coralfl
07-10 11:24 AM
Congrats and Good luck ByeUsa.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
yabadaba
07-04 08:51 AM
i sent emails all three nightly news shows at nbc, abc and cbs
i also sent an email to anna at sepiamutiny
i also sent an email to anna at sepiamutiny
ramus
07-03 04:29 PM
I digged it..
Lets digg this please..
Lets digg this please..
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
sanjay
03-27 11:47 AM
Boss, remove Atalji. He is on bed for last 8 months. So no chance for him.
Sonia Gandhi is out of question as people will not accept her.
Rahul is a baccha ( KID ) in front of all those stalwarts ( old and experience wolves ).
Contest should be only between MMS and Advani.
Though i would have loved to see Modi on PM HOT seat.
Sonia Gandhi is out of question as people will not accept her.
Rahul is a baccha ( KID ) in front of all those stalwarts ( old and experience wolves ).
Contest should be only between MMS and Advani.
Though i would have loved to see Modi on PM HOT seat.
more...
drirshad
07-03 06:27 PM
Wish the Senators a Happy Independence Day in the mail ....
Lets go guys its time to fill up those emails and fax machines .....
Lets go guys its time to fill up those emails and fax machines .....
eb3_2004
02-14 03:28 PM
Here is my 2 cents on this
Lets say the interested muster around plaintiffs and sue USCIS. Also, The court agrees that USCIS did not do its duty. Will the court go to the extent of ruling over INA which clearly says that unused visa numbers cannot be recaptured? Will the courts/judicial system set such a precedent where they will go against law just because the agency failed to implement it correctly? I don't think they will set such a precedent by overruling against the law set up by congress and the President who signed it. By long shot, Can the court recommend congress to fix the situation by changing the law and by allowing recapture? Possibly. Does that help and fix our issue?
If lawsuit/court cannot make USCIS use the numbers, how can USCIS admin fix do this?.. I am not fighting here (I sent my letters already!!!)...this just came to my mind...
Lets say the interested muster around plaintiffs and sue USCIS. Also, The court agrees that USCIS did not do its duty. Will the court go to the extent of ruling over INA which clearly says that unused visa numbers cannot be recaptured? Will the courts/judicial system set such a precedent where they will go against law just because the agency failed to implement it correctly? I don't think they will set such a precedent by overruling against the law set up by congress and the President who signed it. By long shot, Can the court recommend congress to fix the situation by changing the law and by allowing recapture? Possibly. Does that help and fix our issue?
If lawsuit/court cannot make USCIS use the numbers, how can USCIS admin fix do this?.. I am not fighting here (I sent my letters already!!!)...this just came to my mind...
more...
manderson
02-13 11:30 AM
If I am not mistaken I believe Rajiv Khanna already filed such a lawsuit some years ago and lost.
Which makes me agree with walking_dude. With the new NC>180 rule, we can get pretty good momentum by recapturing lost visas and if possible by also increasing country caps and a increase of EB visas from 2009 onwards.
Which makes me agree with walking_dude. With the new NC>180 rule, we can get pretty good momentum by recapturing lost visas and if possible by also increasing country caps and a increase of EB visas from 2009 onwards.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
ujjwal_p
05-11 07:03 PM
Remember, you are doing this to potentially ditch India and to change your nationality and are going to take oath
Wrong! Stop assuming dude. People are here because they need the Green Card. We don't take an oath to renounce loyalties when we get it. Of course your intention is clear and I am thankful that we Indians don't need to count on you. Of course, its interesting that you are quite happy being a US Citizen when it's the US which has called the LTTE a terrorist organization. Hmm, I hope you did your research. Anyway, too late. We don't need you anymore in India and like I said earlier, good riddance. All the best!
