webm
03-19 03:52 PM
May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved,
Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..
Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..
wallpaper harry potter castle cake.
jgh_res
07-05 12:38 PM
My background: I am a desi. I contributed around 300$ or so. I filed my 485 couple of years ago. So I am not that desperate.
Onething about desi's I figured out over a long time, they dont mind spending zillion dollars for attorney fees, USCIS fees, whatever fees. But they really mind paying 20$/month towards IV or anything, if there is a way they can get it for free.
What an epitome of hypocrisy? Non Profit org working towards GC alleviatoon and needs resources for lobbying. Yeah! The Blue skies are showering green on IV every day. How about us working for a Non profit org or EDU for free? They all serve noble causes. Dont they?
Onething about desi's I figured out over a long time, they dont mind spending zillion dollars for attorney fees, USCIS fees, whatever fees. But they really mind paying 20$/month towards IV or anything, if there is a way they can get it for free.
What an epitome of hypocrisy? Non Profit org working towards GC alleviatoon and needs resources for lobbying. Yeah! The Blue skies are showering green on IV every day. How about us working for a Non profit org or EDU for free? They all serve noble causes. Dont they?
LegalIndianInUSA
08-02 11:43 PM
Although they promise a lot of things on paper, we generally skip reading the fine print. Fine print generally would include this clause (language will be a bit different)...
"Although these are our policies, these might change at any time, with or without written notice".
End of story to all 'You promised me gold in your agreement' arguments.
There was no fine print on the appointment letter. There wasn't even fuzzy wording (like "we may" or "in most circumstances" etc).
Although I'm clearly educated about how the system works now, back then, at age 24, I wasn't. I was foolish enough to trust and believe that they would keep their word; they are after all, big multinational companies.
I don't want other young Indian/foreign immigrants to fall into the same predicament.
The sooner they realize that Human Resources is the most inhuman department in a company, the better.
Practically speaking, if you think from a company's perspective also, I don't blame them. Would you (Mr OP sir) be willing to invest in something that you are not sure that you will get profit from it? Like, you give me 100$, I may give it back+10%interest or may not give it back. If I want to give it back, I may give it back in 2yrs or even 30yrs, 100 yrs its upto me, depending on some citing of random comet I choose.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
In large companies, the Legal department doesnt exist solely for GCs and Immigration related matters. The cost of immigration is barely a drop in the overall cost of maintaining such a department, and hence your logic is wrong.
It is an unfortunate truth we all need to get accustomed to live with.
No, we dont need to get accustomed to being lied to, or being treated as skilled slaves.
If you side with the law and say that the companies are not obligated to process GCs, then they should not be offering the same. Also, the law as it currently stands, is unjust and I'd much sooner see the law be changed to something like "if you've worked here for 6 years, paid taxes etc, then you can apply for a GC yourself based on just that"
I guess it is in our Indian blood to expect freebies/extra perks from government, from employers (being socialist, a bit communist country and what not), and we forget it is the FREE MARKET that rules here.
lol. Firstly, there is no such thing as a "free market". Wake up already.
Secondly, the US is more socialist than India is.
Thirdly, A GC is not a freebie/extra perk. A GC is a good-faith agreement between the company, the future employee and the governing body(USCIS), and companies should understand the ethical meaning of "good faith".
If your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
Yea sure, I'd like to see all the high skilled kings that have been made by companies.
It is a fallacy that skill, intellect or IQ has meaning/importance in the US.
At the end of the day, you are just another desk jockey.
"Although these are our policies, these might change at any time, with or without written notice".
End of story to all 'You promised me gold in your agreement' arguments.
There was no fine print on the appointment letter. There wasn't even fuzzy wording (like "we may" or "in most circumstances" etc).
Although I'm clearly educated about how the system works now, back then, at age 24, I wasn't. I was foolish enough to trust and believe that they would keep their word; they are after all, big multinational companies.
I don't want other young Indian/foreign immigrants to fall into the same predicament.
The sooner they realize that Human Resources is the most inhuman department in a company, the better.
Practically speaking, if you think from a company's perspective also, I don't blame them. Would you (Mr OP sir) be willing to invest in something that you are not sure that you will get profit from it? Like, you give me 100$, I may give it back+10%interest or may not give it back. If I want to give it back, I may give it back in 2yrs or even 30yrs, 100 yrs its upto me, depending on some citing of random comet I choose.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
In large companies, the Legal department doesnt exist solely for GCs and Immigration related matters. The cost of immigration is barely a drop in the overall cost of maintaining such a department, and hence your logic is wrong.
It is an unfortunate truth we all need to get accustomed to live with.
No, we dont need to get accustomed to being lied to, or being treated as skilled slaves.
If you side with the law and say that the companies are not obligated to process GCs, then they should not be offering the same. Also, the law as it currently stands, is unjust and I'd much sooner see the law be changed to something like "if you've worked here for 6 years, paid taxes etc, then you can apply for a GC yourself based on just that"
I guess it is in our Indian blood to expect freebies/extra perks from government, from employers (being socialist, a bit communist country and what not), and we forget it is the FREE MARKET that rules here.
lol. Firstly, there is no such thing as a "free market". Wake up already.
Secondly, the US is more socialist than India is.
Thirdly, A GC is not a freebie/extra perk. A GC is a good-faith agreement between the company, the future employee and the governing body(USCIS), and companies should understand the ethical meaning of "good faith".
If your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
Yea sure, I'd like to see all the high skilled kings that have been made by companies.
It is a fallacy that skill, intellect or IQ has meaning/importance in the US.
At the end of the day, you are just another desk jockey.
2011 Fairy Castle Cake Pictures,
12samanta
07-02 03:56 PM
Guys, Do not waste time in debating on the forum. If someone creates the petition then i will support and atleast send it to all my friends asking them to sign the petition. Lets do it.
more...
msgrewal81
02-19 12:11 AM
If you are lazy enough to contact your representative and Obama, you should not complain for not getting your voice heard. Each and every email matter. Also contact Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] on her website. contact all. It wont take 5 minutes.
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
desi3933
07-09 04:23 PM
In some cases, security clearances required by the F.B.I. were not entirely completed, immigration officials said. The agency approved some applications �when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly,� Mr. Aytes said.
"not entirely completed" = INCOMPLETE
I think this should count for 100%.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
You chose to ignore this from your post
when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly
certain = 100%
You are reading what you want to read.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
"not entirely completed" = INCOMPLETE
I think this should count for 100%.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
You chose to ignore this from your post
when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly
certain = 100%
You are reading what you want to read.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
uma001
10-01 09:51 AM
Guys,
Just an update..I quit the company and joined small consulting firm. Got the project, labor approved, h1b approved (filed in premium) and prewailing wage determination will be started from next week.damn, i should ve done this 4 yrs back. these guys r fast. Never join as fulltime employee if you dont have green card
Just an update..I quit the company and joined small consulting firm. Got the project, labor approved, h1b approved (filed in premium) and prewailing wage determination will be started from next week.damn, i should ve done this 4 yrs back. these guys r fast. Never join as fulltime employee if you dont have green card
2010 Harry Potter castle
perm2gc
01-18 06:20 PM
http://www.immigrationforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1990
more...
humdesi
02-17 02:20 AM
OH REALLY? 500 K will walk out with u? Can u initiate the call please?
I don't think canuck said he wanted 500K people to walk out. It was just a hypothetical scenario.
But I agree - this whole mudslinging is disgusting. BTW, it's not between Indians and RoW. It's between Indian trolls and RoW trolls.
I don't think canuck said he wanted 500K people to walk out. It was just a hypothetical scenario.
But I agree - this whole mudslinging is disgusting. BTW, it's not between Indians and RoW. It's between Indian trolls and RoW trolls.
hair harry potter castle cake.
mchundi
07-24 10:32 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 ??
In the recently released ombudsman's report there was a concern that USCIS is giving EAD's for all AOS applications without checking the case and later rejects 20% of the cases.
It might be tough to push them to take a decesion like this.
On the other hand the hospital and doctor's lobby is going to push for some more relief for the nurses VISA numbers if the CIR doesnot materialize this year, If that happens we can try and lobby to attach some of our issues to that.
--MC
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 ??
In the recently released ombudsman's report there was a concern that USCIS is giving EAD's for all AOS applications without checking the case and later rejects 20% of the cases.
It might be tough to push them to take a decesion like this.
On the other hand the hospital and doctor's lobby is going to push for some more relief for the nurses VISA numbers if the CIR doesnot materialize this year, If that happens we can try and lobby to attach some of our issues to that.
--MC
more...
TexDBoy
09-10 01:20 PM
I just see the eagle ... it should have started already ...
hot Lego Harry Potter castle
ramus
07-02 10:31 PM
Thank you.. I see you just joined last month.. Happy to see new member contributing.. Please update our main thread and ask others to contribute..
Here is my contribution Google Order #920441777988850
Here is my contribution Google Order #920441777988850
more...
house Above, you see the castle cake
reddymjm
10-16 01:36 PM
Please work on the IV approved action items before working on these.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22037
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18955
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22037
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18955
tattoo Hogwarts Castle Cake
ghost
08-12 07:34 AM
I would be more than happy to help with whatever ideas you have on mind. Even if IV decides to create an exclusive EB3 fund, count me in for any monetary contribution.
Good to see someone from EB-2 advocating an exclusive EB-3 monetary fund...I think the spirit of this gesture speaks for the fact that we are in this together...let's translate into a "donor" status if possible...personally, I'm not bothered whether my donations go towards EB-2 or EB-3 and that should not be our long-term vision.
Let's believe in IV and believe in ourselves that we are better than this EB-2/EB-3 divisions. Good luck to all of us!
Good to see someone from EB-2 advocating an exclusive EB-3 monetary fund...I think the spirit of this gesture speaks for the fact that we are in this together...let's translate into a "donor" status if possible...personally, I'm not bothered whether my donations go towards EB-2 or EB-3 and that should not be our long-term vision.
