nozerd
01-27 10:47 AM
I went back and reread the July 2001 Bulletin.
How difficult would it be to lobby for extending the same logic for removing per country cap ? I am sure removing 7% cap would definitely help.
Also since EB3 World has a cut off does it mean that no visas will be left from the world pool which can be recaptured ?
How difficult would it be to lobby for extending the same logic for removing per country cap ? I am sure removing 7% cap would definitely help.
Also since EB3 World has a cut off does it mean that no visas will be left from the world pool which can be recaptured ?
wallpaper ANSAL API#39;s VICTORIA FLOORS
Dhundhun
07-13 11:48 PM
I read somewhere that now all the applications - 485/EAD/AP, for one particular applicant, are adjudicated by the same officer. This is a new process change to improve efficiency. I think the article I read indicated that it was already working that way at TSC.
Unfortunately, i don't have the link, but I will post it if i come across it.
My case (I485) is with NSC. The e-filed EAD renewal also got LIN number, but (may be due to load distribution) it is being handled by MSC.
Does this imply everything will be handled by MSC instead of TSC? I think source article is needed to analyze, what is happening.
Unfortunately, i don't have the link, but I will post it if i come across it.
My case (I485) is with NSC. The e-filed EAD renewal also got LIN number, but (may be due to load distribution) it is being handled by MSC.
Does this imply everything will be handled by MSC instead of TSC? I think source article is needed to analyze, what is happening.
gimme_GC2006
05-15 10:00 AM
If we have all resources required to do MBA fulltime from a reputed school then there is no dilemea, one should opt for it. When resources are limited (need to work fulltime, has family with small kids, limited $$$ etc) then online is a better choice compared with part time. Students working for an Online MBA do develop good network and such degrees are being more and more accepted. Online course needs more descipline and dedication than the regular courses. The interaction between students and professor is more in a online course than in a part time course. You spend more time in research than in travel. Flexibility is another advantage.
My client CIO did MBA from University of Pheonix in 2006 and he was hired as CIO in 2008. I am talking of a company with more than 5000 IT staff. So its my opinion that Online MBA is valued by the industry.
http://rankings.ft.com/exportranking/online-mba-2009/pdf
I totally agree with first para..but your client CIO getting promotion out of a Phoenix university degree surprises me..many people discouraged me from going there as they dont require GMAT to start with.
My client CIO did MBA from University of Pheonix in 2006 and he was hired as CIO in 2008. I am talking of a company with more than 5000 IT staff. So its my opinion that Online MBA is valued by the industry.
http://rankings.ft.com/exportranking/online-mba-2009/pdf
I totally agree with first para..but your client CIO getting promotion out of a Phoenix university degree surprises me..many people discouraged me from going there as they dont require GMAT to start with.
2011 Ansal API Palm Grove mohali|
sanz
03-11 11:38 PM
is it really out
Visa Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html)
this doesnt tell that yet
Visa Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html)
this doesnt tell that yet
more...
gceverywhere
09-26 10:12 AM
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Whether it was ignorance or a planned move, I agree with you that IV must talk to CNN and ask them to re-publish that article with the correct information.
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Whether it was ignorance or a planned move, I agree with you that IV must talk to CNN and ask them to re-publish that article with the correct information.
ganguteli
03-09 11:32 PM
I like your idea.
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
more...
gsc999
04-20 02:44 PM
Maybe no banners or signs because this is a town-hall style meeting and not a rally. I'll let you know if its ok to do that.
But surely, it would be good if you bring a sign/banner saying "www.immigrationvoice.org" which would help us get more coverage is its caught by the media.
--
Ok, I will get a couple.
But surely, it would be good if you bring a sign/banner saying "www.immigrationvoice.org" which would help us get more coverage is its caught by the media.
--
Ok, I will get a couple.
2010 Pictures of Ansal Api Happy
sbabunle
01-02 12:29 AM
Could you guys please give me the matter to post so that I dont have to type in the whole story again...thanks
more...
