE question.
You started this thread saying that USCIS has a "deadline" for completing stuffs last Monday or last last Friday.... All of us trusted you that time - Could you please give us a responsible answer or status Update.
I hope you will reply this time.
Thanks,
frankzulu,
thanks buddy. ignore that intelligent person.
He seems to be living in different world.
I hope moderators or admin or atleast pappu privately restrain this guy from his vitrious talk.
Coming to attending the rally, lets get some more folks from manchester, nashua area and plan on to attend this event.
--sri
girlfriend Boston Bruins players, from
JunRN
09-11 10:39 PM
By the way, we can also send "relief goods" to Texas Center plus our letters of sentiment.
hairstyles Bruins vs. Lightning
h1b_forever
08-13 01:47 PM
1)I disagree with the bill, why should legal employment immigration pay for policing the border. Why only H1 and L1s? Why not other temporary and permanent immigration visas
Should not they be paying to protect the border first before everything else
2) Having said that, I cannot disagree with making it difficult for companies which have more than 50 employees with more than 50% on h1/L1. It just does not add up that they cannot employ 50% locals/residents. I would go further and make it really difficult for someone to do this unless they can really prove the need (like in case of EB1)
I know my opinion will not be popular, but think about it. I can agree they cannot fill all their jobs with locals, but not even 50%, come on some one will have to show me why they can not do that. The only reason I can think of
1)Their pay will not attract people
2)They wont pay overtime and make them work like dogs
3)They come here for a short duration to help outsource the jobs
Should not they be paying to protect the border first before everything else
2) Having said that, I cannot disagree with making it difficult for companies which have more than 50 employees with more than 50% on h1/L1. It just does not add up that they cannot employ 50% locals/residents. I would go further and make it really difficult for someone to do this unless they can really prove the need (like in case of EB1)
I know my opinion will not be popular, but think about it. I can agree they cannot fill all their jobs with locals, but not even 50%, come on some one will have to show me why they can not do that. The only reason I can think of
1)Their pay will not attract people
2)They wont pay overtime and make them work like dogs
3)They come here for a short duration to help outsource the jobs
chocolate
06-03 03:49 PM
If you are eligible to file I-140/485 now then how come you are stuck?
Remember nothing has become law yet..
MY employer is a consulting company and i had a rfe to my h1 extension for 8th yr so he wants to wait to answer rfe , then get approval and next file for next stages. I have tried all the ways to make him file and not able to.I just hope the new labor laws will help. Acc to that he shud file for next stages in 180 days starting july 15 th right. What is this May 15 thing?Any inputs. Thanks in advance.
Remember nothing has become law yet..
MY employer is a consulting company and i had a rfe to my h1 extension for 8th yr so he wants to wait to answer rfe , then get approval and next file for next stages. I have tried all the ways to make him file and not able to.I just hope the new labor laws will help. Acc to that he shud file for next stages in 180 days starting july 15 th right. What is this May 15 thing?Any inputs. Thanks in advance.
sanam9696
09-14 11:02 AM
Why this fight for EB2 vs EB3..
ideally GC should be given based on one's arrival in US or based on first filing of GC..irrespective of which category u r
keeping that in mind, it doesn't matter, if u r EB2 or EB3 or if u r porting the date..because in either way..one will get GC (luck is still a factor) based on number of years in US or years since GC process started.
given a chance and if permissible under the law, most of us would want to switch to EB1..or even change the birthplace..to avoid this mess..but then it is too difficult to switch to EB1 compared to switching from EB3 to EB2. one would always take the least resistive path and it is right as long as it is not illegal under the current law..(oh..no..don't talk about morality..because when personal interests are at stake..nothing matters..for most of us)
anyway..they have successfully created enough divisions among ourselves EB1,2,3...row...the bright side of eb3 to eb3 porting is..that everyone will become eb2 and then we will stand united..hopefully..but then we will have divisions..eb2 before this year..eb2 originally filed..eb2 with masters from us..eb2 with 5 yrs of experience..eb2 with two masters...eb2 with fair screen..eb2 with black skin..
we have been always like that..divided and self centric and we will remain so and that's why u can see those blood sucking idiots can kill as at their will because we are not indians..but..from up, bihar, gujarat..from castes..region.language..list is endless but then we have never learnt anything from history..that's why ruled by minorities for most of the years in last 2000yrs history..
ideally GC should be given based on one's arrival in US or based on first filing of GC..irrespective of which category u r
keeping that in mind, it doesn't matter, if u r EB2 or EB3 or if u r porting the date..because in either way..one will get GC (luck is still a factor) based on number of years in US or years since GC process started.
given a chance and if permissible under the law, most of us would want to switch to EB1..or even change the birthplace..to avoid this mess..but then it is too difficult to switch to EB1 compared to switching from EB3 to EB2. one would always take the least resistive path and it is right as long as it is not illegal under the current law..(oh..no..don't talk about morality..because when personal interests are at stake..nothing matters..for most of us)
anyway..they have successfully created enough divisions among ourselves EB1,2,3...row...the bright side of eb3 to eb3 porting is..that everyone will become eb2 and then we will stand united..hopefully..but then we will have divisions..eb2 before this year..eb2 originally filed..eb2 with masters from us..eb2 with 5 yrs of experience..eb2 with two masters...eb2 with fair screen..eb2 with black skin..
we have been always like that..divided and self centric and we will remain so and that's why u can see those blood sucking idiots can kill as at their will because we are not indians..but..from up, bihar, gujarat..from castes..region.language..list is endless but then we have never learnt anything from history..that's why ruled by minorities for most of the years in last 2000yrs history..
No comments:
Post a Comment