vaishnavilakshmi
07-11 02:04 PM
Request More Eb3 Guys To Participate......
Please....
Hi Alex,
How about ur details?u havenot posted ur details here???
vaishu
Please....
Hi Alex,
How about ur details?u havenot posted ur details here???
vaishu
wallpaper Salma Hayek enjoying hoiyday
Jaime
09-11 03:54 PM
For the first time in its history, the U.S. faces the prospect of a reverse brain drain. New research by my team at the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University shows that more than 1 million highly skilled professionals such as engineers, scientists, doctors, researchers, and their families are in line for a yearly allotment of only around 120,000 permanent-resident visas for employment-based principals and their families in the three main employment visa categories (EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3). These individuals entered the country legally to study or to work. They contributed to U.S. economic growth and global competitiveness. Now we've set the stage for them to return to countries such as India and China, where the economies are booming and their skills are in great demand. U.S. businesses large and small stand to lose critical talent, and workers who have gained valuable experience and knowledge of American industry may become potential competitors.
The problem is simple. There aren't enough permanent-resident visas available each year for skilled workers and their families. And there is a limit of fewer than 10,000 visas that can be issued to immigrants from any single country. So countries with the largest populations such as India and China are allocated the same number of visas as Iceland and Mongolia.
Visa Delays Deprive U.S. of Talent The result is that wait times for employment visas currently stretch from four to six years for immigrants from countries such as India and China, and all indications are that these delays will get longer. Based on a 2003 study of new legal immigrants to the U.S. called the New Immigrant Survey, we estimate that in 2003, about 1 in 3 professionals who had been through the immigration process either planned to leave the U.S. or were uncertain about remaining. Media reports and other anecdotal evidence indicate that many skilled workers have indeed begun to return home.
Much of the current public debate on immigration centers on concerns over low-skilled immigrants entering the U.S. illegally. We do need to develop fair policies to deal with this problem. But skilled immigrants who enter the U.S. legally are a different issue. Professor Richard Devon of Pennsylvania State University estimates that in the U.S. about $200,000 is invested in a child by the time they gain a bachelor's degree in engineering. That means that the U.S. gains billions of dollars in benefit from educated professionals who leave other countries to come here. And we lose billions when they return home. Additionally, we end up training highly skilled workers in our markets, technology, and way of doing business.
Consider this: Earlier research by my team found that more than half of the engineering and technology companies started in Silicon Valley and a quarter of those started nationwide from 1995 to 2006 had immigrant founders. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Their founders tended to be very highly educated in science, technology, math, and engineering-related disciplines, with 96% of them holding bachelor's degrees and 75% holding master's degrees or PhDs (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/11/07, "Immigrants: Key U.S. Business Founders").
Patents: Evidence of Entrepreneurial Activity We also uncovered some puzzling data on patent filings. When we analyzed the international patent database maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), we found that 1 in every 4 patent applications from the U.S. in 2006 listed a foreign national residing in the U.S. as an inventor. This number had increased threefold over an eight-year period and didn't take into account inventors who had become U.S. citizens before applying for a patent.
We realized that these foreign-national inventors were not likely to be from the same immigrant group that was founding high-tech companies. They were likely to be PhD students and employees of U.S. corporations who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. Temporary-visa holders can't easily start their own companies�their visas require them to work full time for the company that sponsored them.
For our new research, we reanalyzed the WIPO patent database to look at which immigrant groups and corporations were applying for the most patents. To understand the foreign-national data, we examined extensive information published by the Homeland Security Dept., the Labor Dept., and the State Dept. We also reviewed the New Immigrant Survey to gain insight into the immigration process and to examine the potential that, even after becoming permanent residents, skilled immigrants might return home.
Here is what we found:
� Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by companies such as Qualcomm (QCOM) (72%), Merck (MRK) (65%), General Electric (GE) (64%), Siemens (SI) (63%), and Cisco (CSCO) (60%). Their contributions were relatively small at Microsoft (MSFT) (3%) and General Motors (GM) (6%). Surprisingly, 41% of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals listed as inventors.
