varshadas
02-08 08:23 PM
Its OK either way. Everyone is not needed. It does not matter if you are not from the district. If you can't make it, don't sweat it. Hemal is coming. Two of us should be OK.
Btw, what happened to the flyer distribution at Metropark?
Thanks,
Varsha
Btw, what happened to the flyer distribution at Metropark?
Thanks,
Varsha
wallpaper Black and Gray Wallpaper
GCard_Dream
03-18 05:35 PM
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
sukhwinderd
02-17 09:49 PM
here is a report which says there are more than 300,000 GC visa numbers were unused.
go to page 35 or search pdf for recapture to see chart.
from the report
This dialogue is critical considering that when USCIS
and DOS fail to accurately estimate cut-off dates, visas go
unused or are shifted to other family or employment-based
categories. Congress passed legislation permitting the
recapture of some unused visa numbers from previous
years.119 Figure 19 presents data on visa numbers �lost�
between 1992 and 2009 for both employment and family
preference categories.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_2010_annual_report_to_congress.pdf
recapturing visas is the easiest way to clear backlog. it has happened before and can happen again, if all of us try.
go to page 35 or search pdf for recapture to see chart.
from the report
This dialogue is critical considering that when USCIS
and DOS fail to accurately estimate cut-off dates, visas go
unused or are shifted to other family or employment-based
categories. Congress passed legislation permitting the
recapture of some unused visa numbers from previous
years.119 Figure 19 presents data on visa numbers �lost�
between 1992 and 2009 for both employment and family
preference categories.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_2010_annual_report_to_congress.pdf
recapturing visas is the easiest way to clear backlog. it has happened before and can happen again, if all of us try.
2011 Gray March Calendar Wallpaper
retrohatao
02-18 11:58 PM
WaldenPond,
It is an interesting post.
I am quite sure you by this time know that "the security clearnce" has become the most secretive processes in the GC process. You were right when you have mentioned people would like to get to the next process. Yes, I was of the opinion that the labour clearance was the only hurdle in the GC process. When my I-485 was current and my case was not cleared than I realized how serious the "security clearance process" was. Interestingly many people have been stuck in the process. (Please take a look at the link I have posted.) None of the people could successfully find a way out. Comparing the "Name check process" as a "case to case" process is bit a "over-statement". In the cases you have mentioned, atleast you have an option to contact USCIS. USCIS has an obligation to respond with in a specified time period. But in case of "Name Check process" as you might have already found , one may not expect a response from FBI. Its plain and simple. If my name is stuck in the "security clearane", I would like to know what for ( just like the RFE sent by USCIS). I may provide some information that could clarify their doubts or atleas can provide them to check certain facts to check the veracity
As related to working on the issue, yes I can definitely work on the issue to the best of my ability.There are some constraints due to the Job I am in, however I am willing to do whatever possibly can be done.
It is an interesting post.
I am quite sure you by this time know that "the security clearnce" has become the most secretive processes in the GC process. You were right when you have mentioned people would like to get to the next process. Yes, I was of the opinion that the labour clearance was the only hurdle in the GC process. When my I-485 was current and my case was not cleared than I realized how serious the "security clearance process" was. Interestingly many people have been stuck in the process. (Please take a look at the link I have posted.) None of the people could successfully find a way out. Comparing the "Name check process" as a "case to case" process is bit a "over-statement". In the cases you have mentioned, atleast you have an option to contact USCIS. USCIS has an obligation to respond with in a specified time period. But in case of "Name Check process" as you might have already found , one may not expect a response from FBI. Its plain and simple. If my name is stuck in the "security clearane", I would like to know what for ( just like the RFE sent by USCIS). I may provide some information that could clarify their doubts or atleas can provide them to check certain facts to check the veracity
As related to working on the issue, yes I can definitely work on the issue to the best of my ability.There are some constraints due to the Job I am in, however I am willing to do whatever possibly can be done.
more...
shreekhand
07-04 10:28 PM
A nicely presented opinion by Ramba, but there are obvious flaws in the anaylsis. Here are my observations
1.) The contention that they followed the recommendations of the Omb report and went back to pre-1982 method cannot be true. They cannot follow that without violating 8 USC Section 1255 (b) which clearly states that a visa number is reduced AFTER the approval of the I-485.
2.)There were 40K visas remaining at the time of the Jun 13 bulletin according to AILA. The 60K number as per DoS might have been from end of May. We most note the fact from the CIS I-485 Standard Operating Procedure that when a petition is "documentarily qualified and approvable" a request is made for a visa number, if such number is not available that petition is put into a approved pending availability of visa number list. This makes it amply clear that the CIS knew the exact number of approvable petitions.(might be ~40-60K) The DoS might also have known that.
3.) So what happened ? Looks like the DoS did not expect the CIS to get those petitions quickly from storage, assign a visa number, stamp and sign petitions with the speed that CIS did it with. As a matter of fact, we can clearly deduce from inquiries made my petitioners in the month of May that soon after the June bulletin was released in May, the petitioners were informed by IO's that their files are now been retrieved and have been assigned to officers for approval in June !
4.) This shows that the CIS swift approval (i.e retrieval, assigning visa #, stamp, signature) activity especially the retrieval part did not start on June 1, or June 13 but well before in mid May if not earlier.
5.) Now maybe they assigned the visa #'s to the approvable petitions (in line with the law) already but they are still going on with the stamp, signature part (as evidenced by people receiving approvals e-mails even on July 2nd and 3rd.. and other forums)
6.) Suspension of PPS at NSC and TSC -- Now why should that happen ?
If they have already used up the EB quota one would ask that much amount of man hours are now free isn't it !!?
But the above points might show us that they might need it to simply finish off the paperwork of the approvable petitions in the month of July. Remember signing off on 40K+ petitions is not a 1 month job, but just assigning visa numbers might be. It is very certain to me that we will see approvals well within July!
Loose ends:
1.) What baffles though is the allocation of all visa numbers before the last quarter of FY 07 ! Maybe there is loophole there that allowed them to do so.
2.) How did visa number for EB1 for a top scientist from say an undersubscribed country such as Ukraine also get used up ??!
1.) The contention that they followed the recommendations of the Omb report and went back to pre-1982 method cannot be true. They cannot follow that without violating 8 USC Section 1255 (b) which clearly states that a visa number is reduced AFTER the approval of the I-485.
2.)There were 40K visas remaining at the time of the Jun 13 bulletin according to AILA. The 60K number as per DoS might have been from end of May. We most note the fact from the CIS I-485 Standard Operating Procedure that when a petition is "documentarily qualified and approvable" a request is made for a visa number, if such number is not available that petition is put into a approved pending availability of visa number list. This makes it amply clear that the CIS knew the exact number of approvable petitions.(might be ~40-60K) The DoS might also have known that.
3.) So what happened ? Looks like the DoS did not expect the CIS to get those petitions quickly from storage, assign a visa number, stamp and sign petitions with the speed that CIS did it with. As a matter of fact, we can clearly deduce from inquiries made my petitioners in the month of May that soon after the June bulletin was released in May, the petitioners were informed by IO's that their files are now been retrieved and have been assigned to officers for approval in June !
4.) This shows that the CIS swift approval (i.e retrieval, assigning visa #, stamp, signature) activity especially the retrieval part did not start on June 1, or June 13 but well before in mid May if not earlier.
5.) Now maybe they assigned the visa #'s to the approvable petitions (in line with the law) already but they are still going on with the stamp, signature part (as evidenced by people receiving approvals e-mails even on July 2nd and 3rd.. and other forums)
6.) Suspension of PPS at NSC and TSC -- Now why should that happen ?
If they have already used up the EB quota one would ask that much amount of man hours are now free isn't it !!?
But the above points might show us that they might need it to simply finish off the paperwork of the approvable petitions in the month of July. Remember signing off on 40K+ petitions is not a 1 month job, but just assigning visa numbers might be. It is very certain to me that we will see approvals well within July!
Loose ends:
1.) What baffles though is the allocation of all visa numbers before the last quarter of FY 07 ! Maybe there is loophole there that allowed them to do so.
2.) How did visa number for EB1 for a top scientist from say an undersubscribed country such as Ukraine also get used up ??!
sanju_dba
08-10 02:45 PM
Count me in!
more...
sayantan76
08-23 11:10 AM
Hi, I hope somebody helps in my dilemma.
I am currently on an L1A visa. I heard that my main office (where I am now working) is closing the foreign office where I come from. Based on L1 requirements and facts, it states that once the subsidiary closes, my L1 becomes invalid. Given this, the company is willing to sponsor my green card as soon as possible. It will probably still take a year before the subsidiary officially closes. What are my options? If they have to close the company while my green card is being process, would it be cancelled ?
Thanks.
i am not a lawyer -so get expert opinion.....
but the logic of L1A becoming instantly invalid for someone already in US office if the foreign office closes does not sound logical, even by USCIS standards. I would suggest taking a good 2nd opinion.
Also - if you are in L1A - you should technically qualify for EB-1 which is current for all countries and if that category applies to your situation - you would not need to go through Labor Cert - a couple of friends of mine got their GC in less than 90 days using the EB1 route.
All the best!
I am currently on an L1A visa. I heard that my main office (where I am now working) is closing the foreign office where I come from. Based on L1 requirements and facts, it states that once the subsidiary closes, my L1 becomes invalid. Given this, the company is willing to sponsor my green card as soon as possible. It will probably still take a year before the subsidiary officially closes. What are my options? If they have to close the company while my green card is being process, would it be cancelled ?
Thanks.
i am not a lawyer -so get expert opinion.....
but the logic of L1A becoming instantly invalid for someone already in US office if the foreign office closes does not sound logical, even by USCIS standards. I would suggest taking a good 2nd opinion.
Also - if you are in L1A - you should technically qualify for EB-1 which is current for all countries and if that category applies to your situation - you would not need to go through Labor Cert - a couple of friends of mine got their GC in less than 90 days using the EB1 route.
All the best!
2010 Elegant Gray Wallpaper
veni001
03-11 10:38 PM
No change for EB2..... India
EB3 moved about three months
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
EB3 moved about three months
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
more...
desi3933
02-04 01:44 PM
Recently got Laid off. Here are my details:
-485 has been pending >180 days
-PD: Feb 2006
-Last day of work is 6th March, 2009
-EAD valid for another 6 months or so.
-I am working on H1-B, which is valid till 2010.
I understand that I can use AC21 and work on my EAD as long as the job is similar or same. I also understand that it is a good idea to get the H1-B transferred rather than using the EAD.
My comments are in blue ....
My questions are:
-Can one stay unemployed on EAD without jeopardizing the GC process?
Depends on timing for RFE and approval time. At the time of RFE and I-485 approval, beneficiary should have permanent job offer that matches with LC Job duties. Technically, one can be unemployed during AOS stage, as long as he/she has permanent job offer that begins after I-485 approval.
-Do I have to inform USCIS that I am unemployed as of March 6th, 2009 in case I do not find a job?
There is no such regulation at this time.
-Do I inform the USCIS in case I find a job and work on my EAD or my H1-B.
There is no such regulation at this time.
I mean when do I have to inform USCIS if at all?
In the event of RFE.
Also, I live in Windsor, Canada, and used to commute everyday to work to Detroit. Can I stay in Windsor subsequent to March 6th in case I don't find a job. Will it affect my 485 process?
Maintaining US presence is better IMHO. Typically trips, that are less than 24 hours, are not counted as presence outside USA, therefore daily trip to Windsor was ok.
