amitjoey
01-18 12:32 PM
http://www..com/discussion-forums/dallas-backlog/1171607/#post-6787022
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
Every time you stand out of the crowds, you will have to bear rotten eggs and tomatoes. This is no different. Anytime you do the right thing, there will be critics. Remember all of the people out there (Anti-Immigrants) who do not want IV to succeed.
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
Every time you stand out of the crowds, you will have to bear rotten eggs and tomatoes. This is no different. Anytime you do the right thing, there will be critics. Remember all of the people out there (Anti-Immigrants) who do not want IV to succeed.
wallpaper Picture love tattoo. Butterfly
Michael chertoff
03-19 12:55 PM
Question on AOS processing based on PD/RD - Currently, EB2 INDIA is Dec 03. Assuming May 08 VB goes to Jan 03 (EB2 INDIA) , will the EB2 INDIA AOS applications with Feb - Dec 03 PDs still get processed??
Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??
Why not july 2006??
Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??
Why not july 2006??
Ramba
02-21 01:21 PM
It is very difficult to predict how the cutoff date movement from april to september. All depends on how many EB3-ROW applications are ready for approval by March 8th, due to 2 years movement. After july fiasco, there are tons of fresh 485s got filed (may be 300K to 600K). There will be considerable EB3-ROW applicants to consume all the visas remaining in this year. As USCIS processing 485s based only on recived date (not by EB catagory not by PD wise and not by and countrywise), it is very diffcult to conclude that all the EB3-ROW 485s with PD before 2005 currently pending with USCIS, will be ready by March 8th to consume all the visas. If EB3-ROW consumption by march-8 is less than what DOS projecting, there may be a further movement. Depending upon DOS staergy, the remaining movement may be in EB3-ROW or EB2-In,CH. EB1-IN,EB2-IN, & EB3-In might have alrady consumed its quota. The only available numbers for Indians are spill over. So, depending upon DOS policy there will be a movement in EB3-ROW or EB2 In-CH. Other animal that affet this situation is, new policy of USCIS for very old name check cases (about 50,000). If the EB3-ROW has more name check victims, then movement for India will not be possible. So, its is very difficult to predict.
2011 small fairy tattoo designs
ak_2006
09-09 02:37 PM
I feel like there will be no special help from anybody including IV. I am not blaming IV for this as they have to fight for all. We (EBI) need lead the fight to do something.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
more...
gc28262
04-10 10:24 PM
and what is your point?
EB3-I won't retrogress back to 2001 again. It will keep moving forward at slow but steady pace.
EB3-I won't retrogress back to 2001 again. It will keep moving forward at slow but steady pace.
lordoftherings
07-04 07:47 PM
Yes, if all this is true, then going the lawsuit way is not the right step. They should now use this to force USCIS make some changes. One of them would allowing to file I-485 right after I-140 approval irrespective of whatever the PD is. When PDs become current the processing will start. This change will give releif to a lot of victims and future filers.
more...
Madhuri
06-11 11:47 AM
Done
2010 utterfly fairy tattoo
gc_wow
02-12 03:52 PM
No one cares about our plight.We are like new Jews in America.No matter what for no reason every one hates us for what we are.
more...
vinzak
11-11 12:45 PM
We can all send a copy to the ombudsmand and DOS.
I will be discussing this with my congressperson in a couple of weeks. Can any of you contact your congressperson and have them help you regarding quarterly spillover? Use the draft to take to your local congressman.
I'm willing to send this to all the congressman/senators in Texas. Since I'm new to this game, is email better or snail mail? Or is personal contact expected?
Thanks.
I will be discussing this with my congressperson in a couple of weeks. Can any of you contact your congressperson and have them help you regarding quarterly spillover? Use the draft to take to your local congressman.
I'm willing to send this to all the congressman/senators in Texas. Since I'm new to this game, is email better or snail mail? Or is personal contact expected?
Thanks.
hair utterfly fairy tattoo.
ajay
12-25 02:12 PM
Nrc2008068051
more...
aristotle
07-18 03:11 AM
Can all the July 2nd filers update this thread if
- you have your application rejected and returned.
OR
- you get a receipt number or have your check cashed.
Please login and subscribe to this thread.
- you have your application rejected and returned.
OR
- you get a receipt number or have your check cashed.
Please login and subscribe to this thread.
hot Butterfly Fairy Tattoos
jkays94
07-10 02:39 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
more...
house fairy tattoo flash
Legal
07-04 07:58 PM
EXCELLENT ANALYSIS. STILL THERE ARE PROBLEMS.
The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July.
1. ARE YOU SURE THIS NUMBER IS ACCURATE? 700K? SEEMS TO BE EXAGGERATED.
When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card.
2.IF THESE 40K WERE OTHERWISE QULAIFIED WHY WERE THEY SITTING ON THEM UNTIL MID-JUNE ....TO START WITH? IF THEY WERE SO EAGER TO FOLLOW THE OMBUDSMAN'S GUIDELINES WHY WERE THEY SO SLOW IN USING UP THE VISA NUMBERS UNTIL MID JUNE?