Wrong! Stop assuming dude. People are here because they need the Green Card. We don't take an oath to renounce loyalties when we get it. Of course your intention is clear and I am thankful that we Indians don't need to count on you. Of course, its interesting that you are quite happy being a US Citizen when it's the US which has called the LTTE a terrorist organization. Hmm, I hope you did your research. Anyway, too late. We don't need you anymore in India and like I said earlier, good riddance. All the best!
more...
gcdreamer05
07-17 11:50 AM
Hi Attorney,
My friend has an I-140 EB3 priority date oct 2005 approved and he had filed for 485 during july 2007.
He also has another approved LC under EB2 category and he has to file I-140 now.
In August 2008, the EB2 priority date becomes current for him since if he interfiles he would get oct 2005 on his new I-140.
Since he would be porting his EB3 PD to EB2 I-140, is it allowed that now in august he can file both I-140 & I-485 along with porting PD request.
or should he only file I-140 with porting request alone.
Does USCIS still allow concurrent filing and in this scenario can he file concurrently.
What happens to his earlier 485, does he need to withdraw it or how does it work. He is still working on his h1b now.
What will happen to the EAD which was recieved but not yet used. For the new 485 will he get a new EAD or how does EAD depend on changes to 485.
Please clarify.
Thanks.
My friend has an I-140 EB3 priority date oct 2005 approved and he had filed for 485 during july 2007.
He also has another approved LC under EB2 category and he has to file I-140 now.
In August 2008, the EB2 priority date becomes current for him since if he interfiles he would get oct 2005 on his new I-140.
Since he would be porting his EB3 PD to EB2 I-140, is it allowed that now in august he can file both I-140 & I-485 along with porting PD request.
or should he only file I-140 with porting request alone.
Does USCIS still allow concurrent filing and in this scenario can he file concurrently.
What happens to his earlier 485, does he need to withdraw it or how does it work. He is still working on his h1b now.
What will happen to the EAD which was recieved but not yet used. For the new 485 will he get a new EAD or how does EAD depend on changes to 485.
Please clarify.
Thanks.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
sajimm
05-17 08:50 PM
I would recommend to be very careful if you are considering to use substitution labor. See the quote from http://www.immigration-law.com below.
04/30/2006: Advisory for Substitution I-140 Filers Either Waiting Decision or On Appeal to AAO or Motion to Reopen/Reconsider
The DOL is currently finalizing the rule-making process to eliminate the substitution of labor certifications. The proposed rule which has already been published in the federal register has a clause exempting those who obtained the "substitution approved" at the time of the release of the final regulation which they are currently working on. No one can predict the exact date when this final regulation will be published in the federal register.
Under the current rule, there is no separate procedure for request for substitution of labor certification apart from the filing of I-140 petition for the new employee with the request to withdraw the pending or approved I-140 petition and substitute the alien beneficiary in the new I-140 petition proceeding. The employer's request for withdrawal of the pending I-140 petition or approved I-140 petition for the old employee is filed as part of the new I-140 petition filing on behalf of the new employee for the substitution. Accordingly, in this context, there is no separation decision which is issued by the USCIS for the approval of the substitutuion. The employers learn the approval of the substitution when they receive either denial or approval of the new substitution I-140 petitions.
Unfortunately, the proposed substitution elimination rule does not elaborate or define "approved substitution." Because of the current USCIS practice making the decision of substitution approval as part of the decision of I-140 petition itself, there is a risk that the DOL and the USCIS may argue that "approved substitution" means "I-140 petition approval." Such interpretation will lead to devastating consequences to the aliens who's I-140 petition will be pending or on appeal to the AAO on other legal issues such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage at the time of release of the "final regulation" in that all these I-140 petitions will have to be denied because of elimination of the substitution. The damage will mount in the situation of concurrent I-140 and I-485 applications for the alien employees and their family members.
It is thus prudent that the people whose substitution I-140 petitions are still pending consult their legal counsels to discuss strategies or options to avoid the potential deadly consequences
04/30/2006: Advisory for Substitution I-140 Filers Either Waiting Decision or On Appeal to AAO or Motion to Reopen/Reconsider
The DOL is currently finalizing the rule-making process to eliminate the substitution of labor certifications. The proposed rule which has already been published in the federal register has a clause exempting those who obtained the "substitution approved" at the time of the release of the final regulation which they are currently working on. No one can predict the exact date when this final regulation will be published in the federal register.