� Foreign nationals contributed to 25.6% of all U.S. international patent applications in 2006, but the numbers were much higher in several states such as New Jersey (37%), California (36%), and Massachusetts (32%).
� In 2006, 16.8% of international patent applications from the U.S. had inventors with Chinese names and 36% of these (or 5.5% of the total) were foreign nationals. Similarly, 13.7% had Indian names and 40% (or 6.2% of the total) were foreign nationals.
� Both Indian and Chinese inventors tended to file most patents in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and electronics.
Our analysis of the immigration data produced the most startling results.
"Immigration Limbo" We estimate that, as of Sept. 30, 2006, there were 500,040 individuals in the main employment-based visa categories and an additional 555,044 family members in line for permanent-resident status in the U.S. An additional 126,421 with job offers were waiting abroad. In total, there were 1,181,505 educated and skilled professionals waiting to gain legal permanent-resident status.
In the 2005-06 academic year, there were 259,717 international students in the U.S. There were an additional 38,096 in practical training�many of these are PhD researchers.
One thing is certain: If we wait five years to fix immigration policy, the unskilled workers will still be here, but the skilled workers who are in "immigration limbo" will be long gone. Our loss will be the gain of countries we are increasingly competing with in the new global landscape.
The problem is simple. There aren't enough permanent-resident visas available each year for skilled workers and their families. And there is a limit of fewer than 10,000 visas that can be issued to immigrants from any single country. So countries with the largest populations such as India and China are allocated the same number of visas as Iceland and Mongolia.
Visa Delays Deprive U.S. of Talent The result is that wait times for employment visas currently stretch from four to six years for immigrants from countries such as India and China, and all indications are that these delays will get longer. Based on a 2003 study of new legal immigrants to the U.S. called the New Immigrant Survey, we estimate that in 2003, about 1 in 3 professionals who had been through the immigration process either planned to leave the U.S. or were uncertain about remaining. Media reports and other anecdotal evidence indicate that many skilled workers have indeed begun to return home.
Much of the current public debate on immigration centers on concerns over low-skilled immigrants entering the U.S. illegally. We do need to develop fair policies to deal with this problem. But skilled immigrants who enter the U.S. legally are a different issue. Professor Richard Devon of Pennsylvania State University estimates that in the U.S. about $200,000 is invested in a child by the time they gain a bachelor's degree in engineering. That means that the U.S. gains billions of dollars in benefit from educated professionals who leave other countries to come here. And we lose billions when they return home. Additionally, we end up training highly skilled workers in our markets, technology, and way of doing business.
Consider this: Earlier research by my team found that more than half of the engineering and technology companies started in Silicon Valley and a quarter of those started nationwide from 1995 to 2006 had immigrant founders. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Their founders tended to be very highly educated in science, technology, math, and engineering-related disciplines, with 96% of them holding bachelor's degrees and 75% holding master's degrees or PhDs (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/11/07, "Immigrants: Key U.S. Business Founders").
Patents: Evidence of Entrepreneurial Activity We also uncovered some puzzling data on patent filings. When we analyzed the international patent database maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), we found that 1 in every 4 patent applications from the U.S. in 2006 listed a foreign national residing in the U.S. as an inventor. This number had increased threefold over an eight-year period and didn't take into account inventors who had become U.S. citizens before applying for a patent.
We realized that these foreign-national inventors were not likely to be from the same immigrant group that was founding high-tech companies. They were likely to be PhD students and employees of U.S. corporations who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. Temporary-visa holders can't easily start their own companies�their visas require them to work full time for the company that sponsored them.
For our new research, we reanalyzed the WIPO patent database to look at which immigrant groups and corporations were applying for the most patents. To understand the foreign-national data, we examined extensive information published by the Homeland Security Dept., the Labor Dept., and the State Dept. We also reviewed the New Immigrant Survey to gain insight into the immigration process and to examine the potential that, even after becoming permanent residents, skilled immigrants might return home.
Here is what we found:
� Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by companies such as Qualcomm (QCOM) (72%), Merck (MRK) (65%), General Electric (GE) (64%), Siemens (SI) (63%), and Cisco (CSCO) (60%). Their contributions were relatively small at Microsoft (MSFT) (3%) and General Motors (GM) (6%). Surprisingly, 41% of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals listed as inventors.
