cjagtap
11-21 10:17 AM
Sreeanne is correct. We had one friend who died in 9-11 and his wife and kid got visa to stay back for few years until she finished her paperwork. Plan for 2-3 options for your family, and just dont depend on continuing GC.
wallpaper gogeta super saiyan 12,
karthiknv143
09-28 02:32 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ace7ec20cfbd4110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D
kshitijnt
05-09 07:15 PM
Western govts. understand only one language, that is lawsuits. Everything else is taken as sucking up to them and weakness. The Indian community in UK has been successful by means of lawsuits. Although I am a big fan and supporter of IV, I think the option of taking lawsuit off the table has hurt us more than it has helped us. Why are we paying $25K for FOIA when no information has come out of it? Instead we should file a grand lawsuit? All information we are expecting from FOIA would be forced to be shared in lawsuit anyway.
I know of one such lawsuit by Mr Rajeev Khanna in 2003, although the lawsuit failed, the speed of 485 processing increased sharply soon after. We have to make bold choices as a community.
The worldwide message of Obama administration being blamed of discrimination from a president whose community was discriminated against is not something white house would be proud of.
Although I do not expect justice in american justice system, at the very least we can send a strong message across to the larger Indian community that would be watching worldwide.
The message is getting stronger in India that Obama administration is anti India for no fault of India and we can make an all out effort using media, lawsuit and everything else in our means to settle the issue once for all.
I know of one such lawsuit by Mr Rajeev Khanna in 2003, although the lawsuit failed, the speed of 485 processing increased sharply soon after. We have to make bold choices as a community.
The worldwide message of Obama administration being blamed of discrimination from a president whose community was discriminated against is not something white house would be proud of.
Although I do not expect justice in american justice system, at the very least we can send a strong message across to the larger Indian community that would be watching worldwide.
The message is getting stronger in India that Obama administration is anti India for no fault of India and we can make an all out effort using media, lawsuit and everything else in our means to settle the issue once for all.
2011 Goku Super Saiyan Power Up. GT
amsgc
07-05 12:02 AM
Hey thx man...I had no idea about this. I will search for the post and read up on it.
Is this something that will be impacted by the Jul17th: no Labor substitution rule or are they completely different..
Retaining your PD, using a new I-140, is not the same as Labor substitution. There are several members who have successfully ported their PD, and may be able to advise you better.
Is this something that will be impacted by the Jul17th: no Labor substitution rule or are they completely different..
Retaining your PD, using a new I-140, is not the same as Labor substitution. There are several members who have successfully ported their PD, and may be able to advise you better.
more...
zoooom
07-20 10:10 AM
nice job guys
I think we should extend it till monday atleast
Yeah sure we can extend this till monday..Is somebody keeping track of people and their pledge amount?
I think we should extend it till monday atleast
Yeah sure we can extend this till monday..Is somebody keeping track of people and their pledge amount?
waitnwatch
05-23 12:27 PM
sent emails to 10 +2
more...
asdcrajnet
02-01 08:14 PM
I guess you have decided after lots of thoughts so "all the best of luck". Do you have kids? what age group if you do? just curious
Wondering how they would adjust to the tests, languages, discipline etc etc
My son is 20 months old right now. I don't think he would have the slightest idea of how US is :) . He is going to enjoy the same education system which churned me out :)
When I went last time, I checked out the schools. They are not bad as I thought. All are improving. Since my son is a US citizen, he can easily come to US for college education.
Wondering how they would adjust to the tests, languages, discipline etc etc
My son is 20 months old right now. I don't think he would have the slightest idea of how US is :) . He is going to enjoy the same education system which churned me out :)
When I went last time, I checked out the schools. They are not bad as I thought. All are improving. Since my son is a US citizen, he can easily come to US for college education.
2010 bitter about Vegeta and
zoooom
07-20 11:41 AM
Friend,
I have contributed through the link on home page.
Thanks,
Shana04
PLease do not contribute towards this fund as yet..we havent decided a mode of payment yet. We are just counting currently. We will let you guys know about the mode of payment on Monday.
I have contributed through the link on home page.