Under the current rule, there is no separate procedure for request for substitution of labor certification apart from the filing of I-140 petition for the new employee with the request to withdraw the pending or approved I-140 petition and substitute the alien beneficiary in the new I-140 petition proceeding. The employer's request for withdrawal of the pending I-140 petition or approved I-140 petition for the old employee is filed as part of the new I-140 petition filing on behalf of the new employee for the substitution. Accordingly, in this context, there is no separation decision which is issued by the USCIS for the approval of the substitutuion. The employers learn the approval of the substitution when they receive either denial or approval of the new substitution I-140 petitions.
Unfortunately, the proposed substitution elimination rule does not elaborate or define "approved substitution." Because of the current USCIS practice making the decision of substitution approval as part of the decision of I-140 petition itself, there is a risk that the DOL and the USCIS may argue that "approved substitution" means "I-140 petition approval." Such interpretation will lead to devastating consequences to the aliens who's I-140 petition will be pending or on appeal to the AAO on other legal issues such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage at the time of release of the "final regulation" in that all these I-140 petitions will have to be denied because of elimination of the substitution. The damage will mount in the situation of concurrent I-140 and I-485 applications for the alien employees and their family members.
It is thus prudent that the people whose substitution I-140 petitions are still pending consult their legal counsels to discuss strategies or options to avoid the potential deadly consequences
more...
H1B-GC
02-06 02:44 PM
i consider Mathew Oh,the most considerate and highy respected.His Q&A's are very individual centric but still answers those questions and posts those on his site.He provides links to other sites like immigrationportal.com though both of them are in immigration business(Simply Amazing).And he was the only one who was helpling us or showing real concern during s.1932 fiasco.Simply an Oustanding guy.Next comes Rajiv khanna since he never moderates the forum or censors other immigration sites in the forum.And for his lawsuit on behalf of all EB immigrants in 2002/2003.
And Regarding s.1932,it was posted on the Murthy site as breaking News :eek: after a week i believe that the Bill wasn't passed in the senate/house.It was a Joke of 2005!! :D
And Regarding s.1932,it was posted on the Murthy site as breaking News :eek: after a week i believe that the Bill wasn't passed in the senate/house.It was a Joke of 2005!! :D
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
lazycis
02-14 12:23 PM
Watch and see how fast the Michigan government will start issuing DL to H1B holders and to those who has pending I-485.
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
srkamath
07-23 03:10 PM
Legal, Thanks again. Also that is where exactly is the contradiction in analysis.
In my understanding, they must apply any spill over to EB3 too. EB3 gets 28.6% of total quota (Including spill overs). If some one is sure that it is not the case, please correct me.
If spill over was already applied and if EB3 will not open up again, then EB3 already got its share of spill over and EB2 also used up some part of that spill over, so only part of that spill over is left for the 2 months.
If spill over is not applied yet, then EB3 should get 28.6% of what ever is spilled over to total EB quota. Hence EB3 should open up again.
Please note that I am not making this complex. I am only pointing at complexities.
The 28.6% does not apply to spillovers - it is only for fresh allocations. Spill over goes sideways first until all in an EB category are filled, then spills over to the next EB category where again it spills sideways first.
In my understanding, they must apply any spill over to EB3 too. EB3 gets 28.6% of total quota (Including spill overs). If some one is sure that it is not the case, please correct me.
If spill over was already applied and if EB3 will not open up again, then EB3 already got its share of spill over and EB2 also used up some part of that spill over, so only part of that spill over is left for the 2 months.
If spill over is not applied yet, then EB3 should get 28.6% of what ever is spilled over to total EB quota. Hence EB3 should open up again.