� Foreign nationals contributed to 25.6% of all U.S. international patent applications in 2006, but the numbers were much higher in several states such as New Jersey (37%), California (36%), and Massachusetts (32%).
� In 2006, 16.8% of international patent applications from the U.S. had inventors with Chinese names and 36% of these (or 5.5% of the total) were foreign nationals. Similarly, 13.7% had Indian names and 40% (or 6.2% of the total) were foreign nationals.
� Both Indian and Chinese inventors tended to file most patents in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and electronics.
Our analysis of the immigration data produced the most startling results.
"Immigration Limbo" We estimate that, as of Sept. 30, 2006, there were 500,040 individuals in the main employment-based visa categories and an additional 555,044 family members in line for permanent-resident status in the U.S. An additional 126,421 with job offers were waiting abroad. In total, there were 1,181,505 educated and skilled professionals waiting to gain legal permanent-resident status.
In the 2005-06 academic year, there were 259,717 international students in the U.S. There were an additional 38,096 in practical training�many of these are PhD researchers.
One thing is certain: If we wait five years to fix immigration policy, the unskilled workers will still be here, but the skilled workers who are in "immigration limbo" will be long gone. Our loss will be the gain of countries we are increasingly competing with in the new global landscape.
gcny2006
10-12 08:27 AM
Got an RFE on 9th sept after several SLUDs in first week of september. The RFE asked for paperwork to establish that I maintained legal status during my student years. USCIS received the response on september 30th. The case status chaged to 'response review'. I have had sevreal sluds since them but no approval yet.
2011 Salma Hayek Tattoos
reedandbamboo
09-11 08:38 AM
I am in for this. Is this something that can be a planned effort rather than a impulsive exercise?
I think we should -
1) Wait till this session of the Congress gets over.
2) Form a work group that will chalk out the plan (of efforts).
3) Execute the planned efforts.
Efforts could include things like -
1) Discussing the proposal with supporting Senators like Zoe Lofgren.
2) Making conscious efforts to publicize our woes and genuine issues / conditions.
3) Quantify the benefits of our presence - in evidence of a quantified evidence, idiots like Loo Dog, etc. can't refute that much.
4) Talk to organizations like Lazaras (or some org.) form a more cosmopolitan group including Chinese and others as well.
5) Letter campaign in mass to all Congressmen's offices telling them the sad story about waiting for 8-10 years.
6) Any other efforts that CORE comes up with.
Planned & focused efforts always yield desired results... I believe so.
Others, please chime in.
-A.
A,
There are some of us at this thread that are trying to address the latest retrogression and highlight USCIS inefficiency at this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340&page=2
Could we get together and put together our grievances? My letter to the Ombudsman (pending editing and re-writing) focuses on the random nature of approvals and the back and forth movements of the Visa Bulletin.
Please comment!!
Thanks.
I think we should -
1) Wait till this session of the Congress gets over.
2) Form a work group that will chalk out the plan (of efforts).
3) Execute the planned efforts.
Efforts could include things like -
1) Discussing the proposal with supporting Senators like Zoe Lofgren.
2) Making conscious efforts to publicize our woes and genuine issues / conditions.
3) Quantify the benefits of our presence - in evidence of a quantified evidence, idiots like Loo Dog, etc. can't refute that much.
4) Talk to organizations like Lazaras (or some org.) form a more cosmopolitan group including Chinese and others as well.
5) Letter campaign in mass to all Congressmen's offices telling them the sad story about waiting for 8-10 years.
6) Any other efforts that CORE comes up with.
Planned & focused efforts always yield desired results... I believe so.
Others, please chime in.
-A.
A,
There are some of us at this thread that are trying to address the latest retrogression and highlight USCIS inefficiency at this thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21340&page=2
Could we get together and put together our grievances? My letter to the Ombudsman (pending editing and re-writing) focuses on the random nature of approvals and the back and forth movements of the Visa Bulletin.
Please comment!!
Thanks.
more...
snathan
06-10 04:11 PM
Done...
immigrant2007
08-12 04:04 PM
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
Such is our seriousness, the thread barely started it was at the bottom of the list just awaiting its natural death. Whereas the most meningless threads are at the top of the list. If people can not EB3 backlog seriously then i am sure they don't deserve any GCs.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
Such is our seriousness, the thread barely started it was at the bottom of the list just awaiting its natural death. Whereas the most meningless threads are at the top of the list. If people can not EB3 backlog seriously then i am sure they don't deserve any GCs.
more...
aps
08-09 12:20 AM
:rolleyes:I mailed my I-485 application on July30 and it is delivered on next day.
My lawyer send me the I-485 froms before the july 30, 07 y revision and i used those forms for filing. But, FAQ3 released by uscis today states that we have to use the form version dated �7/30/07 Y�. . WHAT IS THIS? Do i have to resend the application again? More over i do not see difference between these two forms.
I have copied the question from faq3. It is the first question.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Please explain if you have any idea about this.
My lawyer send me the I-485 froms before the july 30, 07 y revision and i used those forms for filing. But, FAQ3 released by uscis today states that we have to use the form version dated �7/30/07 Y�. . WHAT IS THIS? Do i have to resend the application again? More over i do not see difference between these two forms.
I have copied the question from faq3. It is the first question.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Please explain if you have any idea about this.
2010 Salma Hayek Gallery
sc3
10-16 02:48 PM
I beg to disagree. If it was the visa bulletin, then why did they process newer applications first?. That shows some disorder out there. Even when Amazon breaks up, they set their operations right. Here we are being fed the same story over and over again.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
Firstly: If USCIS was reacting, they would not have approved the so called "newer" applications. USCIS had to use up the numbers so they took the path of least resistance -- not the right thing to do -- but it can't be branded as a "reaction" to the July 07 issue.
Second: When you say "approving" newer applications, are you saying approving older applications by PD or older applications by RD/ND (with older being 3-4 year older RD/PD)?? USCIS has never had to process applications by PD, only factor they have is RD/ND. PD just tells when someone can be approved (or apply), it doesn't get you any priority in the processing queue. I am sure you dont want the situation where you have your later PD, earlier RD, but someone who chose to delay his app to come with an ancient PD, but a fresh RD to get processed ahead of you (when both of you are current) do you?
I am bit out of touch, but isn't PERM/BEC a DoL operation not USCIS. Then again, those were the factors you have no control. Even when it was just the Labor Cert process, there had been disparities between various processing centers. Some people made use of provisions (sometimes fraudulently) to get their LCs through these "fast" process centers. I too have been affected by the Perm/LC situation, but I don't think USCIS is to take blame on that.
Am I defending USCIS: No, I am just saying if people want a Flower campaign, they should go ahead with it. No point putting FUD to stop people from doing what they want.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
Firstly: If USCIS was reacting, they would not have approved the so called "newer" applications. USCIS had to use up the numbers so they took the path of least resistance -- not the right thing to do -- but it can't be branded as a "reaction" to the July 07 issue.
Second: When you say "approving" newer applications, are you saying approving older applications by PD or older applications by RD/ND (with older being 3-4 year older RD/PD)?? USCIS has never had to process applications by PD, only factor they have is RD/ND. PD just tells when someone can be approved (or apply), it doesn't get you any priority in the processing queue. I am sure you dont want the situation where you have your later PD, earlier RD, but someone who chose to delay his app to come with an ancient PD, but a fresh RD to get processed ahead of you (when both of you are current) do you?
I am bit out of touch, but isn't PERM/BEC a DoL operation not USCIS. Then again, those were the factors you have no control. Even when it was just the Labor Cert process, there had been disparities between various processing centers. Some people made use of provisions (sometimes fraudulently) to get their LCs through these "fast" process centers. I too have been affected by the Perm/LC situation, but I don't think USCIS is to take blame on that.
Am I defending USCIS: No, I am just saying if people want a Flower campaign, they should go ahead with it. No point putting FUD to stop people from doing what they want.
more...
ajay
04-13 10:12 AM
A very useful piece of information has been brought to our attention by shiankuraaf.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
hair Salma Hayek Interview GROWN
anilsal
12-26 03:50 PM
MasterCard is quite attractive with the new WorldPoints concept. A point for every dollar spent. When you have sufficient points, you can get air tickets etc.
An issue with Discover card is that it is not widely accepted outside the US - not in Canada or in Europe (the merchant will have to call some number to get authorization). Amex is usable worldwide.
Many merchants do not accept either Amex or Disc in the US.
An issue with Discover card is that it is not widely accepted outside the US - not in Canada or in Europe (the merchant will have to call some number to get authorization). Amex is usable worldwide.
Many merchants do not accept either Amex or Disc in the US.
more...
dressking
09-28 10:06 AM
At the end of the day, its comes to ones preferences.
The way i look at, after spending so many years in states, its just hard to pack and move. Over the period of time, we make friends, we have familes and above all we invest the best years of our lives.
Pros and cons will be everywhere.
India no doubt has changed a lot. One can debate about the pros and cons the whole day. I dont think money is a problem in india any more. The economy is growing like anything and will keep on growing. No doubt about it.
I am sure folks who have spent 7-8 years in this country and are still trying to settle down, will love every oppurtunity to settle down here. Because this country is like our home now. We have given it everything. We have made sincere efforts in helping the American economy grow.
Even if we move to other countries, there is no gurantee we will be treated good. We have to start from scratch, make friends, earn peoples respect and trust.
Sometimes i feel sad when people talk about leaving the country, to whom they have given everything.
I will like to ask everyone one question.
Why not give one good shot at trying to fix the broken Employement-Based green card system? What are we all scared off? We never did anything wrong, so why do we need to leave the country?
Folks think about it.
I am sorry if i offended anyone, but this is what i feel.
I believe in fixing things then running away from them. Thats my take.
GO IV GO
TOGETHER WE CAN
You have said what exactly what I want to say. I have built a business here and it is been around for eight years. My customers, products, services, connections, knowledge and experience, etc., etc. I can not move them with me. They are from this country and for this country only.
The way i look at, after spending so many years in states, its just hard to pack and move. Over the period of time, we make friends, we have familes and above all we invest the best years of our lives.
Pros and cons will be everywhere.
India no doubt has changed a lot. One can debate about the pros and cons the whole day. I dont think money is a problem in india any more. The economy is growing like anything and will keep on growing. No doubt about it.
I am sure folks who have spent 7-8 years in this country and are still trying to settle down, will love every oppurtunity to settle down here. Because this country is like our home now. We have given it everything. We have made sincere efforts in helping the American economy grow.
Even if we move to other countries, there is no gurantee we will be treated good. We have to start from scratch, make friends, earn peoples respect and trust.
Sometimes i feel sad when people talk about leaving the country, to whom they have given everything.
I will like to ask everyone one question.
Why not give one good shot at trying to fix the broken Employement-Based green card system? What are we all scared off? We never did anything wrong, so why do we need to leave the country?
Folks think about it.
I am sorry if i offended anyone, but this is what i feel.
I believe in fixing things then running away from them. Thats my take.
GO IV GO
TOGETHER WE CAN
You have said what exactly what I want to say. I have built a business here and it is been around for eight years. My customers, products, services, connections, knowledge and experience, etc., etc. I can not move them with me. They are from this country and for this country only.
hot Salma Hayek wants to
kosu
08-15 03:57 PM
September is out.. I cannot beleive what i am seeing..
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
more...
house salma hayek movies names
srkamath
07-18 03:17 PM
I complied the list from visa stastistics website
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
example 2007 numbers from
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY07AnnualReportTableVp2.pdf
2006 numbers from
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY06AnnualReportTableV-Part2.pdf
This is simply the best data i have ever seen an IV member dig out in the last 2 years.. Great Job sachug22
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
example 2007 numbers from
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY07AnnualReportTableVp2.pdf
2006 numbers from
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY06AnnualReportTableV-Part2.pdf
This is simply the best data i have ever seen an IV member dig out in the last 2 years.. Great Job sachug22
tattoo Celebrity Photos - Salma Hayek
texanmom
09-26 11:40 AM
Please deluge both the author (Eilene Zimmerman) and the editor with emails pointing out the misrepresentation of IV's agenda.
Using words like 'defamatory' , "unethical reporting" and 'misrepresentation' catches their attention since they are always afraid of law suits.
Using words like 'defamatory' , "unethical reporting" and 'misrepresentation' catches their attention since they are always afraid of law suits.
more...
pictures SALMA HAYEK PICS
singhsa3
07-13 09:09 AM
Agree, she is just trying to cash on the momentum and probalby later claim credit if favorable changes are made. But , it should not bother us as it only going to help us and not hurt us.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
dresses salma hayek, rising
snathan
06-10 01:44 PM
@eastindia: I doubt if that 's required - "Basically a letter from employer". You definitely include your I-485 notice that shows that a AOS in pending.
Remember the GC is for future employement. USCIS can anytime ask the letter to prove the job offer is still there. I know coupld of guys got RFE for the same.
If there is no job, the underlaying I-485 become invalid and so there is no AOS.
Remember the GC is for future employement. USCIS can anytime ask the letter to prove the job offer is still there. I know coupld of guys got RFE for the same.
If there is no job, the underlaying I-485 become invalid and so there is no AOS.
more...
makeup Salma Hayek
kramesh_babu
07-15 12:49 PM
People say you can still use your AP to reenter as long as its not expired.
I have an AP and my Priority date is current. What will happend to my AP when my 485 is approved and I am out of country?
I have an AP and my Priority date is current. What will happend to my AP when my 485 is approved and I am out of country?
girlfriend hair Salma Hayek
immi_seeker
08-16 12:50 AM
September bulletin was out today..Wondering why there was no thread yet on IV..EB2 india shows visa number available with a cutoff date of APRIL 2004
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
hairstyles Salma-Hayek-Biography-3.
bfadlia
12-15 10:01 AM
Take the body shoppers and glorified body shoppers like TCS, wipro, infy etc out of the equation and you would have sheer wastage of H1B numbers since the American companies will not go abroad to recruit someone who is unfamiliar with US work culture.
That is why congress came up with 20K quota for master degree holders who can be recruited directly by US corporations. In my opinion, US corporations should not complain at all since they were never interested in upholding the true spirit of H1B by recruiting people from abroad directly.
-gcisadawg
US corporation did go abroad to recruit back when there was heavy demand in the dot com bubble and Y2K.. American recruiters for several big companies used to make regular trips all over the world like russia, eastern europe and middle east to scout talents and ship them here.. but that never happens now since 1- there is no real demand 2- Desi Bodyshops already brought in hundreds of thousands of H1 people on short term or fictituous projects then set them out to hunt for next projects in this tight market..
We programmers need to come to grip with the fact that today unless you have a rare skill and exceptional ability America will not roll the red carpet on your GC path.
That is why congress came up with 20K quota for master degree holders who can be recruited directly by US corporations. In my opinion, US corporations should not complain at all since they were never interested in upholding the true spirit of H1B by recruiting people from abroad directly.
-gcisadawg
US corporation did go abroad to recruit back when there was heavy demand in the dot com bubble and Y2K.. American recruiters for several big companies used to make regular trips all over the world like russia, eastern europe and middle east to scout talents and ship them here.. but that never happens now since 1- there is no real demand 2- Desi Bodyshops already brought in hundreds of thousands of H1 people on short term or fictituous projects then set them out to hunt for next projects in this tight market..
We programmers need to come to grip with the fact that today unless you have a rare skill and exceptional ability America will not roll the red carpet on your GC path.
ajay
11-10 05:20 PM
I will send.
nomi
12-13 10:25 AM
Count me and 2 more members with me....lets have a plan..and execute it.
Would some one will take control to make letter ready which we need to send to USCIS and I will work to get info about USCIS office and fax number ??
Please let me know who will make this fax letter ready ??
thx.
Would some one will take control to make letter ready which we need to send to USCIS and I will work to get info about USCIS office and fax number ??
Please let me know who will make this fax letter ready ??
thx.
