Openarms
07-17 10:12 AM
Dear Attorney,
I am from India and working as a Software Programmer / Analyst in a decent company and I am using AC21 with this company...and my Green Card journey started September 2002.
Labor applied (EB3) - September 2002
Labor approved - July 2003
I-140 / I-485 applied - December 2003
I_140 approved - August 2004 after responding to an RFE
Two times finger prints done and name check is done.
RFE about sons birth certificate -- responded last year.
But still the way things are going with Visa numbers and seems no light at the end of the tunnel. I am decided to change EB3 to EB2.
What would you suggest?
Where can I find the process for this switch (EB3 to EB2) ??
Is there any benefit switching from AOS to Consular Process?
Thanks and appreciate your response.
I am from India and working as a Software Programmer / Analyst in a decent company and I am using AC21 with this company...and my Green Card journey started September 2002.
Labor applied (EB3) - September 2002
Labor approved - July 2003
I-140 / I-485 applied - December 2003
I_140 approved - August 2004 after responding to an RFE
Two times finger prints done and name check is done.
RFE about sons birth certificate -- responded last year.
But still the way things are going with Visa numbers and seems no light at the end of the tunnel. I am decided to change EB3 to EB2.
What would you suggest?
Where can I find the process for this switch (EB3 to EB2) ??
Is there any benefit switching from AOS to Consular Process?
Thanks and appreciate your response.
wallpaper New Moon Trailer 3 HD (Full
Macaca
06-27 11:03 AM
From pages 36-37 of CIS Ombudsman's 2007 Annual Report to Congress (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf).
In the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 16, AR 2006 -- 02), the Ombudsman also recommended that USCIS assign visa numbers to employment-based green card applications as applicants file them. The Ombudsman continues to recommend that USCIS work with DOS to reinstate that process which existed in the early 1980s, wherein DOS issued visa numbers for both employment and family-based applications for applicants as they applied rather than as they were approved. This process would ensure that USCIS does not accept more applications than the number of visas available.
With respect to the recommendation that USCIS assign visa numbers to cases as they are received, the process the Ombudsman describes was the process in place a number of years ago. DOS, which manages overall visa number allocations, modified that process to the procedure in effect today. It is their policy to allocate visa numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached.
However, through the tri-agency meetings, DOS explained that the modification to the program occurred in the early 1980s because INS could not adhere to the requirements to return unused visa numbers immediately. The Ombudsman understands that DOS prefers that cases are reported qualified for a visa earlier than at approval. In the last several months, there have been several suggestions on how to accomplish that task, but operational concerns remain. The Ombudsman hopes that USCIS and DOS can reestablish the older program with improved processing and technology to ensure timely and accurate reporting of cases ready-to-issue and to prevent the future loss of visa numbers.
In the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 16, AR 2006 -- 02), the Ombudsman also recommended that USCIS assign visa numbers to employment-based green card applications as applicants file them. The Ombudsman continues to recommend that USCIS work with DOS to reinstate that process which existed in the early 1980s, wherein DOS issued visa numbers for both employment and family-based applications for applicants as they applied rather than as they were approved. This process would ensure that USCIS does not accept more applications than the number of visas available.
With respect to the recommendation that USCIS assign visa numbers to cases as they are received, the process the Ombudsman describes was the process in place a number of years ago. DOS, which manages overall visa number allocations, modified that process to the procedure in effect today. It is their policy to allocate visa numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached.
However, through the tri-agency meetings, DOS explained that the modification to the program occurred in the early 1980s because INS could not adhere to the requirements to return unused visa numbers immediately. The Ombudsman understands that DOS prefers that cases are reported qualified for a visa earlier than at approval. In the last several months, there have been several suggestions on how to accomplish that task, but operational concerns remain. The Ombudsman hopes that USCIS and DOS can reestablish the older program with improved processing and technology to ensure timely and accurate reporting of cases ready-to-issue and to prevent the future loss of visa numbers.
nixstor
07-03 06:34 PM
Wish the Senators a Happy Independence Day in the mail ....
Lets go guys its time to fill up those emails and fax machines .....
Please try to understand who is a senator and who is a representative. While that might not make any difference to us, it is of great importance if some one happens to get on our forums. Rep Zoe Lofgren. Not Senator Lofgren
Lets go guys its time to fill up those emails and fax machines .....
Please try to understand who is a senator and who is a representative. While that might not make any difference to us, it is of great importance if some one happens to get on our forums. Rep Zoe Lofgren. Not Senator Lofgren
2011 Transformers 3: Dark of the
vdlrao
07-25 07:01 PM
I still believe in EB2 will try to catch up current by next October.
more...
Macaca
07-04 10:14 AM
IV release has the following line in 1st para. What is one minor category?
The Department of State, in a sweeping move, announced that they would accept applications from all highly-skilled workers (sans one minor category) to a) adjust status to a permanent resident (ie apply for a Green Card, which is the final stage),
The Department of State, in a sweeping move, announced that they would accept applications from all highly-skilled workers (sans one minor category) to a) adjust status to a permanent resident (ie apply for a Green Card, which is the final stage),
ajaypr
06-24 01:24 PM
Why should we punish people who play by the rules? Charles Oppenheim, Guru of the Visa Office in the State Department, has confirmed what we warned employment-based (EB) immigrants about in our June 2009 newsletter. Not only are EB-3 numbers unavailable for the rest of the fiscal year and EB-2 numbers for persons born in China and India oversubscribed, but the situation is going to get worse, much worse. Mr. Oppenheim states that the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories are all experiencing greatly increased demand, so much so that the EB-4 category (religious workers and special immigrants) may retrogress this...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/grim-outlook-for-eb-visa-numbers.html)
This is what I received from a immigration lawyer ......
LATEST GRIM VISA BULLETIN PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED GREEN CARDS ILLUSTRATE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
There are few things that clearly demonstrate the overarching need for immigration reform than the most recent information provided by the U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin provides information on the availability of immigrant visa numbers, which dictates when foreign nationals may apply for green cards under various preference categories. The July installment of the Visa Bulletin shows complete unavailability for the vast majority of employment-based cases. Moreover, DOS projections show that demand for higher-preference green card categories could reach record levels, which would lead to backlogs in these categories where green card numbers were traditionally available in the past.
The Visa Bulletin establishes "cut-off" dates based on the demand for green cards versus the amount actually available under immigration law to each specific employment-based (and family-based) category per country for each fiscal year. As it assesses green card demand in relation to availability, the DOS may move these cut-off dates forward or back, or not at all. When the DOS believes that all immigrant visa numbers in a particular category will be exhausted (or allocated) by the end of a particular fiscal year (i.e., September 30th), it will indicate an "unavailability" of numbers (marked as "U") in the Visa Bulletin. The law prevents any single country from overuse of immigrant visa numbers during a particular fiscal year. As a result, foreign nationals born in countries from which there is significant immigration to the U.S. will typically have a separate "cut-off" date (and longer waiting times for an available green card number) in the Visa Bulletin.
An individual's priority date or "place in line" for a visa number under the employment-based categories is the date on which his or her employer files a labor certification or immigrant visa petition with the government. Individuals assigned priority dates that are earlier than the relevant preference category cut-off date noted in the Visa Bulletin are eligible to move to the last step in the employment-based green card process - either processing of an adjustment of status application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or processing of an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. When the category is "unavailable," individuals cannot file for adjustment of status or receive an immigrant visa.
In the most recent Visa Bulletin, immigrant visa numbers continue to be unavailable for all third preference (EB-3) employment-based cases. Third preference cases comprise the majority of pending employment-based green card cases, as they include positions requiring at minimum either a bachelor's degree or two years of work experience.
The July Visa Bulletin indicates that the first, second and fourth and fifth preference employment categories remain current for July. However, since demand in the second. preference category for individuals from China and India exceeds the per-country limitations, these two countries have second-preference cut-off dates of January 2000.
Overall, the July Visa Bulletin continues a substantial decrease in green card availability over the government's 2009 fiscal year. Admittedly, the retrogression, or backward movement of the cut-off dates, has been more common for employment-based green card numbers in recent years. Yet the complete exhaustion of EB-3 numbers and the sharp decline in India and China's EB-2 numbers are staggering reversals given the slow yet steady improvement in these cut-off dates during the present fiscal year.
DOS has projected that, as a result of significant filings in the EB-4 and EB-5 categories, there will be fewer numbers to supplement the EB-1 and EB-2 categories. In previous years, thousands of unused EB-4 and EB-5 numbers "spilled over" into other preference categories. However, greater-than-anticipated EB-4 and EB-5 usage, as well as greater demand in the EB-1 category itself, will create an even greater dearth of available "spill over" immigrant visa numbers in the EB-2 category.
In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories.
With respect to the EB-3 category, the DOS has stated that the worldwide, China and Mexico quotas for the EB-3 category will become available again with the start of the new fiscal year in October 2009, with a projected cut-off date of March 1, 2003 for each. However, the EB-3 India quota may have a November 1, 2001 cut-off date.
The federal quotas limiting employment-based green card numbers have remained unchanged since 1990, nearly two decades ago. Since that time, the United States has undergone unprecedented expansion, technological development, and cultural diversification, in large part through immigration. During this progress, skilled immigrants have continued one of our country's oldest and proudest traditions - the search for better lives for their families, and the desire to contribute to and to participate in our free society. Still, these quotas remain stagnant, potentially stifling the future of our nation's ability in the 21st century to prosper as an economic competitor in our world, to build a broad-based infrastructure in our localities, and to live together as families in our homes.
A quarter-century prior to 1990, major revisions to the immigration quotas sparked a historic influx of individuals to our nation of immigrants. In 1965, this broad-based increase in immigration levels across all preference categories allowed some of the world's most talented individuals to come to our shores and share their knowledge as academics, increase our economic fortunes as innovators and entrepreneurs, build vibrant communities as leaders and organizers, and inspire with their tales of strife and triumph as refugees. For many ethnicities and nationalities, the "post-65" generation was the real beginning of their stories in America.
Faced with a major financial downturn and an increasingly competitive global economy, our country cannot choose the path of closed borders and restricted immigration. At this very moment, historically restrictive nations are expanding their immigration policies and attracting valuable immigrants otherwise bound for our shores.
Absent relief provided by potential legislation, there will be substantial backlogs for nationals of India and China in all categories for many years. Careful and strategic planning for employers and foreign nationals entering into or engaged in the immigrant visa process will be necessary while we continue to advocate zealously for reform to address these antiquated quotas.
These green card backlogs illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, a long-overdue increase in employment-based green card availability would play a major role in making future generations of individuals feel welcome to come to our nation of immigrants and in spurring sorely needed innovation and prosperity.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/grim-outlook-for-eb-visa-numbers.html)
This is what I received from a immigration lawyer ......
LATEST GRIM VISA BULLETIN PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED GREEN CARDS ILLUSTRATE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
There are few things that clearly demonstrate the overarching need for immigration reform than the most recent information provided by the U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin provides information on the availability of immigrant visa numbers, which dictates when foreign nationals may apply for green cards under various preference categories. The July installment of the Visa Bulletin shows complete unavailability for the vast majority of employment-based cases. Moreover, DOS projections show that demand for higher-preference green card categories could reach record levels, which would lead to backlogs in these categories where green card numbers were traditionally available in the past.
The Visa Bulletin establishes "cut-off" dates based on the demand for green cards versus the amount actually available under immigration law to each specific employment-based (and family-based) category per country for each fiscal year. As it assesses green card demand in relation to availability, the DOS may move these cut-off dates forward or back, or not at all. When the DOS believes that all immigrant visa numbers in a particular category will be exhausted (or allocated) by the end of a particular fiscal year (i.e., September 30th), it will indicate an "unavailability" of numbers (marked as "U") in the Visa Bulletin. The law prevents any single country from overuse of immigrant visa numbers during a particular fiscal year. As a result, foreign nationals born in countries from which there is significant immigration to the U.S. will typically have a separate "cut-off" date (and longer waiting times for an available green card number) in the Visa Bulletin.
An individual's priority date or "place in line" for a visa number under the employment-based categories is the date on which his or her employer files a labor certification or immigrant visa petition with the government. Individuals assigned priority dates that are earlier than the relevant preference category cut-off date noted in the Visa Bulletin are eligible to move to the last step in the employment-based green card process - either processing of an adjustment of status application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or processing of an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. When the category is "unavailable," individuals cannot file for adjustment of status or receive an immigrant visa.
In the most recent Visa Bulletin, immigrant visa numbers continue to be unavailable for all third preference (EB-3) employment-based cases. Third preference cases comprise the majority of pending employment-based green card cases, as they include positions requiring at minimum either a bachelor's degree or two years of work experience.
The July Visa Bulletin indicates that the first, second and fourth and fifth preference employment categories remain current for July. However, since demand in the second. preference category for individuals from China and India exceeds the per-country limitations, these two countries have second-preference cut-off dates of January 2000.
Overall, the July Visa Bulletin continues a substantial decrease in green card availability over the government's 2009 fiscal year. Admittedly, the retrogression, or backward movement of the cut-off dates, has been more common for employment-based green card numbers in recent years. Yet the complete exhaustion of EB-3 numbers and the sharp decline in India and China's EB-2 numbers are staggering reversals given the slow yet steady improvement in these cut-off dates during the present fiscal year.
DOS has projected that, as a result of significant filings in the EB-4 and EB-5 categories, there will be fewer numbers to supplement the EB-1 and EB-2 categories. In previous years, thousands of unused EB-4 and EB-5 numbers "spilled over" into other preference categories. However, greater-than-anticipated EB-4 and EB-5 usage, as well as greater demand in the EB-1 category itself, will create an even greater dearth of available "spill over" immigrant visa numbers in the EB-2 category.
In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories.
With respect to the EB-3 category, the DOS has stated that the worldwide, China and Mexico quotas for the EB-3 category will become available again with the start of the new fiscal year in October 2009, with a projected cut-off date of March 1, 2003 for each. However, the EB-3 India quota may have a November 1, 2001 cut-off date.
The federal quotas limiting employment-based green card numbers have remained unchanged since 1990, nearly two decades ago. Since that time, the United States has undergone unprecedented expansion, technological development, and cultural diversification, in large part through immigration. During this progress, skilled immigrants have continued one of our country's oldest and proudest traditions - the search for better lives for their families, and the desire to contribute to and to participate in our free society. Still, these quotas remain stagnant, potentially stifling the future of our nation's ability in the 21st century to prosper as an economic competitor in our world, to build a broad-based infrastructure in our localities, and to live together as families in our homes.
A quarter-century prior to 1990, major revisions to the immigration quotas sparked a historic influx of individuals to our nation of immigrants. In 1965, this broad-based increase in immigration levels across all preference categories allowed some of the world's most talented individuals to come to our shores and share their knowledge as academics, increase our economic fortunes as innovators and entrepreneurs, build vibrant communities as leaders and organizers, and inspire with their tales of strife and triumph as refugees. For many ethnicities and nationalities, the "post-65" generation was the real beginning of their stories in America.
Faced with a major financial downturn and an increasingly competitive global economy, our country cannot choose the path of closed borders and restricted immigration. At this very moment, historically restrictive nations are expanding their immigration policies and attracting valuable immigrants otherwise bound for our shores.
Absent relief provided by potential legislation, there will be substantial backlogs for nationals of India and China in all categories for many years. Careful and strategic planning for employers and foreign nationals entering into or engaged in the immigrant visa process will be necessary while we continue to advocate zealously for reform to address these antiquated quotas.
These green card backlogs illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, a long-overdue increase in employment-based green card availability would play a major role in making future generations of individuals feel welcome to come to our nation of immigrants and in spurring sorely needed innovation and prosperity.
more...
weasley
08-16 10:16 AM
To all the wannabe americans and GC aspirants, dont forget where you came from. You are nothing but 21st century cheap labor. Just do the right thing!
Is this what anti's call us? I think most of us are not just cheap labour. Definitely paid more that the average wage levels.
Is this what anti's call us? I think most of us are not just cheap labour. Definitely paid more that the average wage levels.
2010 transformers 3 trailer music
ita
03-30 01:08 AM
Snathan,Arkbird
Please do understand MMS brought economic reforms when he was finance minister in P.V Narasimha Rao's govt.People thought country would see the same in 2004 when MMS was made PM. But Sonia Gandhi didn't give him that freedom.We didn't see any reforms in these 5 years.
Opting for MMS is like saying I won't take Sonia/Rahul but would take them if they came with a wrapper called MMS. That's what MMS is.
All those voting for MMS in the poll might as well vote for Rahul if you are bent on only congress party for communal/other reasons of your own.
MMS is not even fighting these elections.As per congress party sources Sonia doesn't want to announce Rahul as PM candidate because if congress loses then Rahul has to take the blaim(which will affect his charisma..huh our leaders run not qualifications but charisma and even urban/rural people fall for that).If congress wins MMS will be replaced with Rahul citing health or some other issue within no time.
I can understand rural masses but educated skilled people falling for the tactics of unskilled Sonia is something.No wonder she is going great.
Please do understand MMS brought economic reforms when he was finance minister in P.V Narasimha Rao's govt.People thought country would see the same in 2004 when MMS was made PM. But Sonia Gandhi didn't give him that freedom.We didn't see any reforms in these 5 years.
Opting for MMS is like saying I won't take Sonia/Rahul but would take them if they came with a wrapper called MMS. That's what MMS is.
All those voting for MMS in the poll might as well vote for Rahul if you are bent on only congress party for communal/other reasons of your own.
MMS is not even fighting these elections.As per congress party sources Sonia doesn't want to announce Rahul as PM candidate because if congress loses then Rahul has to take the blaim(which will affect his charisma..huh our leaders run not qualifications but charisma and even urban/rural people fall for that).If congress wins MMS will be replaced with Rahul citing health or some other issue within no time.
I can understand rural masses but educated skilled people falling for the tactics of unskilled Sonia is something.No wonder she is going great.
more...
prem_goel
05-29 03:45 PM
http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/cognizant-technology-solutions-private-limited-c17075.html
i agree. to add the worst, if anyone jump to cognizant from other big companies like wipro, infy etc they designate you in management level may be 5 years + exp after graduation who is unfit for management lack of very basic communication skills, half knowledged tech skill etc etc etc. Moreover people jump to cognizant for onsite to USA and eventually settle in USA. For the reason being cognizant bring the people on L visa and do EB1C quick green card processing for management. while they file perm they fabricate the responsiblities to suit the EB1c requirement.
At the same time the person who stayed longer and longer with cognizant won't get promoted that easily to management.
one more thing i like to add here, cognizant makes the world feel it is a american company but the truth Cognizant technologies is 100% indian (desi) company like other companies like infy, wipro, tcs.
23 days ago by cts 0 Votes
how do we bring this to uscis attention about L1A fraud and cognizent employees applying in eb1 catagory by producing fake doc...
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/fraud_faqs_07-13-07.pdf
Specifically this provision applies to Cognizant
Willful provision or assistance in the provision of false or inaccurate information for an application for labor certification;
i agree. to add the worst, if anyone jump to cognizant from other big companies like wipro, infy etc they designate you in management level may be 5 years + exp after graduation who is unfit for management lack of very basic communication skills, half knowledged tech skill etc etc etc. Moreover people jump to cognizant for onsite to USA and eventually settle in USA. For the reason being cognizant bring the people on L visa and do EB1C quick green card processing for management. while they file perm they fabricate the responsiblities to suit the EB1c requirement.
At the same time the person who stayed longer and longer with cognizant won't get promoted that easily to management.
one more thing i like to add here, cognizant makes the world feel it is a american company but the truth Cognizant technologies is 100% indian (desi) company like other companies like infy, wipro, tcs.
23 days ago by cts 0 Votes
how do we bring this to uscis attention about L1A fraud and cognizent employees applying in eb1 catagory by producing fake doc...
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/fraud_faqs_07-13-07.pdf
Specifically this provision applies to Cognizant
Willful provision or assistance in the provision of false or inaccurate information for an application for labor certification;
hair Trailer Music Talk / Hybrid
number30
01-18 08:14 PM
"just eating everyone's head"
To eat the some heads What if tomorrow same rules are applied for the Green card process?
To eat the some heads What if tomorrow same rules are applied for the Green card process?
more...
cbpds
01-13 06:11 PM
Will these rules apply for H1 re-stamping or is it just for H1 renewals only?
That seems to be the intention here..
That seems to be the intention here..
hot Transformers 3 Trailer
i-luv-tofu
07-21 12:16 PM
Hi,
I made a ton money. Just give me your information - name, email, phone# & I will refer you. You will be very happy & make others as well!
My desi neighbor told me about it recently. What are your experience with Amway Quickstar. Have you guys made money from it?