Please note that I am not making this complex. I am only pointing at complexities.
The 28.6% does not apply to spillovers - it is only for fresh allocations. Spill over goes sideways first until all in an EB category are filled, then spills over to the next EB category where again it spills sideways first.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
vamsi_poondla
02-14 12:51 PM
Watch and see how fast the Michigan government will start issuing DL to H1B holders and to those who has pending I-485.
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
A new ruling is different than challenging an existing rule. So, we cannot compare with DL Issue. Name checks, I don't think it is logical. But at the same time, it is not with sinister design as well. Latest memo doesnt admit that they introduced this to screw us. It happened consequentially due to delays, less funding allocation and other processing slack. (BTW, I think MI IV Leadership team did a wonderful job for the DL Issue.)
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
A new ruling is different than challenging an existing rule. So, we cannot compare with DL Issue. Name checks, I don't think it is logical. But at the same time, it is not with sinister design as well. Latest memo doesnt admit that they introduced this to screw us. It happened consequentially due to delays, less funding allocation and other processing slack. (BTW, I think MI IV Leadership team did a wonderful job for the DL Issue.)
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
sachug22
10-07 05:00 PM
Some additional assumption in the calculations
China gets its share of EB2 numbers (by priority date)
95% cases are approved and none are delayed
EB3 to EB2 porting and cross-changeability ignored (they counter each other)
I-485 filled in last few months will not be approved (processing delays)
DOS/CIS are efficient and follow rules.
China gets its share of EB2 numbers (by priority date)
95% cases are approved and none are delayed
EB3 to EB2 porting and cross-changeability ignored (they counter each other)
I-485 filled in last few months will not be approved (processing delays)
DOS/CIS are efficient and follow rules.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
thepaew
12-13 04:24 PM
The US Constitution is a very concise document. Here is a link to it.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
I don't think that per-country caps on immigration are unconstitutional. Please note that I am affected by this and would be very happy if the caps are lifted, but I do not think that this approach is viable and that this is the best use of our limited resources.
I also disagree with your premise that corporations want to see the caps lifted.
we, as non citizens, obviously do not have all the rights that the citizens possess. We don't know whether this rule is or is not constitutional (And as someone rightly pointed out that the expertise of a constitutional attorney is required).
However if it can be shown that certain citizens/corporations ( for example microsoft, google etc who also make efforts and lobby congress to change the law ) are unduly disadvantaged by this per country cap, then they can be plaintiff. So in a sense, we have allies in the corporate sector with tons of money (and who want to make more!) So they might be willing to support us,
if it is indeed found that the rule can be challenged.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
I don't think that per-country caps on immigration are unconstitutional. Please note that I am affected by this and would be very happy if the caps are lifted, but I do not think that this approach is viable and that this is the best use of our limited resources.
I also disagree with your premise that corporations want to see the caps lifted.
we, as non citizens, obviously do not have all the rights that the citizens possess. We don't know whether this rule is or is not constitutional (And as someone rightly pointed out that the expertise of a constitutional attorney is required).
However if it can be shown that certain citizens/corporations ( for example microsoft, google etc who also make efforts and lobby congress to change the law ) are unduly disadvantaged by this per country cap, then they can be plaintiff. So in a sense, we have allies in the corporate sector with tons of money (and who want to make more!) So they might be willing to support us,
if it is indeed found that the rule can be challenged.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
santa123
07-25 06:13 PM
Dear Attorney,
I am about to file my I140.
I am in the US on L1B with company A and my GC is for future employment with Company B.
The unknown for me is that when my dates become current, I might be in my home country after completing my US assignment or in another assignment in the US itself.
In this case what is my best option, AOS or CP?
Can I choose CP now and if I am in the US when my dates are current, switch to AOS quickly and still file my I485?
Looking forward to your guidance. Thanks a ton!!
I am about to file my I140.
I am in the US on L1B with company A and my GC is for future employment with Company B.
The unknown for me is that when my dates become current, I might be in my home country after completing my US assignment or in another assignment in the US itself.
In this case what is my best option, AOS or CP?
Can I choose CP now and if I am in the US when my dates are current, switch to AOS quickly and still file my I485?
Looking forward to your guidance. Thanks a ton!!
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
mallickarjunreddy
07-13 10:30 AM
WHY not go back to India if the GC process fails , I mean after all India is our home country rite .(I am talking only about Indians)
Health and Wealth are subjective after all
Health and Wealth are subjective after all
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
PlainSpeak
01-13 03:09 PM
I completely agree with amitjoey and willigetgc.
Blaming IV on one hand for the lack of enthusiasm and support from EB3 community and on the other hand - for a stand-still in the Congress when it comes to EB specific bills/laws is inappropriate. And then asking IV to drum up a fake EB3 relief measure to encourage this community is a disastrous way to go.
I recently spoke with one of the admins (reached via contacts page) who gave a very realistic view of how things stand in the Congress and otherwise...and I truly encourage other members to talk to the right folks to get facts rather than getting misled by pure rhetoric. I trust that IV core advocacy wil identify the right bills/legislations to push for and hopefully regional grass-roots members will support those efforts. This Diversity bill might prove to be good practice but we should not have any false hopes. it just gives us another reason to blame IV later on - and IV is the only true platform we have.
Other than that let me just paste the following I wrote on another thread in response to Plainspeak's approach -
You do not represent my opinions. So please stop advocating yourself as an EB3 representative. With the points you have raised and the negative vibes you have created between EB2 vs EB3, you have shown that you are concerned and frustrated only about your own personal GC situation and are trying to use the EB3 tag to shove it down my throat. Which I completely detest.
And to that commnet of mine which you copied from the other post i would asvise people go to that post and see my reply to that
Blaming IV on one hand for the lack of enthusiasm and support from EB3 community and on the other hand - for a stand-still in the Congress when it comes to EB specific bills/laws is inappropriate. And then asking IV to drum up a fake EB3 relief measure to encourage this community is a disastrous way to go.
I recently spoke with one of the admins (reached via contacts page) who gave a very realistic view of how things stand in the Congress and otherwise...and I truly encourage other members to talk to the right folks to get facts rather than getting misled by pure rhetoric. I trust that IV core advocacy wil identify the right bills/legislations to push for and hopefully regional grass-roots members will support those efforts. This Diversity bill might prove to be good practice but we should not have any false hopes. it just gives us another reason to blame IV later on - and IV is the only true platform we have.
Other than that let me just paste the following I wrote on another thread in response to Plainspeak's approach -
You do not represent my opinions. So please stop advocating yourself as an EB3 representative. With the points you have raised and the negative vibes you have created between EB2 vs EB3, you have shown that you are concerned and frustrated only about your own personal GC situation and are trying to use the EB3 tag to shove it down my throat. Which I completely detest.
And to that commnet of mine which you copied from the other post i would asvise people go to that post and see my reply to that
freakin_gc
02-12 01:03 PM
Whether unused visa in EB-3 Row will go to EB3 India?
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2008/02/house-dems-to-p.html
Good strategy. Need to make sure all EB provisions are still intact in these reforms targetted for spring & Summer of this year.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2008/02/house-dems-to-p.html
Good strategy. Need to make sure all EB provisions are still intact in these reforms targetted for spring & Summer of this year.
ramus
07-03 08:51 PM
Done..
Thanks.
Pleeeeeeeeease blog at Employment Based (EB) Skilled Immigration Applicants (http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=1042&threadid=314286&BoardsParam=HIPDelay=1&PostID=7628691)
Please put details. 1 liners will not cut it!
Thanks.
Pleeeeeeeeease blog at Employment Based (EB) Skilled Immigration Applicants (http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=1042&threadid=314286&BoardsParam=HIPDelay=1&PostID=7628691)
Please put details. 1 liners will not cut it!