Contributions: $350 +
Led various fund raising efforts for Tristate Area
Was in the DC rally
Priority Date: Feb 2006
Good Luck.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
-485 has been pending >180 days
-PD: Feb 2006
-Last day of work is 6th March, 2009
-EAD valid for another 6 months or so.
-I am working on H1-B, which is valid till 2010.
I understand that I can use AC21 and work on my EAD as long as the job is similar or same. I also understand that it is a good idea to get the H1-B transferred rather than using the EAD.
My comments are in blue ....
My questions are:
-Can one stay unemployed on EAD without jeopardizing the GC process?
Depends on timing for RFE and approval time. At the time of RFE and I-485 approval, beneficiary should have permanent job offer that matches with LC Job duties. Technically, one can be unemployed during AOS stage, as long as he/she has permanent job offer that begins after I-485 approval.
-Do I have to inform USCIS that I am unemployed as of March 6th, 2009 in case I do not find a job?
There is no such regulation at this time.
-Do I inform the USCIS in case I find a job and work on my EAD or my H1-B.
There is no such regulation at this time.
I mean when do I have to inform USCIS if at all?
In the event of RFE.
Also, I live in Windsor, Canada, and used to commute everyday to work to Detroit. Can I stay in Windsor subsequent to March 6th in case I don't find a job. Will it affect my 485 process?
Maintaining US presence is better IMHO. Typically trips, that are less than 24 hours, are not counted as presence outside USA, therefore daily trip to Windsor was ok.
Contributions: $350 +
Led various fund raising efforts for Tristate Area
Was in the DC rally
Priority Date: Feb 2006
Good Luck.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
hair wallpaper gray. gray wallpaper
BharatPremi
03-17 03:18 PM
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
In general CP ones get out of this mess first always... I know you are CP one and you would be out well before the guy having same PD but stuck in AOS.
In general CP ones get out of this mess first always... I know you are CP one and you would be out well before the guy having same PD but stuck in AOS.
more...
Abhinaym
09-10 10:42 AM
It seems I don't have the number of posts necessary to log in. Is there anyway I can just view the live updates?
hot Yellowcard Gray Wallpaper
pyaradesi
02-03 09:28 PM
Folks,
I am not a naysayer, I think the IV core team has done a great job of giving a voice to us.
But, there are a few questions that I am not convinced myself:
1. why remove per country quota just for EB, why not family based immigration as well?
2. what will happen after removing per country limits, what kind of numbers are we looking at? how many new PRs? What is the impact on the country,economic, social, cultural, I do care about the USA.
3. By asking legislators to remove these per country quota limits, isn't this a paradigm shift in thinking?
When I, a guy impacted by this EB backlog am not convinced, how the heck are we going to make a case to some congressman/woman? We should definitely move away from this snobbish view that EB folks are better than others, or that the USA needs the EB folks more than EB folks need the USA.
That said, I do believe that we have a humanitarian case for folks like us who are already in the queue. Educating congress about the path taken by the average EB immigrant would help. At the end of the day human life is human life even it is it Indian.
I am not a naysayer, I think the IV core team has done a great job of giving a voice to us.
But, there are a few questions that I am not convinced myself:
1. why remove per country quota just for EB, why not family based immigration as well?
2. what will happen after removing per country limits, what kind of numbers are we looking at? how many new PRs? What is the impact on the country,economic, social, cultural, I do care about the USA.
3. By asking legislators to remove these per country quota limits, isn't this a paradigm shift in thinking?
When I, a guy impacted by this EB backlog am not convinced, how the heck are we going to make a case to some congressman/woman? We should definitely move away from this snobbish view that EB folks are better than others, or that the USA needs the EB folks more than EB folks need the USA.
That said, I do believe that we have a humanitarian case for folks like us who are already in the queue. Educating congress about the path taken by the average EB immigrant would help. At the end of the day human life is human life even it is it Indian.
more...
house Raven D. Gray Wallpaper by
battineni
08-10 02:23 PM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
I'm with you...!!