Raghunadh Polavarapu
08-10 02:36 PM
EB-3 keyboard tigers are back to discuss how to get GC'ssssss:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
hair Ansal API Happy Homes is
partha_vus
10-26 11:35 AM
PD Jan 2001(ported priority Date)
I-140 Approed June 2007
I485 Applied RD:July 2, 2007
EAD cards received
thanks
I-140 Approed June 2007
I485 Applied RD:July 2, 2007
EAD cards received
thanks
more...
grinch
03-12 09:58 AM
great work all of you guys, my choice was between grinch's and thirdworldman. i voted thirdworldman, but i just wanna say i know grinch hasn't done this a lot, so i think you've done an excellent job man :thumb:
aw thanks man, appreciate the compliment!
aw thanks man, appreciate the compliment!
hot ansal api, Ansal api mohali,
HOPE_GC_SOON
08-02 03:13 PM
Folks,
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
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 ??
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
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 ??
more...
house Ansal API, lanuches Spacious
nixstor
10-15 11:53 PM
ok what receipt # are you guys talking about? i think iam little confused..
ok if I send the letter with my name and notarize it would it suffice? plkease advise? waht is that receipt # that u guysa re talking about
Yes, just notarize and send by mail or fax. The receipt number is for tracking your FOIA request and NOT for your immigration related cases.
From USCIS FOIA home page
Making a FOIA or PA request:
1. To Request USCIS Records: Unless otherwise noted below, mail or fax all requests for USCIS records, including alien files and procurement information, to the National Records Center at the address listed above. Please note: ALL FOIA REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING. Form G-639 (available from this website under Immigration Forms) may be used for this purpose, but is not required. Please see “How to make a FOIA or PA request” for detailed information necessary to process your request. Unfortunately, we are unable to accept FOIA or PA requests by e-mail at this time.
ok if I send the letter with my name and notarize it would it suffice? plkease advise? waht is that receipt # that u guysa re talking about
Yes, just notarize and send by mail or fax. The receipt number is for tracking your FOIA request and NOT for your immigration related cases.
From USCIS FOIA home page
Making a FOIA or PA request:
1. To Request USCIS Records: Unless otherwise noted below, mail or fax all requests for USCIS records, including alien files and procurement information, to the National Records Center at the address listed above. Please note: ALL FOIA REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING. Form G-639 (available from this website under Immigration Forms) may be used for this purpose, but is not required. Please see “How to make a FOIA or PA request” for detailed information necessary to process your request. Unfortunately, we are unable to accept FOIA or PA requests by e-mail at this time.
tattoo Mohali Map
atleasth1b
08-22 05:13 PM
I am in a very Bad situation it seems, please help.
I am working in US on L1B visa and Wife on L2. then Wife got a Job and her employer filled her 485.
In the mean time I applied for H1 (through a consultant, to get out of the L1B company). Looks like the H1 Got Approved. Now, I think the problem is, If I switch to H1, then she will loose her job and our chance of Getting EAD will go.
I do NOT want to go for H1, but EAD Is important to me. Is there a Way I can keep my L1? (so that my wife can keep her job)
Please help
I am working in US on L1B visa and Wife on L2. then Wife got a Job and her employer filled her 485.
In the mean time I applied for H1 (through a consultant, to get out of the L1B company). Looks like the H1 Got Approved. Now, I think the problem is, If I switch to H1, then she will loose her job and our chance of Getting EAD will go.
I do NOT want to go for H1, but EAD Is important to me. Is there a Way I can keep my L1? (so that my wife can keep her job)
Please help
more...
pictures ANSAL API, WORLD 1, Mohali
mpadapa
07-01 04:31 PM
Online petition is a great idea. But what will it accomplish?? Ultimately all those questions have to addressed in the form of a bill and that needs to be passed in the Congress. Is it a coincidence, we already have a bill HR5921 addressing those questions raised by OP All we need to do is channel our energy to make this bill along with the other Rep. Lofgren bills a success.
IV is already raising all those questions mentioned in the petition with the lawmakers. So what is new in this petition?
IV is already raising all those questions mentioned in the petition with the lawmakers. So what is new in this petition?
dresses Ansal API Golf Links mohali|
sureshj
06-08 02:18 PM
To solve the FBI name check problem, the following suggestions should be communicated to lawmaker if possible:
1. Increase the fundings for FBI name check. The major reason of name check delay is due to lack of resources for manual name check.
2. Introduce a conditional Green Card. Conditional green card is equivalent to green card, except with condition that it could be taken back IF AND ONLY IF the name check eventually fails to pass. Person with conditional green card enjoy all the benefits with normal green card, including transfering job freely, re-enter US freely, count years to citizenship, etc.
