MrWaitingGC
06-29 06:32 PM
USCIS may say "Oops! Sorry! This is just a typo. U got rotated by 90 degrees clockwise." :mad:
I liked your sense of humor.
I liked your sense of humor.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
FinalGC
08-12 01:59 PM
I am so emotional now........just got the email, text message and message on the website changed to "Decision"
Mine, my wife's and my son's cases APPROVED!!!!
My case was in NSC. No additional fingerprinting, except one in Oct 2007, my son had to do one since he turned 14 this year....
14 years of wait is over......Praise be to God for his faithfulness and mercies
:):):)
Mine, my wife's and my son's cases APPROVED!!!!
My case was in NSC. No additional fingerprinting, except one in Oct 2007, my son had to do one since he turned 14 this year....
14 years of wait is over......Praise be to God for his faithfulness and mercies
:):):)
barrysingh
01-13 08:41 PM
??
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
snddlth
10-12 04:45 PM
USCIS blocked the #4 option in POJ method since today morning. There is no way we can reach TSC/NSC IOs.
more...
SunnySurya
08-07 11:24 AM
I don't think that either, but as long as they are willing to fund my operation in part or otherwise, I am good to go...
Do you seriously think any of these people will become plantiff and risk their greencard applcation? Because by becoming plantiff their application will be scrutinzed and further delayed.
.
I am open to reveal anyone my identity and discuss my plans who has voted Yes
If these people rolling flood and sunnysurya were confident, they would have posted their name and phone number till now for everyone. These guys are cowards. I bet their profile will also be annonymous.
Do you seriously think any of these people will become plantiff and risk their greencard applcation? Because by becoming plantiff their application will be scrutinzed and further delayed.
.
I am open to reveal anyone my identity and discuss my plans who has voted Yes
If these people rolling flood and sunnysurya were confident, they would have posted their name and phone number till now for everyone. These guys are cowards. I bet their profile will also be annonymous.
jungalee43
09-15 04:21 PM
I've started calling. 6 down and many more to go. Two of them directed me to voice mail and 4 actually talked. I will finish the list today and then tomorrow I would call House Speaker's office and Senate Majority leader's office.
more...
whitecollarslave
01-14 06:18 PM
Do you belong to a state chapter?. If you have not joined a state chapter yet please let us know your residing state and we will direct you to the appropriate state chapter. State Chapter's can provide information related to all EB issues we are working on. Thanks
Thanks! I am in Virginia.
Thanks to needhelp for the reference.
Is it advisable to include a reference to the Ombudsman report in the letter to the President? I am talking about the earlier mentioned reference on page 33 stating that "since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Thanks! I am in Virginia.
Thanks to needhelp for the reference.
Is it advisable to include a reference to the Ombudsman report in the letter to the President? I am talking about the earlier mentioned reference on page 33 stating that "since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
shekhar10c
07-11 11:25 AM
The flower campaign has been a spectacular success. Lets not dilute it or confuse it with food or pizza campaign. Lets the free flow of flower campaign contunue.
There is a symbolism of peaceful protest behind flowers, its universaly understood, what is the symbolism behind sending food, it might be misunderstood. Lets not overdo it.
yeah u r right. Our aim was to realize them and not irritate them. And sending flowers is wonderful job .I salute to u people. But sending pizzza???:eek: This may backfire. So, now lets sit and watch. And if you want to send more something, then better send more flowers to USCIS,DOS and even to walter's hospital instead of sending pizza!!!!! Or better contribute for IV:)
There is a symbolism of peaceful protest behind flowers, its universaly understood, what is the symbolism behind sending food, it might be misunderstood. Lets not overdo it.
yeah u r right. Our aim was to realize them and not irritate them. And sending flowers is wonderful job .I salute to u people. But sending pizzza???:eek: This may backfire. So, now lets sit and watch. And if you want to send more something, then better send more flowers to USCIS,DOS and even to walter's hospital instead of sending pizza!!!!! Or better contribute for IV:)
more...
senthil1
07-09 09:25 PM
If it is not mistake you are thinking as Conspiracy. What is the motive of conspiracy? What I am telling is making all PD current was mistake as everyone will expect atleast 300k I485 applications and that many Visa was not available. They made another mistake to correct previous mistake. There is no pro or anti immigrant stand is needed to evaluate this. I do not believe conspiracy theories. Even 9/11 attack also so many conspiracy thories are there. Unless we get some evidence everything is speculative only
why do you keep parroting the pro USCIS, pro -antiimmigrant line all the time?
there are times when your realism makes sense, then there are others when it's plain silly.
this was not a mistake. this was not an accident.
civil servants do not show up on weekends by accidents. and they do not do 6 mnths of work in 15 days by mistake.
it was intentional, directed and planned.
you can believe whatever motives you want and you can sympathize with uscis till kingdom come. but pleaaasee don't tell me it was a random event, some act of god that is our destiny or such crap. please!
why do you keep parroting the pro USCIS, pro -antiimmigrant line all the time?
there are times when your realism makes sense, then there are others when it's plain silly.
this was not a mistake. this was not an accident.
civil servants do not show up on weekends by accidents. and they do not do 6 mnths of work in 15 days by mistake.
it was intentional, directed and planned.
you can believe whatever motives you want and you can sympathize with uscis till kingdom come. but pleaaasee don't tell me it was a random event, some act of god that is our destiny or such crap. please!
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
BharatPremi
09-25 02:10 PM
This is April 2009 performance report for reference (See last page):
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/operating_performance_apr09.pdf
I got my "light". Thanks for sharing. More food to chew on :)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/operating_performance_apr09.pdf
I got my "light". Thanks for sharing. More food to chew on :)
more...
nk2006
09-15 11:10 AM
Called half of them..
Meanwhile new updates from opponents
Not sure how true is that
good find. I guess we should intensify our efforts - HR5882 is a big/last opportunity for all of us. I called all the members once, will write and post letters today.
The suggestion to make Sept 18 (to mark anniversary of IV rally) as call your congressmen is good. Lets make a last push of the year.
Meanwhile new updates from opponents
Not sure how true is that
good find. I guess we should intensify our efforts - HR5882 is a big/last opportunity for all of us. I called all the members once, will write and post letters today.
The suggestion to make Sept 18 (to mark anniversary of IV rally) as call your congressmen is good. Lets make a last push of the year.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
BharatPremi
09-24 05:17 PM
Number 2) and hence number 3) are definitely wrong.
As I mentioned in my other post, the categorisation for I,P,C,M and ROW is based on the fact that I,P,C,M are the only countries with demand exceeding the annual limit.
ROW = All countries not hitting the 7%(or 9%) country limit. That doesn't mean they are capped at X/5. What would be the basis of that cap.
Assuming USCIS acts like it is supposed to, follows all rules etc........They start using new numbers on Oct1st of the new FY with a fresh slate of 140k available.
Now by law, they will first divide the cap into the 5 EB categories -EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 and EB5. Now once they reach the 7%(or 9) cap in any of the categories, they will have to stop assigning numbers for that country. So for EB3, once they reach the 7 or 9% quota for I,C,M,P - they will need to stop. The rest of the countries(ROW) will get the 100 - (7 x 4) = 72% of the quota. This could be divied up between UK, France, Pak, Germany etc etc. As none of them are going over the 7%, the country cap doesn't affect them. But Since there are a lot of apps under EB3-ROW, there's never any number to spill over to the capped countries.
In case of EB2, only 2 countries hit the cap - India and China. In this case even P and M are part of ROW. But since the apps from ROW is less than the remaining quota of (100 - 7 x 2)% of the EB2 quota, the remaining will be spilled over. The spillover rules will determine who these go to.
The way the current spillover rules stand, your final calculations will still hold true for EB2 due to the spillover ultimately remaining the same to EB2. But not for EB3.
This is not the correct understanding. I know this myth is propogated millions of times in millions of board and so now this myth has become "truth" for millions. But that is not the correct way USCIS does things.
Country specific limit - 9% does NOT have any realtion to "assigning numbers". it is just meant to "approve 485 - mail you a real physical green card".
In ROW cataegory other countries are also bound with this 9 (7 + 2) % limit for Visa granting. For an example - For Pakistan USCIS will never grant more than 9% visa per year no matter how many applications from Pakistan have been assigned a valid visa number. Same will go true for Britain or any "other" country.
In reality How USCIS divide 28.6% among countires - That is unknown mystery and nobody surely know that. And that is why I had to assume "equal shares - 5 part" in my analysis assuming USCIS works fairly but we all know that is a bullshit too :)
As I mentioned in my other post, the categorisation for I,P,C,M and ROW is based on the fact that I,P,C,M are the only countries with demand exceeding the annual limit.
ROW = All countries not hitting the 7%(or 9%) country limit. That doesn't mean they are capped at X/5. What would be the basis of that cap.
Assuming USCIS acts like it is supposed to, follows all rules etc........They start using new numbers on Oct1st of the new FY with a fresh slate of 140k available.
Now by law, they will first divide the cap into the 5 EB categories -EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 and EB5. Now once they reach the 7%(or 9) cap in any of the categories, they will have to stop assigning numbers for that country. So for EB3, once they reach the 7 or 9% quota for I,C,M,P - they will need to stop. The rest of the countries(ROW) will get the 100 - (7 x 4) = 72% of the quota. This could be divied up between UK, France, Pak, Germany etc etc. As none of them are going over the 7%, the country cap doesn't affect them. But Since there are a lot of apps under EB3-ROW, there's never any number to spill over to the capped countries.
In case of EB2, only 2 countries hit the cap - India and China. In this case even P and M are part of ROW. But since the apps from ROW is less than the remaining quota of (100 - 7 x 2)% of the EB2 quota, the remaining will be spilled over. The spillover rules will determine who these go to.
The way the current spillover rules stand, your final calculations will still hold true for EB2 due to the spillover ultimately remaining the same to EB2. But not for EB3.
This is not the correct understanding. I know this myth is propogated millions of times in millions of board and so now this myth has become "truth" for millions. But that is not the correct way USCIS does things.
Country specific limit - 9% does NOT have any realtion to "assigning numbers". it is just meant to "approve 485 - mail you a real physical green card".
In ROW cataegory other countries are also bound with this 9 (7 + 2) % limit for Visa granting. For an example - For Pakistan USCIS will never grant more than 9% visa per year no matter how many applications from Pakistan have been assigned a valid visa number. Same will go true for Britain or any "other" country.
In reality How USCIS divide 28.6% among countires - That is unknown mystery and nobody surely know that. And that is why I had to assume "equal shares - 5 part" in my analysis assuming USCIS works fairly but we all know that is a bullshit too :)
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
maheshf
04-04 04:23 PM
I checked my status and it's been showing this for last 1 year..not sure what it means? Does it mean it has been pre-adjudicated? Please let me know if this is standard response once you submit RFE response. Thanks
"Request for Evidence Response Review
On May 29, 2009, we received your response to our request for evidence. This case is being processed at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. You should expect to receive a written decision or written update within 60 days of the date we received your response unless fingerprint processing or an interview are standard parts of case processing and have not yet been completed, in which case you can use the processing time information on our website to estimate when this case will be done. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283.
Once a timely response to the request for evidence is received by USCIS, we review the evidence or information you submitted. If you submitted the requested evidence, we continue with the adjudication of your application or petition in light of the new evidence"
"Request for Evidence Response Review
On May 29, 2009, we received your response to our request for evidence. This case is being processed at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. You should expect to receive a written decision or written update within 60 days of the date we received your response unless fingerprint processing or an interview are standard parts of case processing and have not yet been completed, in which case you can use the processing time information on our website to estimate when this case will be done. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283.
Once a timely response to the request for evidence is received by USCIS, we review the evidence or information you submitted. If you submitted the requested evidence, we continue with the adjudication of your application or petition in light of the new evidence"
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
prashantkh
07-09 07:03 PM
We should send emails to Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Jay Leno, David Letterman, Conan O'Brian, Jimmy Kimmel etc.
They have tremendous amount of viewership and seems like a perfect material for these shows. I will send email to these guys but if more and more peple can make them aware of this development, this news can potentially snowball. :D
They have tremendous amount of viewership and seems like a perfect material for these shows. I will send email to these guys but if more and more peple can make them aware of this development, this news can potentially snowball. :D
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
mbawa2574
07-10 09:46 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070710/pl_nm/usa_immigration_indians_dc_1
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
garamchai2go
12-18 08:52 AM
Dec 6 1400 hrs, Passport rcvd - NO(as of Dec 17), H1-B, Chennai
With telephone conversation with consulate staff , I came to know that sometime tomorrow vfs will have my passport. Will let you know once I hear from vfs.
Dec 6 1400 hrs, Passport sent to vfs - Yes(on Dec 18), H1-B, Chennai
With telephone conversation with consulate staff , I came to know that sometime tomorrow vfs will have my passport. Will let you know once I hear from vfs.
Dec 6 1400 hrs, Passport sent to vfs - Yes(on Dec 18), H1-B, Chennai
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
gc_lover
06-29 08:22 PM
My labor is also stuck in PBEC...
Trust me...you are in better position then those who are stuck because of this USCIS mess!
Trust me...you are in better position then those who are stuck because of this USCIS mess!
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
trueguy
08-21 10:05 AM
we should do something ASAP before they decide upon Oct'2008 VB. Before FY2009 starts, we should make sure they are aware of EB3 problems so they can come up with new rules for new year.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
whitecollarslave
04-17 06:26 PM
8 USC 1324b
(a)(1) General rule
It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien, as defined in section 1324a (h)(3) of this title) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment—
(A) because of such individual’s national origin, or
(B) in the case of a protected individual (as defined in paragraph (3)), because of such individual’s citizenship status.
(3) “Protected individual” defined
As used in paragraph (1), the term “protected individual” means an individual who—
(A) is a citizen or national of the United States, or
(B) is an alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence, is granted the status of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under section 1160 (a) or 1255a (a)(1) of this title, is admitted as a refugee under section 1157 of this title, or is granted asylum under section 1158 of this title;
(4) Additional exception providing right to prefer equally qualified citizens
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to prefer to hire, recruit, or refer an individual who is a citizen or national of the United States over another individual who is an alien if the two individuals are equally qualified.
So EAD folks are excluded from "protected individuals" and employer has a right to prefer US citizens according to this.
I disagree with your conclusion. The employer has the right to prefer US Citizens over another individual only if the two individuals are equally qualified. For the cases mentioned in this thread, employers have flatly refused to consider anybody on EAD. So the clause of preference to US citizens does not apply. The you posted is the original text and does not include amendments or changes.
If you read up on section 1160 (a) or 1255a (a)(1) you will find that it includes people who have filed for AOS. It is my understanding that an EB immigrant with AOS pending is included in the "alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under section 1160 (a) or 1255a (a)(1)" category. I am not a lawyer and could be wrong but this is my interpretation. If you are on H-1B, this does not apply. But if you have EAD and AOS pending this should apply. There is no way for an employer to distinguish between an EB immigrant with EAD and AOS pending v/s a FB immigrant with EAD and AOS pending.