Thanks,
Shana04
PLease do not contribute towards this fund as yet..we havent decided a mode of payment yet. We are just counting currently. We will let you guys know about the mode of payment on Monday.
more...
capriol
09-12 05:06 PM
Congratulations, mine (485 and 765 for my husband) was received by TSC on July 24th but no receipt, no checks cashed nothing yet. It seems TSC is really slow in receipting the applications. My husband needs to travel abroad soon and we're anxiously waiting for the receipt...[/QUOTE]
Hello: I am in the same boat with you; received 485 at TSC on July 25, 2007 but no news of checks being cashed. In that context I have a question:
Can we start a thread only for those sending 485s to the TSC say after July 17, 2007? (This is because most postings are for the NSC).
Thanks.
Hello: I am in the same boat with you; received 485 at TSC on July 25, 2007 but no news of checks being cashed. In that context I have a question:
Can we start a thread only for those sending 485s to the TSC say after July 17, 2007? (This is because most postings are for the NSC).
Thanks.
hair Have they reached super sayian
phillyag
08-25 08:49 AM
I think you may see some action soon ...( did you have LUD on 8/21 ??)
Thanks
No I did not...the date before it was of back in 2008.
My PD is Jan-17-2006 at NSC.
Thanks
No I did not...the date before it was of back in 2008.
My PD is Jan-17-2006 at NSC.
more...
smsthss
03-28 11:28 AM
At one end it is bad that USCIS moved back Nebraska Processing date to June 08 2007 (More than one month backword) but it looks like USCIS is preparing itself to kick EB3-India ahead... It is too early to say this confidently.. But my feeling is that USCIS will keep processing dates tied to June 2007 and will kick EB3-India ahead. I am keeping my fingers crossed. Though as per murthy's web site in May bulletin EB3-India dates will remain same, I am feeling that if my guess is correct then at least from June bulletin we will see 2 patterns 1) Nebraka processing date would not move ahead for some months or will
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
How is the nebraska processing date of june 2007 linked to the visa bulletin. How can you say that looking at processing times of june 2007, we can predict that USCIS wants to push out EB3-I past jun 2003?????
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
How is the nebraska processing date of june 2007 linked to the visa bulletin. How can you say that looking at processing times of june 2007, we can predict that USCIS wants to push out EB3-I past jun 2003?????
hot Big Bang Kamehamehaquot;
rangaswamy
07-06 05:18 PM
i think this walk should be postponed out to atleast a week or two away.
Firstly i live in Santa clara myself and i had no clue about this till now (less than 24 hours away)
If we organize this the right way you can get atleast a few hundreds of people.
Wait till July 10th, see if we get media coverage with the whole gandhigiri idea.
Organize this and publicize.. start email chains .. for example cisco/oracle etc have lots of H1bs.
hang placards with the number of years you have waited/you educational qualification/ SSN tax and other taxes paid...
make a single file.. and walk about 2 miles without any slogans.
get the media to cover this event appropriately.
Anand
Firstly i live in Santa clara myself and i had no clue about this till now (less than 24 hours away)
If we organize this the right way you can get atleast a few hundreds of people.
Wait till July 10th, see if we get media coverage with the whole gandhigiri idea.
Organize this and publicize.. start email chains .. for example cisco/oracle etc have lots of H1bs.
hang placards with the number of years you have waited/you educational qualification/ SSN tax and other taxes paid...
make a single file.. and walk about 2 miles without any slogans.
get the media to cover this event appropriately.
Anand
more...
house And his new Transformation
shreekarthik
10-08 06:40 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
tattoo vegeta gt, suoer saiyan 4,
sankap
07-10 05:07 PM
So, we're back to the semantics. We need USCIS/DOL definitions of "permanent" and "legitimate"--not the definition just for educators/tenured teaching positions, as desi3933 gave. If we don't have the definitions, we can/can't assume anything/everything. Therefore, self-employment in same/similar occupation, with a *projected* cash flow, should be classified as "FT, permanent."
You are wrong, again!. ;)
I said this before, Permanent job does not mean "forever", it simple means it has no fixed end date (i.e. indefinite duration). That said, most of the Permanent Jobs are, in fact, at will jobs.
.