However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
3.MORE PRECISE DESCRIPTION WOULD BE THEY WERE COMPLETELY RECKLESS..GIVE A S+I& ABOUT HOW MUCH THEIR ACTIONS AFFECT THE CUSTOMERS.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bullet. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
4.OK..... WHICH PART OF THIS AFFECTED THE STAFF AT USCIS... THE FACT THAT MANY OF US WILL ONLY HAVE EAD FOR 10 YRS OR THE FACT THAT MORE EAD RENEWALS MEANS MORE CUMBERSOME WORK FOR THEM? I'M AFRAID IT IS THE LATER.
Now, they used all 140K visas this year.
5.AREN'T THEY REQUIRED BY LAW TO SPREAD THE NUMBERS FOR EACH QUARTER? DON'T THEY HAVE LIMITATIONS ON HOW MUCH THEY CAN USE FOR EACH MONTH ETC?
The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
6.I AGREE. THIS COULD BE THE ONLY >POTENTIAL <SILVER LINING. HOWEVER, OPPONENTS WHO FOUGHT THE PREVIOUS LEGISLATIONS IN FAVOR OF US WON'T LET IT HAPPEN THAT EASILY.
THERE IS NO OTHER CHOICE OTHER THAN TRYING..
The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July.
1. ARE YOU SURE THIS NUMBER IS ACCURATE? 700K? SEEMS TO BE EXAGGERATED.
When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card.
2.IF THESE 40K WERE OTHERWISE QULAIFIED WHY WERE THEY SITTING ON THEM UNTIL MID-JUNE ....TO START WITH? IF THEY WERE SO EAGER TO FOLLOW THE OMBUDSMAN'S GUIDELINES WHY WERE THEY SO SLOW IN USING UP THE VISA NUMBERS UNTIL MID JUNE?
However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
3.MORE PRECISE DESCRIPTION WOULD BE THEY WERE COMPLETELY RECKLESS..GIVE A S+I& ABOUT HOW MUCH THEIR ACTIONS AFFECT THE CUSTOMERS.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bullet. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
4.OK..... WHICH PART OF THIS AFFECTED THE STAFF AT USCIS... THE FACT THAT MANY OF US WILL ONLY HAVE EAD FOR 10 YRS OR THE FACT THAT MORE EAD RENEWALS MEANS MORE CUMBERSOME WORK FOR THEM? I'M AFRAID IT IS THE LATER.
Now, they used all 140K visas this year.
5.AREN'T THEY REQUIRED BY LAW TO SPREAD THE NUMBERS FOR EACH QUARTER? DON'T THEY HAVE LIMITATIONS ON HOW MUCH THEY CAN USE FOR EACH MONTH ETC?
The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
6.I AGREE. THIS COULD BE THE ONLY >POTENTIAL <SILVER LINING. HOWEVER, OPPONENTS WHO FOUGHT THE PREVIOUS LEGISLATIONS IN FAVOR OF US WON'T LET IT HAPPEN THAT EASILY.
THERE IS NO OTHER CHOICE OTHER THAN TRYING..
tattoo fairy tattoo pictures.
perm2gc
01-18 06:20 PM
http://www.immigrationforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1990
more...
pictures Sexy Back Fairy Tattoo
ilikekilo
10-15 08:59 PM
ok what receipt # are you guys talking about? i think iam little confused..
ok if I send the letter with my name and notarize it would it suffice? plkease advise? waht is that receipt # that u guysa re talking about
ok if I send the letter with my name and notarize it would it suffice? plkease advise? waht is that receipt # that u guysa re talking about
dresses fairy tattoo flash
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
more...
makeup utterfly-fairy-tattoo-design-
saketkapur
10-16 03:30 PM
sent.........
girlfriend small fairy tattoos. free
anu_t
07-29 03:55 PM
wizkid , You are absolutely right. Reading your story is just a great inspiration.
hairstyles utterfly fairy wings
indianindian2006
07-14 07:05 PM
So whether you receive RFE, NOID depends on adjudicator instead of USCIS rules.
That is the reason I was asking you to try to find from your ex-employer if you could get any news.General procedure from what I have read is to issue a NOID but they have given you a RFE which keeps you alive for now.Maybe your ex-emplyer cancelled your 140 after 180 days but again all this is a shot in the dark and only your ex-employer has the answer for this.
That is the reason I was asking you to try to find from your ex-employer if you could get any news.General procedure from what I have read is to issue a NOID but they have given you a RFE which keeps you alive for now.Maybe your ex-emplyer cancelled your 140 after 180 days but again all this is a shot in the dark and only your ex-employer has the answer for this.
kuhelica2000
01-09 11:29 AM
Absolutely wrong. Becasue of false 5/6 year experience, the genuine guy with 2/3 years fo experience didn't even get the interview. Misrepresentation in your resume works becuase American system is mostly based on trust. All the places I have worked, no one ever asked to even see my diploma. Becuase, they trusted me. Unfortunately we are taking advantage of this trust and that's why we will be seeing laws to eliminate consulrtng all together because some low ethics like you want credit for doctoring resume.
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
desi3933
02-12 01:42 PM
....
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment