alisa
01-18 10:10 PM
just sent it to you
wasn't sure i could put a file here
The following is a copy paste of the hopeless situation for many many of us, from the presentation paskal was referring to.
Please add more facts, figures, numbers.
There are around 147,000 employment based Visa number available every year.
Each country in the world, irrespective of population, equally share from the same bucket for Visa Number.
Total there are 100 (suppose) country in world. Each country will get 1470 Visa Number allocated / year.
This 1470 will be divided between EB1, EB2 and EB3 category
That means every category will get 490 Visa Number.
USCIS statistics show each household has at least two member. So only 245 household from India in EB3 category will get GC in a year.
Total GC application pending with USCIS is around 1MM.
In simple you are in a funnel and if you don�t act now you will be in funnel for lifetime.
wasn't sure i could put a file here
The following is a copy paste of the hopeless situation for many many of us, from the presentation paskal was referring to.
Please add more facts, figures, numbers.
There are around 147,000 employment based Visa number available every year.
Each country in the world, irrespective of population, equally share from the same bucket for Visa Number.
Total there are 100 (suppose) country in world. Each country will get 1470 Visa Number allocated / year.
This 1470 will be divided between EB1, EB2 and EB3 category
That means every category will get 490 Visa Number.
USCIS statistics show each household has at least two member. So only 245 household from India in EB3 category will get GC in a year.
Total GC application pending with USCIS is around 1MM.
In simple you are in a funnel and if you don�t act now you will be in funnel for lifetime.
wallpaper motivational poster1
gvenkat
10-20 09:24 AM
Mccain is suportive to immigration yes. But not to legal but illegal. And there will be too m any distractions under his regime the 100 yer war in iraq and a new war in IRan that this will be in the back burner and the economy going down and us losing jobs so that we dont have to worry about GC. :mad::mad::mad:
Wake up US needs a change.. didnt we have a republican president for the last 8 yeras.. didnt the retrogession happen during that time.. so what we need is chnage and thigns will fall in place.. although Obama might not be pro-immigration we might have some transparency...
Wake up US needs a change.. didnt we have a republican president for the last 8 yeras.. didnt the retrogession happen during that time.. so what we need is chnage and thigns will fall in place.. although Obama might not be pro-immigration we might have some transparency...
sayantan76
02-22 07:55 PM
I agree with you.
This guy googler just wants 5 minutes of fame and attention. By talking about such sensitive information on the forum, he is risking anything good that can happen for us in future. DOS can get unhappy with this official for discussing such information. I can understand the motives of lawyers for announcing on their website. They want publicity and business for themselves by showing off their connections.
Any Govt official who mentions any piece of information to a member of general public or press does it with full knowledge that the information can become public knowledge....so either the information shared by this person with googler is not sensitive (most likely the case since generic USCIS modus operandi in making available visa numbers and moving dates should be public information) or the person does not care that sensitive info gets leaked. So Googler did the right thing in sharing the info
Also - i dont understand the logic that having this information could risk any good that might be coming our way - its not that googler's source is making any special favors or moving the dates faster than they should....all he is doing is moving dates as per USCIS policy.....so even if USCIS gets pissed off with this person and replaces him - the next incumbent would also move dates in a similar manner (nothing works like "precedence" in Govt).......the only harm coming our way is that we would have lost a good info source
This guy googler just wants 5 minutes of fame and attention. By talking about such sensitive information on the forum, he is risking anything good that can happen for us in future. DOS can get unhappy with this official for discussing such information. I can understand the motives of lawyers for announcing on their website. They want publicity and business for themselves by showing off their connections.
Any Govt official who mentions any piece of information to a member of general public or press does it with full knowledge that the information can become public knowledge....so either the information shared by this person with googler is not sensitive (most likely the case since generic USCIS modus operandi in making available visa numbers and moving dates should be public information) or the person does not care that sensitive info gets leaked. So Googler did the right thing in sharing the info
Also - i dont understand the logic that having this information could risk any good that might be coming our way - its not that googler's source is making any special favors or moving the dates faster than they should....all he is doing is moving dates as per USCIS policy.....so even if USCIS gets pissed off with this person and replaces him - the next incumbent would also move dates in a similar manner (nothing works like "precedence" in Govt).......the only harm coming our way is that we would have lost a good info source
2011 Funny Motivational Poster V0.6
GC_US_64
12-26 03:58 PM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
more...