Let's believe in IV and believe in ourselves that we are better than this EB-2/EB-3 divisions. Good luck to all of us!
more...
pictures quot;Harry Potter#39;squot; Castle!
eb3_nepa
07-02 09:38 AM
YOU PEOPLE understand first what i kept in the reply. I did not blame IV for doing other efforts..I am talking about facts about USCIS..So dont make fool us or yourself as IV or any other organization will not be able to attack USCIS..Bcoz USCIS is monarch..
I have to agree with Bheemi. I fully support IV, but even IV has its limits and NOONE can fight the USCIS. AILA/AILF can TRYYY and that is all that they can do.
I have to agree with Bheemi. I fully support IV, but even IV has its limits and NOONE can fight the USCIS. AILA/AILF can TRYYY and that is all that they can do.
dresses Colt#39;s Harry Potter cake
lazycis
12-21 10:03 PM
lazycis,
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
8 USC 1182(a)(9)(B) Aliens unlawfully present
(ii) Construction of unlawful presence For purposes of this paragraph, an alien is deemed to be unlawfully present in the United States if the alien is present in the United States after the expiration of the period of stay authorized by the Attorney General or is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled.
Unlawful presence is different from out of status.
The period for unlawful presence begins on:
1) The expiration date* of the visa "status" document (I-94 Arrival/Departure Card), or
2) status violation, determined by an immigration judge, or
3) status violation, determined by the USCIS during the course of adjudicating a benefit application.
245(k) allows up to 180 days of "out of status".
If a person overstays (expired I-94) more than one year, leaves and re-enters within 10 years, it will be a problem for I-485 (if the USCIS finds about it, of course). More likely it will result in removal proceedings and permanent bar to reentry to the US. The only exception is if that person has an immediate relative who is a US citizen (see 8 USC 1255(i)).
So the moral of the story is to never leave the US until you get a green card if you accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
However if a person left and was allowed to re-enter, there is a chance that a person did not accumulated unlawful presence to trigger re-entry ban. Refer to this CIS memo for details regarding "period of authorized stay".
http://www.mnllp.com/GOVbcisnOOSunlawful0403.pdf
more...
makeup Harry Potter Toys - Top 10
anilsal
09-11 04:23 PM
Have you folks seen this movie?
Waldenpond,logiclife,pappu,sertasheep,paskal,amitp s,janilsal,jaime,
vandanaverdia,texanmom,chandu,needhelp,seahawks and the entire IV community Go To Washington.
Waldenpond,logiclife,pappu,sertasheep,paskal,amitp s,janilsal,jaime,
vandanaverdia,texanmom,chandu,needhelp,seahawks and the entire IV community Go To Washington.
girlfriend sorry for d date actually
akilhere
10-12 03:42 PM
Hi 'akilhere',
You should go for new medical report as last one is too old. For vaccinations, you can use your last report but for TB and other blood test, you should go for recent.
I'm not sure whether RFE would be for medical report. In my case, my civil surgeon was not in USCIS's current list of authorised civil surgeons and somehow, my x-ray report was missing from report also.
It may be EVL. In either case, it is easy work as you have not changed your employer (no AC-21 issue).
I got the RFE. Its says that the civil surgeon did not attach the copy of the radiologist report to form I-693. It needs the report on an official letterhead.
It also says that I don't need to take another medical exam for this.
I've contacted the Doctor's office and asked them for the same. Did you get the same RFE?
Thanks,
You should go for new medical report as last one is too old. For vaccinations, you can use your last report but for TB and other blood test, you should go for recent.
I'm not sure whether RFE would be for medical report. In my case, my civil surgeon was not in USCIS's current list of authorised civil surgeons and somehow, my x-ray report was missing from report also.
It may be EVL. In either case, it is easy work as you have not changed your employer (no AC-21 issue).
I got the RFE. Its says that the civil surgeon did not attach the copy of the radiologist report to form I-693. It needs the report on an official letterhead.
It also says that I don't need to take another medical exam for this.
I've contacted the Doctor's office and asked them for the same. Did you get the same RFE?
Thanks,
hairstyles Cakes for kids and teens
tampacoolie
06-30 09:44 PM
Suck some beer and get some good sleep yo.
Leave the delivery stuff to Fedex or UPS guys, else you will end up with traffic congestion in Lincon, Nebraska on Monday morning.
Leave the delivery stuff to Fedex or UPS guys, else you will end up with traffic congestion in Lincon, Nebraska on Monday morning.
addsf345
11-07 07:24 PM
trying to revive this discussion. Its been more than 6 - 8 months, so what are the updates? Please share.
I am aspiring AC21 wannabe. Appreciate word of advice from those who have successfully used this option.
I am aspiring AC21 wannabe. Appreciate word of advice from those who have successfully used this option.
grinch
03-09 07:22 PM
entries due tomorrow, and I don't know what I'm gona do with mine. I want to fix so much, but theres no time, I'll get my final render in tomorrow
0 comments:
Post a Comment