(a)(1) General rule
It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien, as defined in section 1324a (h)(3) of this title) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment—
(A) because of such individual’s national origin, or
(B) in the case of a protected individual (as defined in paragraph (3)), because of such individual’s citizenship status.
(3) “Protected individual” defined
As used in paragraph (1), the term “protected individual” means an individual who—
(A) is a citizen or national of the United States, or
(B) is an alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence, is granted the status of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under section 1160 (a) or 1255a (a)(1) of this title, is admitted as a refugee under section 1157 of this title, or is granted asylum under section 1158 of this title;
(4) Additional exception providing right to prefer equally qualified citizens
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to prefer to hire, recruit, or refer an individual who is a citizen or national of the United States over another individual who is an alien if the two individuals are equally qualified.
So EAD folks are excluded from "protected individuals" and employer has a right to prefer US citizens according to this.
I disagree with your conclusion. The employer has the right to prefer US Citizens over another individual only if the two individuals are equally qualified. For the cases mentioned in this thread, employers have flatly refused to consider anybody on EAD. So the clause of preference to US citizens does not apply. The you posted is the original text and does not include amendments or changes.
If you read up on section 1160 (a) or 1255a (a)(1) you will find that it includes people who have filed for AOS. It is my understanding that an EB immigrant with AOS pending is included in the "alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under section 1160 (a) or 1255a (a)(1)" category. I am not a lawyer and could be wrong but this is my interpretation. If you are on H-1B, this does not apply. But if you have EAD and AOS pending this should apply. There is no way for an employer to distinguish between an EB immigrant with EAD and AOS pending v/s a FB immigrant with EAD and AOS pending.
Sandeep
01-07 12:23 PM
Here is a summary of the bills, their bill numbers and the Sections:
Sen. Chuck Hagel's Bill (Section 202 of S. 1918)
-High-tech workers who have worked in the U.S. for 3 years would be allowed to adjust to permanent resident status without regard to the annual employment-based immigrant visa cap of 140,000.
-The spouses and children of immigrant workers would also be allowed to adjust status without regard to this cap.
McCain/Kennedy Bill (Sections 601 and 602 of S. 1033)
-Increases quota on EB immigrants to 290,000 to alleviate retrogression
-Recapture unused visas between 2001 and 2005
-Increase the per country limit from 7% to 10%
Cornyn/Kyle Bill (Sections 1001 and 1002 of S. 1438)
-Recapture of the unused visas between 2001 through 2005
-Removal of diversity visa and reallocation of these. Since this is mentioned under EB, the implication seems to be reallocation to EB but am not sure.
-Increase of the country limit from 7% to 10%
It is understood that there would be a merging of these to make the final comprehensive immigration bill
Sen. Chuck Hagel's Bill (Section 202 of S. 1918)
-High-tech workers who have worked in the U.S. for 3 years would be allowed to adjust to permanent resident status without regard to the annual employment-based immigrant visa cap of 140,000.
-The spouses and children of immigrant workers would also be allowed to adjust status without regard to this cap.
McCain/Kennedy Bill (Sections 601 and 602 of S. 1033)
-Increases quota on EB immigrants to 290,000 to alleviate retrogression
-Recapture unused visas between 2001 and 2005
-Increase the per country limit from 7% to 10%
Cornyn/Kyle Bill (Sections 1001 and 1002 of S. 1438)
-Recapture of the unused visas between 2001 through 2005
-Removal of diversity visa and reallocation of these. Since this is mentioned under EB, the implication seems to be reallocation to EB but am not sure.
-Increase of the country limit from 7% to 10%
It is understood that there would be a merging of these to make the final comprehensive immigration bill
patiently_waiting
09-25 07:01 PM
Click-2-Call allows you to call only "the vonage number" from PC.It makes the vonage number to ring and connect to the destination.
any settings need to be updated in vonage account for making the remote number to ring and connect to the destination ?
Thanks
any settings need to be updated in vonage account for making the remote number to ring and connect to the destination ?
Thanks