I made a ton money. Just give me your information - name, email, phone# & I will refer you. You will be very happy & make others as well!
My desi neighbor told me about it recently. What are your experience with Amway Quickstar. Have you guys made money from it?
more...
house TSFH FreedomFighters song
eb2_mumbai
09-25 01:27 PM
I did a quick DB search and here are my findings for 2005 & 2006 PERM data
2005 case status -certified = 6133
Prevailing wage level - level II = 2212
2006 case status certified 79782
Prevailing wage level - level II = 32283
2005 case status -certified = 6133
Prevailing wage level - level II = 2212
2006 case status certified 79782
Prevailing wage level - level II = 32283
tattoo Transformers 3 Dark of the
walking_dude
02-13 12:59 PM
On the contrary, fight for keeping the country limits will kill the movement as Indians who form more than 80% of IV will feel disillusioned and leave. Once that happens ROW can as well kiss the GC increase good bye.
Like grupak mentioned real workable solution is 1) Increase overall numbers (will benefit ROW as well as oversubscribed countries) 2) Eliminate the meaningless country quota. If there is an increase in overall numbers removal of country quotas will have very low impact on ROW. This is the fact.
But there are still some fanatics who pick up fights to keep the country quotas intact. If all of them quit IV damage will still be minimum, when compared to Indians (80% of IV) leaving. Movement will survive and thrive. How many ROW were there at DC rally? Of those present, half were on the stage. Of course I'm exaggerating, but not by much.
My challenge to ROW members who keep on harping about the split in the movement - PARTICIPATE!! Just being active on the forum and posting a hundred posts doesn't make you part of the movement. I hardly see many ROW members volunteering or accepting leadership roles. Unlike EB immigration, IV is open to everyone no matter where you were born. We don't have any 7% quota per country ! And yet, why are the active volunteers, leadership, contributors - the REAL movement- is disproportinately Indian.
Want to influence the movement, be a significant part of it. That's real democracy.
A row — also called a record or tuple—represents a single, implicitly structured data item in a table :) (I think the discussion becomes too hot, time to cool down, folks. The solution is not to remove per country limits, but to increase EB quota or at least to recapture lost visa numbers. Fight for removing per country limits will divide IV and is very unlikely to achieve something.)
Like grupak mentioned real workable solution is 1) Increase overall numbers (will benefit ROW as well as oversubscribed countries) 2) Eliminate the meaningless country quota. If there is an increase in overall numbers removal of country quotas will have very low impact on ROW. This is the fact.
But there are still some fanatics who pick up fights to keep the country quotas intact. If all of them quit IV damage will still be minimum, when compared to Indians (80% of IV) leaving. Movement will survive and thrive. How many ROW were there at DC rally? Of those present, half were on the stage. Of course I'm exaggerating, but not by much.
My challenge to ROW members who keep on harping about the split in the movement - PARTICIPATE!! Just being active on the forum and posting a hundred posts doesn't make you part of the movement. I hardly see many ROW members volunteering or accepting leadership roles. Unlike EB immigration, IV is open to everyone no matter where you were born. We don't have any 7% quota per country ! And yet, why are the active volunteers, leadership, contributors - the REAL movement- is disproportinately Indian.
Want to influence the movement, be a significant part of it. That's real democracy.
A row — also called a record or tuple—represents a single, implicitly structured data item in a table :) (I think the discussion becomes too hot, time to cool down, folks. The solution is not to remove per country limits, but to increase EB quota or at least to recapture lost visa numbers. Fight for removing per country limits will divide IV and is very unlikely to achieve something.)
more...
pictures 2011 shockwave transformers 3
gauravster
06-05 11:58 AM
EB is based on employer's need and sponsorship. Even AC21 is a deviation (in our favour) after 180 days wait. That seems fair, as permiiting you to ditch sponsoring employer soon after your filing for permanent residency could lead to fraud.
Any suggested change should not appear to be too much deviation from the original intent. Best potential seems to be for USCIS to communicate preadjudiation decion to clients without waiting for the visa number (stating that the decison letter could be used for GC benefits, such as those given by EAD & AP, until such time formal GC card is issued, which could be done when visa number becomes available). This should reduce USCIS workload as they will not have to keep on working same cases again and again with frequent requests for FP, job confirmation letters, etc.