You are wrong, again!. ;)
I said this before, Permanent job does not mean "forever", it simple means it has no fixed end date (i.e. indefinite duration). That said, most of the Permanent Jobs are, in fact, at will jobs.
.
more...
pictures Super Vegeta Big Bang Attack
HumHongeKamiyab
12-16 05:50 PM
Appreciate your quick response.
If you cant get a copy of everything (if you ask the attorney directly you should be able ot get a copy of the complete filing) try to get:
- copy of LC or atleast the section that describes the skills
- copy of employment verification letter which describes skills
original I-140 typically stays with employer. trhey might give youa copy of the approval notice...
If you cant get a copy of everything (if you ask the attorney directly you should be able ot get a copy of the complete filing) try to get:
- copy of LC or atleast the section that describes the skills
- copy of employment verification letter which describes skills
original I-140 typically stays with employer. trhey might give youa copy of the approval notice...
dresses Super Saiyan at last!
simple1
05-01 03:21 PM
I second that. Technically they should not be. thanks MCQ, H1 and H4 is a great example
If at all they are counted they must be counted in FB2A not EB.
Honestly, I don’t care if they are counted or not. Why would 5 year old kid get counted in EB quota. I don’t get it.
as long as they are not counted in EBquota. There is no legal basis for that. Or atleast I could not find one.
I have long been of the opinion - told to me by an immigration lawyer, that when you file your I-485 when the PD is current, and your dependents file also that only the Primary counts towards the quota, dependent GC's do not count towards the employment based visa quota - so this may be a moot point as to whether or not they should be in the family or employment based lists.
Much like when you file for an H1B, the H4 for your dependants does not count agains the overall H quota.
If at all they are counted they must be counted in FB2A not EB.
Honestly, I don’t care if they are counted or not. Why would 5 year old kid get counted in EB quota. I don’t get it.
as long as they are not counted in EBquota. There is no legal basis for that. Or atleast I could not find one.
I have long been of the opinion - told to me by an immigration lawyer, that when you file your I-485 when the PD is current, and your dependents file also that only the Primary counts towards the quota, dependent GC's do not count towards the employment based visa quota - so this may be a moot point as to whether or not they should be in the family or employment based lists.
Much like when you file for an H1B, the H4 for your dependants does not count agains the overall H quota.
more...
makeup Majin Goku Super Saiyan by
nrk
09-10 01:06 PM
Hi Kalyan,
I diagree with you. If you get your GC, you plan to buy a home here and try to settle here. so in my words if you get GC then no more remittances.
People on H1 they are not sure whether to buy a home or assets here, what if the case i need to go back due to my visa etc.
Regards,
NRK
Guys,
Though i can't do it, as i am in India after my Visa Denial, some group of people should adopt Gandhiri priniciples and do a fast unto death principile before the White House while others should support all the people who are fasting.
Otherwise, our talks will never get noticed.
India got 52Billion $ in Remittances . Most of them from US. No GC means more remittances.
Think collectively and do something big.
I diagree with you. If you get your GC, you plan to buy a home here and try to settle here. so in my words if you get GC then no more remittances.
People on H1 they are not sure whether to buy a home or assets here, what if the case i need to go back due to my visa etc.
Regards,
NRK
Guys,
Though i can't do it, as i am in India after my Visa Denial, some group of people should adopt Gandhiri priniciples and do a fast unto death principile before the White House while others should support all the people who are fasting.
Otherwise, our talks will never get noticed.
India got 52Billion $ in Remittances . Most of them from US. No GC means more remittances.
Think collectively and do something big.
girlfriend Gogeta, Super Saiyan 2
ink_123
08-30 03:38 PM
Got the receipts for 485 applied on July 2nd to NSC. NSC--> TSC transfer. Notice date of 8/23.
hairstyles 100x Big Bang Kamehameha
sam2006
07-20 12:56 AM
thank you all for coming forward ....
guys lets aim 50 by tomorrow
guys lets aim 50 by tomorrow
snthampi
02-02 07:21 PM
Finally we have decided to go back to India for good. I filed my EB3 in May 2003. Its going to be another 4 years to get the green card. When I went to India for vacation last December, we liked it over there & the economy is booming. There are all sorts of discussion regarding the Economic Gap/Politics/Corruption/Cleanliness. But we like it over there. Finally I will have an option to do something interesting. In US I was very much dependent on my monthly pay check and afraid to take even the slightest risk. I am also scared to use the AC21(Hey, thats the way I am). I am working with the same company for last 10 years, kinda stagnant in the last 4 years. In India, there are lots of choices, either to work for a sw company or start some business on my own. I think I will take the business route.
May be I can go there, earn well, send my son to US for college, do green card through him & come retire in US!!!
Good Luck to everybody!!
Good luck to you! I am also thinking on going back in couple of years, not because of the GC backlog, but to live rest of my life with my extended family.
May be I can go there, earn well, send my son to US for college, do green card through him & come retire in US!!!
Good Luck to everybody!!
Good luck to you! I am also thinking on going back in couple of years, not because of the GC backlog, but to live rest of my life with my extended family.
xeixas
09-10 02:33 AM
It looks like prior to this visa bulletin, the DOS was just guessing the dates for the visa bulletins. Hopefully this behavior changes moving forward.
The best example to illustrate this is EB3-ROW:
1) Back in October 2006, this category was on 01MAY02. Very close to where it is right now.
2) DOS was not getting enough visas from USCIS, so they increased the date. By May of 2007 (Same Fiscal Year) the date was 01AUG03.
3) They still didn't get enough visas. So, by June of 2007 they moved it to 01JUN05.
4) The July 07 bulletin happened and after that everything became unavailable.
5) Then in October 2007, when the USCIS had not revised any of the July 07 applications, the DOS still didn't know what to expect, so they went back to 01AUG02.
6) Again, they didn't get enough applications, so they moved the date up. By January 08 they were in 15OCT02. And in Jun, they went all the way to 01JAN06. Then they became unavailable again.
7) In October of 2008 the date was in 01JAN05, which means that USCIS was not done with the July 07 cases and DOS didn't know what to expect. In April of this year they go back to 2003 (some I-485s that were received back in 2007 getting approved?) and then they became unavailable.
8) Now in October 2009 they are back in 2002.
With dates going from 2001 to 2005 then back to 2002 then up to 2006 then back again to 2002 (EB3-ROW in the last 3 years), it is easy to conclude that up until now, USCIS and DOS have been gambling with the dates. So the October bulletin could mean one of two things: 1) Either they have valid data now and the dates for this bulletin are realistic, which would be good because at least we would know now where we stand or 2) They are still gambling, which is neither good or bad, because with the previous history of movement in the dates, the dates could go back to 2006 again or even further...
The best example to illustrate this is EB3-ROW:
1) Back in October 2006, this category was on 01MAY02. Very close to where it is right now.
2) DOS was not getting enough visas from USCIS, so they increased the date. By May of 2007 (Same Fiscal Year) the date was 01AUG03.
3) They still didn't get enough visas. So, by June of 2007 they moved it to 01JUN05.
4) The July 07 bulletin happened and after that everything became unavailable.
5) Then in October 2007, when the USCIS had not revised any of the July 07 applications, the DOS still didn't know what to expect, so they went back to 01AUG02.
6) Again, they didn't get enough applications, so they moved the date up. By January 08 they were in 15OCT02. And in Jun, they went all the way to 01JAN06. Then they became unavailable again.
7) In October of 2008 the date was in 01JAN05, which means that USCIS was not done with the July 07 cases and DOS didn't know what to expect. In April of this year they go back to 2003 (some I-485s that were received back in 2007 getting approved?) and then they became unavailable.
8) Now in October 2009 they are back in 2002.
With dates going from 2001 to 2005 then back to 2002 then up to 2006 then back again to 2002 (EB3-ROW in the last 3 years), it is easy to conclude that up until now, USCIS and DOS have been gambling with the dates. So the October bulletin could mean one of two things: 1) Either they have valid data now and the dates for this bulletin are realistic, which would be good because at least we would know now where we stand or 2) They are still gambling, which is neither good or bad, because with the previous history of movement in the dates, the dates could go back to 2006 again or even further...
No comments:
Post a Comment