chanduv23
01-30 01:57 PM
It is just not desi compaanies, but small companies in general want to save every peenny and would like to extract more work and would not mind about ur status or legality but will just get their work done.
When you join desi company you have to deal with crap. Must be very careful while inbetween projects and make sure u don't accrue any bench time.
When you join desi company you have to deal with crap. Must be very careful while inbetween projects and make sure u don't accrue any bench time.
wallpaper love quotes and sayings to
dummgelauft
08-21 11:33 AM
Uscis has done nothing wrong.
This person who posted the new thread seems to have come in to the country without even a passport. How is that legal?
How in the world can we expect Uscis to overlook all that? Don't criticize uscis for doing their job right (for once) :)
Canadians DO NOT need a passport, even now, to enter US for PLEASURE (visiting friends, vacation etc.).
HOWEVER, they do need visa to (which means a passport) to (1) Study (2) Work (3) Start a business etc in US.
If this person was a Canadian, and had a US citizen fiancee, it should have been a simple case of gettng a K1 fiancee visa and coming to US. Getting any kind of US visa is really very simple and quick for a Canadian citizen
This person who posted the new thread seems to have come in to the country without even a passport. How is that legal?
How in the world can we expect Uscis to overlook all that? Don't criticize uscis for doing their job right (for once) :)
Canadians DO NOT need a passport, even now, to enter US for PLEASURE (visiting friends, vacation etc.).
HOWEVER, they do need visa to (which means a passport) to (1) Study (2) Work (3) Start a business etc in US.
If this person was a Canadian, and had a US citizen fiancee, it should have been a simple case of gettng a K1 fiancee visa and coming to US. Getting any kind of US visa is really very simple and quick for a Canadian citizen
javadeveloper
12-11 11:52 AM
All of us (people on L-1, F-1, J-1, H1, B1, K1 and their derivatives....) went to US consulate to request for VISA. US consulate never came to your door with a VISA.
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
2011 happy love quotes and sayings
.jpg "cute love quotes and sayings")
illinois_alum
07-16 08:15 AM
Your company should be quite rich to keep paying for EAD's and AP's you don't need, with their periodical extensions, and also for your H1 renewals....
Don't know about his company...but the attorney definitely must be quite rich with all the legal charges :D
Don't know about his company...but the attorney definitely must be quite rich with all the legal charges :D
more...
varshadas
03-07 12:45 PM
Ajay and Shekhar. Did you guys have any luck with the Congressmen?
varshadas
12-14 08:20 PM
Except for myself and Rajeev, no one joined the conference call tonight. C'mmon guys, we need some action here. We all ought to participate in these calls. Writing emails, coming and posting I am in is not going to help. We have to take actions here. I will set up a conference call on another day next week and please make sure you all attend.
Thanks,
Varsha
Thanks,
Varsha
more...
never_giveup
09-10 02:40 PM
can some one pls post the link for live telecast
thanks
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
Look for today's date and link next to it.
thanks
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
Look for today's date and link next to it.
2010 love quotes and sayings for
abracadabra102
02-09 04:45 PM
They wasted 580 EB3 India visas last year (2009).
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
A third of 7% is the upper limit for EB3 I. They can issue fewer Visas based on demand from other countries. Having said that, South Korea and Philippines got more than their fair share. There may be some reason for this.
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
A third of 7% is the upper limit for EB3 I. They can issue fewer Visas based on demand from other countries. Having said that, South Korea and Philippines got more than their fair share. There may be some reason for this.
more...
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
hair cute love quotes and sayings
abhijitp
08-03 02:25 PM
According to the person I spoke to:
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
more...
sanju
04-04 03:43 PM
You are confused on this. IEEE is against increase of H1B visas. They have never said anything about GCs. If they have, show me where.
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
That is a good question. And here is a reply to that.
Why does IEEE oppose H1? Because its members do not like competition from people whose profile match IV members i.e. people on H1B. If IEEE would be in love with green card and people waiting on green card, they would not support John Miano and his testimony. IEEE-USA's memberships consist of middle aged racist engineers who cannot keep up with the competition from mostly Asian younger workers. In the 80s and 90s, they were talking about globalization and its benefits as they got a jump start to get most of the global work. Now, other people in other nations have caught up and same globalization is causing them to pee in their pants. They understand that globalization is good for the country and the society. But what is good for the nation is not always good for each and every individual. So to save their lazy ass, they now want protection from their government, without realizing that if they get the protection they are seeking, they will not be able to enjoy that protection for very long as the companies will be compelled to look for more efficient and cost effective ways to do work.
Anyways, answer to your question is in your question i.e. How could someone be against H1b and for green card?
hot short love quotes and sayings
rimzhim
01-28 09:45 AM
The original intent of country caps was to prevent one single country from monopolizing the immigration (but this was regular unskilled immigration like family based immigration etc). But when it comes to skill based immigration it is ridiculous to maintain country caps. Everybody including the US government, USCIS and industry know that country caps in skilled category are ridiculous. That is why in H1B they don’t enforce the country caps. Because if they enforce the country caps in H1b the whole H1 program will collapse. I know the difference between h1 and green cards but when you bring people into US on H1 without country caps they should not enforce country caps on H1 to green cards skilled category. The people who are oppose immigration are using this(the country cap or rather quota) as an excuse to make things worse for immigrantion.
getting rid of country caps will hurt ppl from ROW. we need to be united, what do u say? H1B and EB visas are not related and should not be confused as related items. There are exemptions on H1b but none on EB.
The country caps ensure equal distribution of immigrants from all parts of the world and not only the countries which have poured in immigrants in the last few decades.
totally agree with this.
Have full faith in IV and I am sure they will try to keep the interests of all in mind, not just of those from one country that will benefit from ending country-caps.
getting rid of country caps will hurt ppl from ROW. we need to be united, what do u say? H1B and EB visas are not related and should not be confused as related items. There are exemptions on H1b but none on EB.
The country caps ensure equal distribution of immigrants from all parts of the world and not only the countries which have poured in immigrants in the last few decades.
totally agree with this.
Have full faith in IV and I am sure they will try to keep the interests of all in mind, not just of those from one country that will benefit from ending country-caps.
more...
house love quotes and sayings for
rajuseattle
07-14 07:41 PM
ajthakur,
competant attorneys knows the language of the AC-21 draft in your situation and they will be able to anser RFEs in an appropriate manner.
If you feel u can simply send the EVL letter yourself and not disclose any facts about the change in employment, then good luck.
This is not at all trying to scare you, but u r almost on the verge of being approved, why taking chances on USCIS.
Lot of the times immigration cases are successful due to good representation and that's where competent attorneys scored well comapre to average attorney.
I have suffered myself a lot due to incompetent attorney who almost killed my labor certification process while in BEC by not responding to the DoL 45- day letter in time.
Afterall its upto you, if you are confident you can answer RFE, go ahead and do it, noone on this IV forum is forcing you to hire any attorney services.
competant attorneys knows the language of the AC-21 draft in your situation and they will be able to anser RFEs in an appropriate manner.
If you feel u can simply send the EVL letter yourself and not disclose any facts about the change in employment, then good luck.
This is not at all trying to scare you, but u r almost on the verge of being approved, why taking chances on USCIS.
Lot of the times immigration cases are successful due to good representation and that's where competent attorneys scored well comapre to average attorney.
I have suffered myself a lot due to incompetent attorney who almost killed my labor certification process while in BEC by not responding to the DoL 45- day letter in time.
Afterall its upto you, if you are confident you can answer RFE, go ahead and do it, noone on this IV forum is forcing you to hire any attorney services.
tattoo emo love quotes and sayings
vandanaverdia
09-11 12:54 PM
The road to GC is not easy...
Support IV & come to DC!!
Lets get together & support a common cause...
Go IV!!!!
Support IV & come to DC!!
Lets get together & support a common cause...
Go IV!!!!
more...
pictures sad love quotes and sayings
tawlibann
03-18 06:00 PM
Sorry if this is offtopic but can someone explain to me who banned me and why? I didn't write anything offensive or abusive, and I didn't insult anybody. I was just discussing the issues I read in another forum.
If it is my handle, you don't like, well my name is Tawlibann Foggs (it is Celtic name, and quite rare but I like it). My friends call me Taliban jokingly (I know it may not be funny to all of you, and I didn't like it at first, but I can't stop people), so that's why the handle was 'taliban'. I hope that answers your questions, and I mean no harm to anyone.
I thought this forum was open to everybody to express their opinions and discuss relevant issues without insulting others. If you're going to keep banning me, please just let me know that I'm not welcome, and I'll leave. I thought Immigration Voice and its forum was open to all EB immigrants. I was even intending to become a contributing member, but now I'm kind of lost. Am I not supposed to post here? Is there something I missed?
If it is my handle, you don't like, well my name is Tawlibann Foggs (it is Celtic name, and quite rare but I like it). My friends call me Taliban jokingly (I know it may not be funny to all of you, and I didn't like it at first, but I can't stop people), so that's why the handle was 'taliban'. I hope that answers your questions, and I mean no harm to anyone.
I thought this forum was open to everybody to express their opinions and discuss relevant issues without insulting others. If you're going to keep banning me, please just let me know that I'm not welcome, and I'll leave. I thought Immigration Voice and its forum was open to all EB immigrants. I was even intending to become a contributing member, but now I'm kind of lost. Am I not supposed to post here? Is there something I missed?
dresses cute love quotes sayings,
rajuseattle
07-14 05:31 PM
ajthakur,
You should have wait for at least 6 months before switching jobs.
You can talk to the attorney who can give you some advice on AC-21.
Per Ac-21 provisions you r very safe if you switch jobs after 180 days, even without letting USCIS know about it. Yours is a different situation as you switched job just 1 month after filing I-485, and it could be difficult for any attorney to make AC-21 arguments in your favour.
Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.
Please cosult with a competent immigration attorney and try to make argument using the AC-21...thats your last hope to save your PD.
USCIS will know about your job switching as they have all the information when you transfer your H1B visa and received 3 yr extention. Be truthful here and state that you intent to be employed with the original sponsor, but due to circumstances you were forced to switch the job and your new employer is willing to sponsor your employment and you are in legal status while I-485 is pending since July 2007.
Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.
You should have wait for at least 6 months before switching jobs.
You can talk to the attorney who can give you some advice on AC-21.
Per Ac-21 provisions you r very safe if you switch jobs after 180 days, even without letting USCIS know about it. Yours is a different situation as you switched job just 1 month after filing I-485, and it could be difficult for any attorney to make AC-21 arguments in your favour.
Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.
Please cosult with a competent immigration attorney and try to make argument using the AC-21...thats your last hope to save your PD.
USCIS will know about your job switching as they have all the information when you transfer your H1B visa and received 3 yr extention. Be truthful here and state that you intent to be employed with the original sponsor, but due to circumstances you were forced to switch the job and your new employer is willing to sponsor your employment and you are in legal status while I-485 is pending since July 2007.
Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.
more...
makeup love quotes and sayings for
anilsal
12-10 09:48 AM
A movement of 15 days in EB3-I is a good movement. Big movement in EB3 without law change is not possible.
You are correct. In fact, without some legislation or a bill for recapture getting passed, large movement in dates in not possible.
You are correct. In fact, without some legislation or a bill for recapture getting passed, large movement in dates in not possible.
girlfriend love quotes and sayings for
gimme_GC2006
07-12 05:22 PM
All right I am current again..exactly after 2 years
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
So I am having the butterflies in my tummy with nostalgia of my nail biting thriller during 2008 July-Sep bulletin, where I got royally screwed.
mwuahhhaaaa...c'mon..come to papa now :D:D
tick..tock..tick..tock :rolleyes:
hairstyles love quotes and sayings about
pappu
07-02 10:36 PM
We need to run a media drive from tomorrow with full speed so that we can communicate this absurd action by DOS and USCIS.
How can they give 18K greencards in one day? and 60K greencards in one month. Where was the lack of manpower and heavy workload excuses?
Why did they make the dates current in the first place when they knew they cannot handle so many applications? There are so many questions that need answers.
This system is broken and needs to be fixed. Let us communicate to all our friends who are affected with this tragedy today so that we can all unite and make efforts to have our voices heard.
IV release
http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
How can they give 18K greencards in one day? and 60K greencards in one month. Where was the lack of manpower and heavy workload excuses?
Why did they make the dates current in the first place when they knew they cannot handle so many applications? There are so many questions that need answers.
This system is broken and needs to be fixed. Let us communicate to all our friends who are affected with this tragedy today so that we can all unite and make efforts to have our voices heard.
IV release
http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
srkamath
07-03 10:18 PM
Country-wise caps are clearly not a sensible way to retain the best talent in the world in the US. The purpose of the EB visa program is to get the best contributors to the US economy mostly when and where Americans are not available. The EB immigration system is not a socialist entitlement program for prospective immigrants from China, India or the ROW. The program must be fair to the US, fairness (or lack thereof) to all qualified prospective immigrants is a consequence not the intent of the law.
The sad truth is that, no matter how sensible that argument is - a large section of people will not understand that or will choose to distort it out of fears such as losing their perceived entitlement - simply put many will simply refuse to buy it. Therefore, if we wish to pursue this issue we need a middle ground proposal.
Here's an amendment that strikes middle ground ......
For a given year, to estimate the demand, first calculate from the last three years data, the average number (percentage) of visas charged to each country under EB1, 2 & 3. For any country that was charged more than an average of 7% of the visas in the last three years, limit the visa allocation in the first quarter to 7%. In the second and third quarters, limit the allocation to the actual average percentage for the last three years. In the last quarter, remove all such country-wise limits to ensure maximum usage.
I'm no legislative expert, but after reading the text of the law at http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe (chapter 1 - Selection System) , it is my understanding that the law already permits something very close what i have proposed. It is up to the executive branch to change their policy here - this seems like a classic case for an Executive Order.
Any thoughts / comments?
The sad truth is that, no matter how sensible that argument is - a large section of people will not understand that or will choose to distort it out of fears such as losing their perceived entitlement - simply put many will simply refuse to buy it. Therefore, if we wish to pursue this issue we need a middle ground proposal.
Here's an amendment that strikes middle ground ......
For a given year, to estimate the demand, first calculate from the last three years data, the average number (percentage) of visas charged to each country under EB1, 2 & 3. For any country that was charged more than an average of 7% of the visas in the last three years, limit the visa allocation in the first quarter to 7%. In the second and third quarters, limit the allocation to the actual average percentage for the last three years. In the last quarter, remove all such country-wise limits to ensure maximum usage.
I'm no legislative expert, but after reading the text of the law at http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe (chapter 1 - Selection System) , it is my understanding that the law already permits something very close what i have proposed. It is up to the executive branch to change their policy here - this seems like a classic case for an Executive Order.
Any thoughts / comments?
mihird
07-09 03:58 PM
I dont think legally you can sue someone, because they have worked harder.
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can present in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
It took them 6 months to consume 66K visas and then another 15 days to process another 66K.
It is reasonably safe to assume, either correct procedures were not followed in the past or were not followed in the last 2 weeks. Only a judge can order USCIS to elobarte on what processes were followed in the last 2 weeks (FBI name checks and security clearances skipped...etc. etc.)
They made people expend (or rather waste) millions of dollars in preparing the paperwork...and then changed the process abruptly on July 2nd..with no advance notice...they could have published a guidance in the July bulletin itself of this possibly happening, if not published a guidance sometime later...
There is no doubt, that the entire chain of events were premeditated...and the communication mix-up as claimed by Condoleezza Rice on TV was a deliberate one..
I doubt if this will all fly in court...they certainly owe the millions of wasted dollars and thousands of wasted hours in preparing the paperwork, back to the applicants/attornies...at the least...
Keep in mind, the AILF rarely files a law suit against the government, and most of their law suits have had favorable outcomes..
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can present in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
It took them 6 months to consume 66K visas and then another 15 days to process another 66K.
It is reasonably safe to assume, either correct procedures were not followed in the past or were not followed in the last 2 weeks. Only a judge can order USCIS to elobarte on what processes were followed in the last 2 weeks (FBI name checks and security clearances skipped...etc. etc.)
They made people expend (or rather waste) millions of dollars in preparing the paperwork...and then changed the process abruptly on July 2nd..with no advance notice...they could have published a guidance in the July bulletin itself of this possibly happening, if not published a guidance sometime later...
There is no doubt, that the entire chain of events were premeditated...and the communication mix-up as claimed by Condoleezza Rice on TV was a deliberate one..
I doubt if this will all fly in court...they certainly owe the millions of wasted dollars and thousands of wasted hours in preparing the paperwork, back to the applicants/attornies...at the least...
Keep in mind, the AILF rarely files a law suit against the government, and most of their law suits have had favorable outcomes..
No comments:
Post a Comment