It is not fair, as this is happening to only people from one/few nationalities. For it to be fair, it should be the case with everyone. It is only fair that once it is proved that a person with the requisite skills is needed and not available among the US citizens, these people should be allowed to move freely so that they are not exploited.
The only way to prevent fraud is to make the initial process of requirement more robust, unfortunately, there is not much that can be improved. Make the process easier and we increase fraud. Make process more difficult and we increase rejections for genuine applications and affect competitiveness. Its is fine line. delaying at any later stage based on nationality is outright unfair to those nationals and potentially could be termed racism.
Any suggested change should not appear to be too much deviation from the original intent. Best potential seems to be for USCIS to communicate preadjudiation decion to clients without waiting for the visa number (stating that the decison letter could be used for GC benefits, such as those given by EAD & AP, until such time formal GC card is issued, which could be done when visa number becomes available). This should reduce USCIS workload as they will not have to keep on working same cases again and again with frequent requests for FP, job confirmation letters, etc.
It is not fair, as this is happening to only people from one/few nationalities. For it to be fair, it should be the case with everyone. It is only fair that once it is proved that a person with the requisite skills is needed and not available among the US citizens, these people should be allowed to move freely so that they are not exploited.
The only way to prevent fraud is to make the initial process of requirement more robust, unfortunately, there is not much that can be improved. Make the process easier and we increase fraud. Make process more difficult and we increase rejections for genuine applications and affect competitiveness. Its is fine line. delaying at any later stage based on nationality is outright unfair to those nationals and potentially could be termed racism.
dresses Transformers 3 trailer 3D
oguinan
02-15 06:52 PM
No claim, just fact. Sure, you can dress up a pig, but some people will still see it for a pig.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act
Racial restrictions which previously existed were abolished in the INA, but a quota system was retained and the policy of restricting the numbers of immigrants from certain countries was continued.
A couple of points. Firstly it's usually a good idea when quoting wikipedia to include the primary reference that the quote or opinion is based on. A contentious issue like immigration reform produces lots of opinion but not all of it is based on fact. Secondly, there are shocking racial elements in the history of immigration laws in the US. Perhaps it's not that shocking when one considers the racial history of the country. Many people will be familiar with the supreme court case 1923 of Bhagat Singh Thind, a Sikh man who fought for the US in World War I. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind
The immigration laws at the time said that only Caucasians could become US citizens. The framers of the law assumed that Caucasian meant "white" while Singh Thind relied on science to prove that people of South Asian origin were also Caucasian. He lost the case with one judge stating "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences".
My point is that the immigration laws of the United States were racist until the 1952 INA act. They specifically placed quotas on people based on the color of their skin. Today's restrictions, while bizarre, unreasonable and unfair in many ways, cannot be defined as racist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act
Racial restrictions which previously existed were abolished in the INA, but a quota system was retained and the policy of restricting the numbers of immigrants from certain countries was continued.
A couple of points. Firstly it's usually a good idea when quoting wikipedia to include the primary reference that the quote or opinion is based on. A contentious issue like immigration reform produces lots of opinion but not all of it is based on fact. Secondly, there are shocking racial elements in the history of immigration laws in the US. Perhaps it's not that shocking when one considers the racial history of the country. Many people will be familiar with the supreme court case 1923 of Bhagat Singh Thind, a Sikh man who fought for the US in World War I. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind
The immigration laws at the time said that only Caucasians could become US citizens. The framers of the law assumed that Caucasian meant "white" while Singh Thind relied on science to prove that people of South Asian origin were also Caucasian. He lost the case with one judge stating "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences".
My point is that the immigration laws of the United States were racist until the 1952 INA act. They specifically placed quotas on people based on the color of their skin. Today's restrictions, while bizarre, unreasonable and unfair in many ways, cannot be defined as racist.
more...
makeup A new Transformers 3 trailer
cps060
04-04 08:39 AM
What are your options if the Canadian PR expires (go to CA get PR and come back to US) and you are still in the US ? OR say you are in your 4th/5th year of CA PR and then you then desire to go to CA, can you re-apply for the Canadian PR ? If you can, what is the procedure .... ?
Anyone who know abt this, please respond.
Anyone who know abt this, please respond.
girlfriend Transformers 3 Trailer - whoa
Marphad
04-01 12:23 PM
You Idiot,
When you keep updating this thread it keeps coming on top.
I ignored it for a few days and finally clicked to see what the Fuck is going on here.
Now it seems even moderators are joining this madness.
If infighting keeps continuing on this forum and you keep discussing non-immigration related topics here, you will never get your green card. FOCUS!
It is strange that you all want green card so that you live in USA but pretend to be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO concerned about Prime Minister of India and then start blaming each other..
No wonder NumbersUSA etc are succeding..
Pappu,
Please remove my profile and user ID from the system. I can't be part of these morons. I shall get my GC when I shall have to get it. I am not here to discuss non-GC related issues. There are many more forums to do that.
9-1-1, Fire Department, come soon!!!!!!!!!!!
When you keep updating this thread it keeps coming on top.
I ignored it for a few days and finally clicked to see what the Fuck is going on here.
Now it seems even moderators are joining this madness.
If infighting keeps continuing on this forum and you keep discussing non-immigration related topics here, you will never get your green card. FOCUS!
It is strange that you all want green card so that you live in USA but pretend to be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO concerned about Prime Minister of India and then start blaming each other..
No wonder NumbersUSA etc are succeding..
Pappu,
Please remove my profile and user ID from the system. I can't be part of these morons. I shall get my GC when I shall have to get it. I am not here to discuss non-GC related issues. There are many more forums to do that.
9-1-1, Fire Department, come soon!!!!!!!!!!!
hairstyles Transformers 3 Trailer
snathan
01-17 10:02 AM
Guys,
We cannot sit idly and watch this developing story. We need to explore the possibility. How many are you ready for the fight?
The Insightful Immigration Blog – Commentaries on Immigration Policy, Cases and Trends: NEW USCIS MEMO ON EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP FOR H-1B PETITIONS: IS IT A WAY TO KEEP CERTAIN WORKERS OUT? (http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-uscis-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
We cannot sit idly and watch this developing story. We need to explore the possibility. How many are you ready for the fight?
The Insightful Immigration Blog – Commentaries on Immigration Policy, Cases and Trends: NEW USCIS MEMO ON EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP FOR H-1B PETITIONS: IS IT A WAY TO KEEP CERTAIN WORKERS OUT? (http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-uscis-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
gcsucks
09-29 04:45 PM
You have to live two years in Canada in order to get your Canadian
Citizenship.
correction. 3 years
Citizenship.
correction. 3 years
BharatPremi
05-11 09:57 PM
buddy,
I'm already in my beloved place and with your contribution and help to Immigration Voice, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Thanks for the help.
Remember, you are doing this to potentially ditch India and to change your nationality and are going to take oath
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law..............."
My question is, hypothetically if in future if there is a war between USA and India, and hypothetically you become a US citizen, how do you conform to the oath?
Looks like my posting hit the nerve hard, i see it from your response.
I'm cultured enough not to bring your mother and father into the conversation.
Good Luck
Nandakumar,
It is pretty much proven that in your mental territory you have already ditched India and it is the USA which will take long to grant you a GC and then afterwards citizenship for which you almost represented your beggar like mentality. But that is not my concern and should not be. I have only one question to you and I hope youwould try to answer it with all possible honesty.
Q: What will be your view regarding USA's official policy to consider LTTE a terrorist organisation? ONce you will be come US citizen how will you align yourself with this policy?
I'm already in my beloved place and with your contribution and help to Immigration Voice, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Thanks for the help.
Remember, you are doing this to potentially ditch India and to change your nationality and are going to take oath
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law..............."
My question is, hypothetically if in future if there is a war between USA and India, and hypothetically you become a US citizen, how do you conform to the oath?
Looks like my posting hit the nerve hard, i see it from your response.
I'm cultured enough not to bring your mother and father into the conversation.
Good Luck
Nandakumar,
It is pretty much proven that in your mental territory you have already ditched India and it is the USA which will take long to grant you a GC and then afterwards citizenship for which you almost represented your beggar like mentality. But that is not my concern and should not be. I have only one question to you and I hope youwould try to answer it with all possible honesty.
Q: What will be your view regarding USA's official policy to consider LTTE a terrorist organisation? ONce you will be come US citizen how will you align yourself with this policy?