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
I'm with you...!!
tattoo Gray Heart iPhone Wallpaper #
gc_rip
09-10 12:01 PM
Hi IV team, and all,
Can we come up with certain organized campaign, just like the flower campaign back in Aug 07? I am sure if we have such campaign, the participation would definitely be more.
Ofcourse we need to choose a right time and right message to put through.
Please share your ideas.
Thanks!
Can we come up with certain organized campaign, just like the flower campaign back in Aug 07? I am sure if we have such campaign, the participation would definitely be more.
Ofcourse we need to choose a right time and right message to put through.
Please share your ideas.
Thanks!
more...
pictures Wallpaper Wallpaper, Gray
GCKaIntezar
01-30 03:15 PM
See attached. Added my comments. Please feel free to add/modify.
I suggest that keep it 1 page long only.
I suggest that keep it 1 page long only.
dresses Gray Wallpaper for Adam
saimrathi
07-05 01:52 PM
In the time it took you to write all this up, mayb you coudl have enlightened a senator or two...
I think atleast the forums section should be made restricted to contributing members. I see many newcomers (both paying and freebies) come to this site and hoping to get a quick guidence on their immigration issue. They come here becasue they know a) they will get some answer quickly b) that answer will make sense and experinced users here who have gone through similar situation will share their insights.
Those are major outcomes or results for not paying any dime.
I can understand someone's concern about asking everyone to pay certain amount. But most of us here are earning decent wages and can contribute atleast 3$ a month (or 25$ a year) for such a service.
If those members want to contribute more as many of us do then they are most welcome to do so.
In $$$ terms of the 12K + members we can retain 40% (about 5K) and each of them contributes atleast 25$ a year (one time payment) = $75,000.00
Remember this $75K is only based on basic membership fees. Any dropouts or reduced rate of conversion will be compensated by those '20$ a month' paying members (roughly by 1 as to 10).
In short, I support this idea of having majority of forums under restricted umbrella.
- PMAMP
I think atleast the forums section should be made restricted to contributing members. I see many newcomers (both paying and freebies) come to this site and hoping to get a quick guidence on their immigration issue. They come here becasue they know a) they will get some answer quickly b) that answer will make sense and experinced users here who have gone through similar situation will share their insights.
Those are major outcomes or results for not paying any dime.
I can understand someone's concern about asking everyone to pay certain amount. But most of us here are earning decent wages and can contribute atleast 3$ a month (or 25$ a year) for such a service.
If those members want to contribute more as many of us do then they are most welcome to do so.
In $$$ terms of the 12K + members we can retain 40% (about 5K) and each of them contributes atleast 25$ a year (one time payment) = $75,000.00
Remember this $75K is only based on basic membership fees. Any dropouts or reduced rate of conversion will be compensated by those '20$ a month' paying members (roughly by 1 as to 10).
In short, I support this idea of having majority of forums under restricted umbrella.
- PMAMP
more...
makeup gray wallpaper. ShaTMUSIC
ronhira
03-12 12:37 PM
I made it very clear even in past. I am more rational kinda guy. I want to know where my money is spent at high level - no details. I know its against IV policy. So I admire what IV is doing, I appreciate donor only forum but not contributing yet. May be I am wrong being too hard to be convinced. I will think over.
n.b.: Yes, I do follow all action items including calling and faxing. I think everybody does this so needless to mention.
u would think..... that everyone follow action items...... then y would we be in this mess if everyone is doing what they should......
i think greyhair, you, kumarc123 are all part of the problem...... let me re-phrase that.... u r all a disease plaguing this eb community...... everyone has their own little petty reason for not participating...... so just eat taco with u'r $25, no need to think over.... keep volunteering me for doing things for u.... i don't care much for this bickering back & forth.... so leave me alone & let me enjoy my friday....
n.b.: Yes, I do follow all action items including calling and faxing. I think everybody does this so needless to mention.
u would think..... that everyone follow action items...... then y would we be in this mess if everyone is doing what they should......
i think greyhair, you, kumarc123 are all part of the problem...... let me re-phrase that.... u r all a disease plaguing this eb community...... everyone has their own little petty reason for not participating...... so just eat taco with u'r $25, no need to think over.... keep volunteering me for doing things for u.... i don't care much for this bickering back & forth.... so leave me alone & let me enjoy my friday....
girlfriend Red and Gray Wallpaper by
sc3
10-16 06:05 PM
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people’s answers.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
hairstyles Gray antique seamless
spatial
01-18 11:46 AM
We need at least 1000 members signing up for the monthly contributions in a month. I am sure we can do that. We have 8000 members and it should be easy. Till now we have only 100 signups
Thanks IV core group. Signed up for $20/month. Please continue your efforts.
I am from Chinese community and registered IV just a couple of week ago. There was no email message to me regarding this movement, and some other registerd users may encounter the same situation. You may need to resend them. Only when I opened IV website yesterday did I know this recurring program and current situation. I am assuming IV is the only group who are pushing to get the I-485 relief for high skilled workers with advanced degree. There are MANY MANY Chinese in the same situation but I guess there might not have so many Chinese in IV. IV core group may think of some better way to reach more Chinese or other people. Basically, we are on the same boat for the same direction. Better to concentrate all resources to reach one goal. I would suggest IV to setup a seperate Chinese (and Hispanic) contribution page to diverse the culture background of IV members.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2PX91085T34540611)
In reference to:S-19881018DS353430X
Thanks IV core group. Signed up for $20/month. Please continue your efforts.
I am from Chinese community and registered IV just a couple of week ago. There was no email message to me regarding this movement, and some other registerd users may encounter the same situation. You may need to resend them. Only when I opened IV website yesterday did I know this recurring program and current situation. I am assuming IV is the only group who are pushing to get the I-485 relief for high skilled workers with advanced degree. There are MANY MANY Chinese in the same situation but I guess there might not have so many Chinese in IV. IV core group may think of some better way to reach more Chinese or other people. Basically, we are on the same boat for the same direction. Better to concentrate all resources to reach one goal. I would suggest IV to setup a seperate Chinese (and Hispanic) contribution page to diverse the culture background of IV members.
Subscription Payment Sent (ID #2PX91085T34540611)
In reference to:S-19881018DS353430X
Chris Rock
08-11 03:16 PM
If there is a non-controversial immi. law change attempt I will donate $500. I will also bring my friends and the total may exceed $2000. We all willing to donate but only if we know that there is good chance of passing.
If there is an attempt to push ideas like recapture, forget it. It will not pass in this economy. I do not want to waste my money and time on those kind of ideas.
IMHO. Not to find fault with anyone. Please do not mistake me.
If there is an attempt to push ideas like recapture, forget it. It will not pass in this economy. I do not want to waste my money and time on those kind of ideas.
IMHO. Not to find fault with anyone. Please do not mistake me.
addsf345
12-10 07:50 PM
I absolutely agree with you. I can't imagine how a person of Indian or Chinese origin can blame themselves of this retrogression. To me, it is a reflection of poor self esteem.
The bottomline is that we are here because we are needed here. We have the privilege to apply for green card in return for the work we do. Country quota does not make sense in employment based immigration. It is an unfair practice which has to stop someday.
very good point. Such low-esteemed people will start blaming their parents for retrogression. Why they gave them birth in first place. If they wouldn't have been born, no retrogression. See its EZ!
The bottomline is that we are here because we are needed here. We have the privilege to apply for green card in return for the work we do. Country quota does not make sense in employment based immigration. It is an unfair practice which has to stop someday.
very good point. Such low-esteemed people will start blaming their parents for retrogression. Why they gave them birth in first place. If they wouldn't have been born, no retrogression. See its EZ!
No comments:
Post a Comment