conundrum
11-07 04:46 PM
Bump ^^^^
anilsal
12-12 03:40 PM
Here is an article that has some info on the non-ability to file 485.
http://www.visapro.com/Immigration-Articles/?a=327&z=63
But still, what rule says that until visa numbers are available, one cannot file 485. Most probably, we never realized this pattern because until retrogression hit, the visa numbers were always available.
http://www.visapro.com/Immigration-Articles/?a=327&z=63
But still, what rule says that until visa numbers are available, one cannot file 485. Most probably, we never realized this pattern because until retrogression hit, the visa numbers were always available.
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
2010 Funny Motivational Posters
joydiptac
02-19 02:22 PM
Guys, this looks good. It is NOT for illegal aliens. Paragraphs (c) and (d) state that the alien must be admissible as an immigrant (i.e. not have broken the law by being an illegal), read paragraph (d) here:
"(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status."
Read the "or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section"....so, anyone who broke the law by entering the country illegally would NOT be eligible.
So, stop sending those letters opposing this bill, and instead let's support it!!
Totally agree with you. All opposed are not getting the point that they do not stand to loose either way. Hope they come to their senses. Anyhow if nothing happens they will be waiting way more than 5 years. This can only reduce the backlogs. Think with a clear mind. You might have a fast car but you can't go fast if the freeway is clogged. THink!
"(d) Security and Law Enforcement Clearances- The alien, if over 15 years of age, shall submit fingerprints in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such fingerprints shall be submitted to relevant Federal agencies to be checked against existing databases for information relating to criminal, national security, or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a process for challenging the accuracy of matches that result in a finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status."
Read the "or other law enforcement actions that would render the alien ineligible for adjustment of status under this section"....so, anyone who broke the law by entering the country illegally would NOT be eligible.
So, stop sending those letters opposing this bill, and instead let's support it!!
Totally agree with you. All opposed are not getting the point that they do not stand to loose either way. Hope they come to their senses. Anyhow if nothing happens they will be waiting way more than 5 years. This can only reduce the backlogs. Think with a clear mind. You might have a fast car but you can't go fast if the freeway is clogged. THink!
more...
msp1976
12-21 09:28 AM
Please take time to write to the New Jersey Senators this holiday season to encourage them to take up the immigration legislation
Lautenberg, Frank R.- (D - NJ) Class II
324 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3224
Web Form: http://lautenberg.senate.gov/contact/
Menendez, Robert- (D - NJ) Class I
502 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4744
Web Form: http://menendez.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm
Lautenberg, Frank R.- (D - NJ) Class II
324 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3224
Web Form: http://lautenberg.senate.gov/contact/
Menendez, Robert- (D - NJ) Class I
502 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4744
Web Form: http://menendez.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm
hair Least funny demotivational
silibili
06-10 04:40 PM
done
more...
bfadlia
09-10 05:55 PM
Guys,
The link isnt working for me too.
I hope things work in favor with this bill today, but if not, we must ask for Citizenship instead of Greencards. Anyone with me.,
We have all waited for 5-10 year and there are many who got it in one year and then Citizenship in 6-8 years from the day they got their GCs. That was the normal timeframe. But due to their inefficiency, we are waiting this much time. NOT our fault. Now dont you guys think we must ask for Citizenship.. I thought my case was too stressful, came 99, applied 04, waiting for 485 now, but I have seen so many many stories of ohter guys also here who suffered more. I feel we must ask them Citizenship. If we get, great, else atleast we end up with GC.
Anybody with me,
Thanks,
Sri.,
That is absolutely reasonable.
Canada does exactly that. You need 4 years for citizenship, but if you were in the country legally before getting permanent residence that is counted.
Unfortunately, US legislators don't care about what's reasonable, their only thinking is "will supporting this bill benefit or hurt my chances of re-election"
The link isnt working for me too.
I hope things work in favor with this bill today, but if not, we must ask for Citizenship instead of Greencards. Anyone with me.,
We have all waited for 5-10 year and there are many who got it in one year and then Citizenship in 6-8 years from the day they got their GCs. That was the normal timeframe. But due to their inefficiency, we are waiting this much time. NOT our fault. Now dont you guys think we must ask for Citizenship.. I thought my case was too stressful, came 99, applied 04, waiting for 485 now, but I have seen so many many stories of ohter guys also here who suffered more. I feel we must ask them Citizenship. If we get, great, else atleast we end up with GC.
Anybody with me,
Thanks,
Sri.,
That is absolutely reasonable.
Canada does exactly that. You need 4 years for citizenship, but if you were in the country legally before getting permanent residence that is counted.
Unfortunately, US legislators don't care about what's reasonable, their only thinking is "will supporting this bill benefit or hurt my chances of re-election"
hot 25 Motivational Posters (Part
sukhwinderd
03-10 09:58 AM
smaller chunks are useful for a night stay at a hotel or for car rental.
car rental at aa is about 2100 miles/day.
hotel is somewhere around 13,000 miles/night.
car rental at aa is about 2100 miles/day.
hotel is somewhere around 13,000 miles/night.
more...
house funny motivational posters
nitinboston
04-09 04:19 PM
Dear Mrs. Hillary Clinton
Heartfelt thanks for making such an effort to answer consumer grievances. My Admiration for this administration and their efforts to improve communication is growing exponentially every day. God Bless you and God Bless America.
We are wringing these questions in effort to understand the VISA allocation processes followed by DOS. Also how it affects effectively petitioners live to plan their future, travel, Buying house etc...
1.0) Is IVACS primary application for tracking VISA requests from USCIS, Consular posts?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS should be single source for data entry of all the new application.
1.1) Does IVACS system (DOS�s Inventory system) connects electronically to USCIS system, Consular posts or NVC or any other agencies for VISA demand requests?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS need talk to Client System (USCIS, Consular posts, NVC or other agencies) every month system for effectively moving VISA bulletin every month.
1.2) In Absence of Interface � Does IVACS system receive VISA demand sent manually through flat file or spreadsheet?
Rationale: In absence of electronic interface DOS need to manually receive data for effectively predicting VISA bulletin every month.
2.0) How many Employment-based I485 VISA demands are pending at USCIS, NVC, Consular posts?
Rationale: We are trying to get Employment based pending applications.
3.0) IS this last Pending EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf on 4/8/2010 - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf includes all the Employment based I485 VISA demand?
Rationale: We are trying to confirm data received are all inclusive.
4.0) Can DOS Enhance/publish table for �total number of VISA available�� as on report preparation date, rather than total Fiscal availability. As per table showed below,
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
Preference China Demand India Demand Maxico Philippines ROW Worldwide limit
Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
5.0) Can DOS generate monthly VISA returns report from USCIS, NVC, Consular posts or any other agencies that demands Employment VISA?
Rationale: This will help us understand how much visa were available for reallocation.
6.0) INA section Sec 201 (2) mentions usages of visa per �Calendar Quarter� with maximum limit of 27% per quarter. As EB2 & EB3 categories are retro gassed Are Minimum 140k/4 Visa's consumed every quarter? If no which section of INA being applied to not to do so?
Rationale: To understand DOS�s interpretation and application of the law.
7.0) Where we can find DOS published monthly EB/FB permanent residency VISA demand report with country of chargeability, Employment based category (for e.g. EB1, EB2, EB3, �), similar to report published by DOL.
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
8.0) What is rational of EB3-India Visa allocation only approximately 100 a month? We feel that before EB3-I become unavailable it should get 140*7%*28.6% = 2802/12 VISA�s every month. EB3-I VISA reductions from Inventory reports before their Priority Date is as follows,
a) Between Inventory Published 03/12/10 & 01/30/10 = 100
b) Between Inventory Published between 01/30/10 & 04/08/10 = 100
Rationale: This will help EB3 applicants to estimate date of approval to plan their future for house Purchase or major move etc.
9.0) How do you propose to reconcile the pending data reported by DOS and USCIS.
We are Comparing data from two sources USCIS published pending inventory and DOS published monthly determination, And we have Found data Differences for following categories,
USCIS Pending for EB3-China as on March 08, 2010 === 5,575
DOS Pending for EB3-China as on March 01, 2010 === 8,900
Rationale: Closing gap in case of data error.
References:
i. EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
ii. Operation of the Numerical Control Process - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Immigrant%20Visa%20Control%20System_operation%20of .pdf
Dude i must say, it must have taken a huge effort to come up with all this. But guess what, it wont make a dent. There are way too many Indians, Chinese and Mexicans in line and too few GC's to give out.
Heartfelt thanks for making such an effort to answer consumer grievances. My Admiration for this administration and their efforts to improve communication is growing exponentially every day. God Bless you and God Bless America.
We are wringing these questions in effort to understand the VISA allocation processes followed by DOS. Also how it affects effectively petitioners live to plan their future, travel, Buying house etc...
1.0) Is IVACS primary application for tracking VISA requests from USCIS, Consular posts?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS should be single source for data entry of all the new application.
1.1) Does IVACS system (DOS�s Inventory system) connects electronically to USCIS system, Consular posts or NVC or any other agencies for VISA demand requests?
Rationale: Any Software/Application used by DOS need talk to Client System (USCIS, Consular posts, NVC or other agencies) every month system for effectively moving VISA bulletin every month.
1.2) In Absence of Interface � Does IVACS system receive VISA demand sent manually through flat file or spreadsheet?
Rationale: In absence of electronic interface DOS need to manually receive data for effectively predicting VISA bulletin every month.
2.0) How many Employment-based I485 VISA demands are pending at USCIS, NVC, Consular posts?
Rationale: We are trying to get Employment based pending applications.
3.0) IS this last Pending EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf on 4/8/2010 - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf includes all the Employment based I485 VISA demand?
Rationale: We are trying to confirm data received are all inclusive.
4.0) Can DOS Enhance/publish table for �total number of VISA available�� as on report preparation date, rather than total Fiscal availability. As per table showed below,
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
Preference China Demand India Demand Maxico Philippines ROW Worldwide limit
Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal Beginning Demand Allocated this month End Demand Allocated this fiscal
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
5.0) Can DOS generate monthly VISA returns report from USCIS, NVC, Consular posts or any other agencies that demands Employment VISA?
Rationale: This will help us understand how much visa were available for reallocation.
6.0) INA section Sec 201 (2) mentions usages of visa per �Calendar Quarter� with maximum limit of 27% per quarter. As EB2 & EB3 categories are retro gassed Are Minimum 140k/4 Visa's consumed every quarter? If no which section of INA being applied to not to do so?
Rationale: To understand DOS�s interpretation and application of the law.
7.0) Where we can find DOS published monthly EB/FB permanent residency VISA demand report with country of chargeability, Employment based category (for e.g. EB1, EB2, EB3, �), similar to report published by DOL.
Rationale: This will help applicants to estimate date of approval and plan for buying house, make major move etc.
8.0) What is rational of EB3-India Visa allocation only approximately 100 a month? We feel that before EB3-I become unavailable it should get 140*7%*28.6% = 2802/12 VISA�s every month. EB3-I VISA reductions from Inventory reports before their Priority Date is as follows,
a) Between Inventory Published 03/12/10 & 01/30/10 = 100
b) Between Inventory Published between 01/30/10 & 04/08/10 = 100
Rationale: This will help EB3 applicants to estimate date of approval to plan their future for house Purchase or major move etc.
9.0) How do you propose to reconcile the pending data reported by DOS and USCIS.
We are Comparing data from two sources USCIS published pending inventory and DOS published monthly determination, And we have Found data Differences for following categories,
USCIS Pending for EB3-China as on March 08, 2010 === 5,575
DOS Pending for EB3-China as on March 01, 2010 === 8,900
Rationale: Closing gap in case of data error.
References:
i. EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
ii. Operation of the Numerical Control Process - http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Immigrant%20Visa%20Control%20System_operation%20of .pdf
Dude i must say, it must have taken a huge effort to come up with all this. But guess what, it wont make a dent. There are way too many Indians, Chinese and Mexicans in line and too few GC's to give out.
tattoo skateboard.com.au
yabadaba
12-27 08:22 AM
this was back in 2004...was on opt till then...wellsfargo just needed my h1b approval notice to approve my mortgage
plus for tax purposes u r considered a permanent resident. that means u have lived in ur state for x number of days in a calendar year...never had issues with getting credit cards, car loan, etc.
of course i had 4 yrs of credit history before that..dont know if that helped.
plus for tax purposes u r considered a permanent resident. that means u have lived in ur state for x number of days in a calendar year...never had issues with getting credit cards, car loan, etc.
of course i had 4 yrs of credit history before that..dont know if that helped.
more...
pictures funny motivational posters.
sroyc
07-11 04:43 PM
There is a lot of hurtburn among folks here abt a lot of things...Does that mean USCIS is going to cater to every case of heartburn. I dont think so.
What else would explain EB2 China's PD going back to EB2 India's PD (April 2004) when visas from EB2-ROW were made available and then both PD's moving to June 2006 (which was EB2 China's PD before it became unavailable)?
They could have set it to March 2005 and it would have been enough to exhaust the remaining EB2-ROW visas left considering the number of EB2 India applicants in the backlog. The fact is that there are not enough EB2 China applicants left in 2003/2004/2005. The only way they can get a fair share of the EB2-ROW spillover was if PD's for both EB2 India and China were moved to 2006.
What else would explain EB2 China's PD going back to EB2 India's PD (April 2004) when visas from EB2-ROW were made available and then both PD's moving to June 2006 (which was EB2 China's PD before it became unavailable)?
They could have set it to March 2005 and it would have been enough to exhaust the remaining EB2-ROW visas left considering the number of EB2 India applicants in the backlog. The fact is that there are not enough EB2 China applicants left in 2003/2004/2005. The only way they can get a fair share of the EB2-ROW spillover was if PD's for both EB2 India and China were moved to 2006.
dresses Motivational Posters
msgrewal81
02-18 06:04 PM
I agree. it makes things easier for illegals and difficult(LC process) for legals.
I have Punjabi background. My uncles came to this country illegally. they always make fun of me that why I came legally. They were all given green cards by Reagan and Clinton.:mad:
I have Punjabi background. My uncles came to this country illegally. they always make fun of me that why I came legally. They were all given green cards by Reagan and Clinton.:mad:
more...
makeup Funny motivational poster
zuhail
04-03 01:37 AM
Hello there,
Please contact me at fermion_boson@ymail.com if you are interested to take part in efforts to re-capture unused visa numbers for EB categories.
Let's do this NOW.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield" --Lord Tennyson in "Ulysses"
Please contact me at fermion_boson@ymail.com if you are interested to take part in efforts to re-capture unused visa numbers for EB categories.
Let's do this NOW.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield" --Lord Tennyson in "Ulysses"
girlfriend Motivational+posters+funny
rpatel
07-24 08:42 AM
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
hairstyles Funny Motivational Posters :-)
vkraman7
03-17 11:07 AM
Category: EB3 India
PD: Sep 2002
Filed 485 on 07/27/2007
PD: Sep 2002
Filed 485 on 07/27/2007
ItIsNotFunny
11-11 06:03 PM
Almost all my personal friends I spoke to recently who did not want to help with IV stuff, now proudly claim "As Obama has become the president, he will do something for us to get the green card"
The hope continues :)
People come on IV only to blame IV and admins for all the problems in their lives, but when asked to help for IV stuff - they give red dots and leave bad comments
There will always be 2 types of people. Lets see and concentrate on people who are positive and move ahead.
The hope continues :)
People come on IV only to blame IV and admins for all the problems in their lives, but when asked to help for IV stuff - they give red dots and leave bad comments
There will always be 2 types of people. Lets see and concentrate on people who are positive and move ahead.
jcmenon
07-24 02:08 PM
We can not file for 485 that is the reason we need to let our voices heard to USCIS, it may be waste of time for some one but at least it would be worth a try.
We did try a lot with S1932, outcome zero.
We did try a lot with CIR, outcome zero.
When so potentially yielding means(S 1932 and CIR) can fail in a same way USCIS option may also fail, but at least we know that we tried this option.
If stuck labor says it is a waste of time (No offence taken), I am not going to buy his arguement, just because he is a super moderator. maximun he can ban me from the site, but I donot worry of voicing my openion for an issue that I think might work out.
Lets do an openion poll and decide how many are in favor of this.
We did try a lot with S1932, outcome zero.
We did try a lot with CIR, outcome zero.
When so potentially yielding means(S 1932 and CIR) can fail in a same way USCIS option may also fail, but at least we know that we tried this option.
If stuck labor says it is a waste of time (No offence taken), I am not going to buy his arguement, just because he is a super moderator. maximun he can ban me from the site, but I donot worry of voicing my openion for an issue that I think might work out.
Lets do an openion poll and decide how many are in favor of this.