3. People wants to file 485 can ask FBI do name check before they actaully file 485 with a certain amount of filing fee. So that the delay for FBI name check will not impact 485 processing too much.
I could'nt agree with gcdreamer more...
Consider this...
1. FBI, I believe, has 2 rookie analysts dedicated to processing name checks and I heard USCIS pays $25 per name check.
2. FBI has distributed databases in NY, CA, FL, etc. that are not networked. So they have to request name checks individually out of these databases.
3. Name check ranks least in their priority list.
4. FBI has increased their name check criteria from 2 (First name and Last Name) to, I think it is, 7 or 8 (part of the first name, part of the last name and few other combinations). This increases the chances of your name generating "hits" and falling into this blackhole.
In addition to the above FBI (which normally receives ~1.5m name check requests per year) received ~6m in 2003. They are still recovering from that deluge. So now you see what's causing the delay.
For USCIS this works out fine, since they rake in 15% of their annual revenue from EAD/AP renewals. They do not want to mess with this "free money" and reduce the processing time. And to top it all they can transfer the blame on FBI.
In addition, to secure this "money train" USCIS cleverly issued a public memo earlier this year indicating WOM cases will be fought in court. To most this would have seemed like the end of WOM, but it is not. Applicants have since filed and won these cases. However the memo probably had its' desired effect...to discourage a majority of the applicants from filing WOM.
I think USCIS has to be made accountable for the money they earn. The $25/name check is just not sufficient. More funding is necessary so that FBI can allocate more analysts to the job and also upgrade their IT infrastructure. Excuses such as "ball is in FBI's court" is just not acceptable. "Conditional Green card" (as suggested by gcdreamer) is excellant idea to alleviate the problems the "name check" victims face over the ~2 to 4 years they spend in this blackhole.
PS: Just in case you are not aware of Senator Obama's initiative to address this problem here is a link where you can sign-up for whatever it is worth.
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?nc082505&1
1. Increase the fundings for FBI name check. The major reason of name check delay is due to lack of resources for manual name check.
2. Introduce a conditional Green Card. Conditional green card is equivalent to green card, except with condition that it could be taken back IF AND ONLY IF the name check eventually fails to pass. Person with conditional green card enjoy all the benefits with normal green card, including transfering job freely, re-enter US freely, count years to citizenship, etc.
3. People wants to file 485 can ask FBI do name check before they actaully file 485 with a certain amount of filing fee. So that the delay for FBI name check will not impact 485 processing too much.
I could'nt agree with gcdreamer more...
Consider this...
1. FBI, I believe, has 2 rookie analysts dedicated to processing name checks and I heard USCIS pays $25 per name check.
2. FBI has distributed databases in NY, CA, FL, etc. that are not networked. So they have to request name checks individually out of these databases.
3. Name check ranks least in their priority list.
4. FBI has increased their name check criteria from 2 (First name and Last Name) to, I think it is, 7 or 8 (part of the first name, part of the last name and few other combinations). This increases the chances of your name generating "hits" and falling into this blackhole.
In addition to the above FBI (which normally receives ~1.5m name check requests per year) received ~6m in 2003. They are still recovering from that deluge. So now you see what's causing the delay.
For USCIS this works out fine, since they rake in 15% of their annual revenue from EAD/AP renewals. They do not want to mess with this "free money" and reduce the processing time. And to top it all they can transfer the blame on FBI.
In addition, to secure this "money train" USCIS cleverly issued a public memo earlier this year indicating WOM cases will be fought in court. To most this would have seemed like the end of WOM, but it is not. Applicants have since filed and won these cases. However the memo probably had its' desired effect...to discourage a majority of the applicants from filing WOM.
I think USCIS has to be made accountable for the money they earn. The $25/name check is just not sufficient. More funding is necessary so that FBI can allocate more analysts to the job and also upgrade their IT infrastructure. Excuses such as "ball is in FBI's court" is just not acceptable. "Conditional Green card" (as suggested by gcdreamer) is excellant idea to alleviate the problems the "name check" victims face over the ~2 to 4 years they spend in this blackhole.
PS: Just in case you are not aware of Senator Obama's initiative to address this problem here is a link where you can sign-up for whatever it is worth.
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?nc082505&1
more...
makeup Ansal API as an
kaisersose
09-18 11:15 PM
I had to reluctantly stay away from the rally due to a brand new baby at home, but I sure hope to be part of future efforts.
And I totally agree that Legal is the keyword. Most Americans are not clear about Legals v Illegals and lump them together. Of course, some just do not care and do not see a need to differentiate between the two. They would just like to see Asian and South Asian folks get out of the country.
And I also am not in favor of asking for an increase in GC quota. Instead I am in favor of not counting spouse and kids against the quota. This itself will effectively inrease the quota to over 350K per year. Directly asking for quota increase always leaves a bad taste for skeptics and will slow down any possible action.
And I totally agree that Legal is the keyword. Most Americans are not clear about Legals v Illegals and lump them together. Of course, some just do not care and do not see a need to differentiate between the two. They would just like to see Asian and South Asian folks get out of the country.
And I also am not in favor of asking for an increase in GC quota. Instead I am in favor of not counting spouse and kids against the quota. This itself will effectively inrease the quota to over 350K per year. Directly asking for quota increase always leaves a bad taste for skeptics and will slow down any possible action.
girlfriend -Decorating/Ansal-Api-3BHK
ns007
04-21 08:27 AM
Sorry, did not see this thread before.
Please let me know if you still need someone to call members. I am available until 4pm EST today.
Thank you for offering to volunteer for calling members in CA. Now we need 2 more volunteers to give 30-45 minutes to make the phone calls. This is a very important initiative. Kindly send me a private message if you would like to volunteer.
Please let me know if you still need someone to call members. I am available until 4pm EST today.
Thank you for offering to volunteer for calling members in CA. Now we need 2 more volunteers to give 30-45 minutes to make the phone calls. This is a very important initiative. Kindly send me a private message if you would like to volunteer.
hairstyles Previous Picture - Next
RNGC
09-20 07:49 PM
Whilst in general a name change does sound like a good idea, we have spent a lot of time and money making sure that Immigration Voice as an organization is known.
It makes no sense to through that away
I am in no way trying to argue....I understand that "ImmigrationVoice" is now known very well ....by changing it to "LegalImmigrationVoice" we are not doing a whole lot of change, just adding a "Legal" in front.....we should maintain the same logo, so our identity will not change!
Just imagine you have no idea what IV is, you just come across the word "ImmigrationVoice" - how does it sound to you ? For me it sounds like we are just a pro-immigration group......No way it sounds like a Legal Immigration group....
Here in US large companies change names...so its not too late......adding a word "Legal", "Highly skilled" etc will go a long way for our future generations......
Just my $0.02
It makes no sense to through that away
I am in no way trying to argue....I understand that "ImmigrationVoice" is now known very well ....by changing it to "LegalImmigrationVoice" we are not doing a whole lot of change, just adding a "Legal" in front.....we should maintain the same logo, so our identity will not change!
Just imagine you have no idea what IV is, you just come across the word "ImmigrationVoice" - how does it sound to you ? For me it sounds like we are just a pro-immigration group......No way it sounds like a Legal Immigration group....
Here in US large companies change names...so its not too late......adding a word "Legal", "Highly skilled" etc will go a long way for our future generations......
Just my $0.02
jsb
08-11 09:21 AM
We need our messiah VLDRAO...
He s the MANNNN...
he predicted July 2007 fiasco and then he was the guy who fought for us...
VLDRAOOO where are you...
Please make dates current for everybody...
Making dates current for everybody will benefit new members (those could not file in July/Aug 07). For you with Nov 04 PD in EB2, and others waiting with I-485 filed, it will create a chaos. USCIS folks will get green to pick any file at random and issue GC's, then we all be unhappy.
They should move cutoff dates in an orderly manner without retrogressing them in the future. Retrogression pains more than no or little cutoff date movement.
He s the MANNNN...
he predicted July 2007 fiasco and then he was the guy who fought for us...
VLDRAOOO where are you...
Please make dates current for everybody...
Making dates current for everybody will benefit new members (those could not file in July/Aug 07). For you with Nov 04 PD in EB2, and others waiting with I-485 filed, it will create a chaos. USCIS folks will get green to pick any file at random and issue GC's, then we all be unhappy.
They should move cutoff dates in an orderly manner without retrogressing them in the future. Retrogression pains more than no or little cutoff date movement.
vandanaverdia
09-11 02:47 PM
Lets all go to DC!!!
GO IV!!!!
GO IV!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment