Wish_Good
05-30 12:21 PM
Just now I sent a very strong email protesting AF behaviour/treatment
to Indian Passengers.
to Indian Passengers.
wallpaper Suit Gundam 00 Wallpaper; gundam 00 wallpapers. Suit Gundam 00 Wallpaper
Caliber
06-11 08:31 AM
the world is not fair, I am willing to fight my part to make it fair and just for all.
Kartik, as long as we, the EB3 do not come forward and collect huge amount for lobbying, we will continue to lurk here for many more years.
Unfortunately the sad part is, whatever lobbying is done actually helped only EB2 I, may be due to a wrong notion by USCIS that all Hi-tech immigrants are EB2. This could be a fact as there are thousands of 245 cases that fell into EB3.
Another bad thing was that USCIS release this VB yesterday which means one extra day to CRY.
I do not blame any one, but ourselves. We do not want to spend money and hence dying in this process. No solution, but cry at every VB day.
Kartik, as long as we, the EB3 do not come forward and collect huge amount for lobbying, we will continue to lurk here for many more years.
Unfortunately the sad part is, whatever lobbying is done actually helped only EB2 I, may be due to a wrong notion by USCIS that all Hi-tech immigrants are EB2. This could be a fact as there are thousands of 245 cases that fell into EB3.
Another bad thing was that USCIS release this VB yesterday which means one extra day to CRY.
I do not blame any one, but ourselves. We do not want to spend money and hence dying in this process. No solution, but cry at every VB day.
Hermione
09-27 01:49 PM
That is actually not true. Approval will not become quicker if speed is not improved.
The ONLY reason there were a LOT of approvals in May through Sept was that there was a sudden jump in PDs that allowed a LOT of people whose applications had been approved pending visa availability could finally be assigned a number. USCIS didn't all of a sudden dramatically increase their productivity, there were just a lot of people waiting for that number.
Of course, Numbers matters too - but more numbers without extra speed will get us nowhere. If that were to happen, there would just be more visas wasted each year that we'd be asking for recapture
But I do agree that "skilled and diversity" makes no sense.
Could you please translate this into layman's English? What you appear to be saying is that speed (CIS efficiency) is more important than number (quotas), but your expample confirms that cases are stuck because of number unavailability (quotas), not because of CIS inefficiency. You got your own green card in three months, did not you? That tells me that CIS darn well capable of processing applications in a timely manner.
The ONLY reason there were a LOT of approvals in May through Sept was that there was a sudden jump in PDs that allowed a LOT of people whose applications had been approved pending visa availability could finally be assigned a number. USCIS didn't all of a sudden dramatically increase their productivity, there were just a lot of people waiting for that number.
Of course, Numbers matters too - but more numbers without extra speed will get us nowhere. If that were to happen, there would just be more visas wasted each year that we'd be asking for recapture
But I do agree that "skilled and diversity" makes no sense.
Could you please translate this into layman's English? What you appear to be saying is that speed (CIS efficiency) is more important than number (quotas), but your expample confirms that cases are stuck because of number unavailability (quotas), not because of CIS inefficiency. You got your own green card in three months, did not you? That tells me that CIS darn well capable of processing applications in a timely manner.
2011 Gundam 00 Raiser
psaxena
10-01 12:10 PM
Nope I didn't mention anything about being the proud donor etc. in my first post. You are the one who wrote the comment to my post in the most indecent and disrespectful way, bringing the point of donor. For your reference I have pasted the first comment that you made on my post also for you convenience I have highlighted it as well. Also keep replying as I love to kick your rear again and again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by psaxena
I bought my own private jet and I travel in that only. On top of it , to keep an eye on my own private jet's schedule(which flies only for me) I got website developed as well.
Also, I got 5 strippers (sorry air hostess) to entertain me during the flight. Guys if you want to fly in my Private jet and avail all the facilities on board please call my dreamland office and speak to Ms. Fantasy and book up a ticket to neverland.
Adios
Quote:
Originally Posted by arunmurthy
Guys like you are a disgrace.
When a serious discussion is going on, do you really have to post??
Just shut up and donate to IV by selling your jet!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dude you brought up the point of being a proud donor. Nobody gives a hoot if you donate or not.
You are doing it for yourself and not for humanity.
Get it right!
And the way you behave shows what kind of background you have (UP/Bihar)
So just grow up and learn how to respect others!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by psaxena
I bought my own private jet and I travel in that only. On top of it , to keep an eye on my own private jet's schedule(which flies only for me) I got website developed as well.
Also, I got 5 strippers (sorry air hostess) to entertain me during the flight. Guys if you want to fly in my Private jet and avail all the facilities on board please call my dreamland office and speak to Ms. Fantasy and book up a ticket to neverland.
Adios
Quote:
Originally Posted by arunmurthy
Guys like you are a disgrace.
When a serious discussion is going on, do you really have to post??
Just shut up and donate to IV by selling your jet!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dude you brought up the point of being a proud donor. Nobody gives a hoot if you donate or not.
You are doing it for yourself and not for humanity.
Get it right!
And the way you behave shows what kind of background you have (UP/Bihar)
So just grow up and learn how to respect others!!!
more...
gemini23
08-03 03:13 PM
I dont know about others but for me Fragomen has been very responsive. I think its probably your employer that is dictating how the attorney should deal with their employees. I work for a big fortune 50 company and I always got email responses from my fragomen attorney within 24 hours...that works for me.
Some times employers dont want their employees to get eads too soon, as they might jump the ship using ac21, and hence takes the help attorney to delay the filing, which works well for some attorneys too.
my 2cents.
Some times employers dont want their employees to get eads too soon, as they might jump the ship using ac21, and hence takes the help attorney to delay the filing, which works well for some attorneys too.
my 2cents.
gc28262
03-20 07:31 PM
OP was never out of status as he was working for one of the employers on proper work authorization all the time. The only question is whether employer X canceled H1 ?Even if they didn't, it is employer's problem not OP's.
Anyways it is better to respond to this query through a lawyer.
Anyways it is better to respond to this query through a lawyer.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
03-05 04:07 PM
http://www.jingchenglaw.com/frontend/successstories/I_140_01.jpg
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
also in the 485 form, please take a look on the right hand side where it says uscis use only....thats where they have "country chargeable," and I guess they are right that they make the determination during adjudication.
This is confusing. In that case how do they make ROW current or PDs way ahead of India? In other words, how do they know without touching a file that PD of a ROW file is current and is eligible to get GC!
Think about the flip side. If this is true, then once they preadjuridict all cases, thousands of ROW cases will immediately become eligible to get GC and India / China will not move for year(s)!
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
also in the 485 form, please take a look on the right hand side where it says uscis use only....thats where they have "country chargeable," and I guess they are right that they make the determination during adjudication.
This is confusing. In that case how do they make ROW current or PDs way ahead of India? In other words, how do they know without touching a file that PD of a ROW file is current and is eligible to get GC!
Think about the flip side. If this is true, then once they preadjuridict all cases, thousands of ROW cases will immediately become eligible to get GC and India / China will not move for year(s)!
2010 GUNDAM00 Season2 26 ตอนจบ By
chanduv23
10-15 09:57 AM
Mea Culpa. I'm the culprit here :).
I requested for the meeting close to weekend. It turned out some other new chapters were also in the same boat. Core put us together in the same call, which helped, as our issues are more or less the same. Timing was inconvenient for cagedcactus due to personal reasons. Yet he participated (which we should appreciate). Some veterans also nearly-missed the call as everything got finalized a few hours before the call.
Regarding nearby states, we can try to accomodate Indiana (IN) and Ohio (OH), and my be Wisconsin (WI), the states that border Michigan, that is if they already don't have an active chapter.
U guys look extra charged .. way to go, good luck
I requested for the meeting close to weekend. It turned out some other new chapters were also in the same boat. Core put us together in the same call, which helped, as our issues are more or less the same. Timing was inconvenient for cagedcactus due to personal reasons. Yet he participated (which we should appreciate). Some veterans also nearly-missed the call as everything got finalized a few hours before the call.
Regarding nearby states, we can try to accomodate Indiana (IN) and Ohio (OH), and my be Wisconsin (WI), the states that border Michigan, that is if they already don't have an active chapter.
U guys look extra charged .. way to go, good luck
more...
ianlock
09-17 04:23 PM
hang on.. but they are...as retroed as the rest of them...ROW and philpines are both AUG 02 for EB3.... ROW EB3 has been retroed for months and months.
that doesnt make any sence to me.?
so the ROW countries have no per county limits??? then why are they retroed??????
that doesnt make any sence to me.?
so the ROW countries have no per county limits??? then why are they retroed??????
hair Suit Gundam 00 Wallpaper
malibuguy007
04-26 01:18 AM
I just emailed 8 friends asking for contributions and sent them the link to this thread. Let us try and get 2 extra people along with each one of us.
more...
jayleno
06-30 04:49 PM
This is very interesting. Please keep us posted on future developments like when you get your card. Lot of us have been debating about RD and ND. The fact that you have got an RFE on your 485 application is also interesting. It could really be your GC.
Have you recently applied for you EAD? They might have approved your EAD and updated your status for the 485 app by mistake. Just trying to over analyze the situation :). Anyway keep your fingers crossed till you get your physical cards.
Earlier today I got an email from USCIS that said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On June 29, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Then by the evening my I-485 said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On June 30, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Problem My EB2 PD is not current, is this a system glitch or did I get GC?
Here are my stats
PD 2007/ India
Arrived on H4 Sept 1997
Change to F1 Jan 1999
Change to H1B Sept 2004
Applied extension Sept 2007
Applied for PERM June 2007
PERM Approved June 2007 EB-2 (approval in 4 days)
filed I-140, I-485 in the July madness
I-140 RFE March 2008
I-140 Approved May 2008
I-485 RFE May 2008
I-485 Approved June 30, 2008
Have you recently applied for you EAD? They might have approved your EAD and updated your status for the 485 app by mistake. Just trying to over analyze the situation :). Anyway keep your fingers crossed till you get your physical cards.
Earlier today I got an email from USCIS that said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On June 29, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Then by the evening my I-485 said
"Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On June 30, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register."
Problem My EB2 PD is not current, is this a system glitch or did I get GC?
Here are my stats
PD 2007/ India
Arrived on H4 Sept 1997
Change to F1 Jan 1999
Change to H1B Sept 2004
Applied extension Sept 2007
Applied for PERM June 2007
PERM Approved June 2007 EB-2 (approval in 4 days)
filed I-140, I-485 in the July madness
I-140 RFE March 2008
I-140 Approved May 2008
I-485 RFE May 2008
I-485 Approved June 30, 2008
hot Gundam 00 Wallpaper by
GCard_Dream
03-21 02:48 PM
... but only after they have issued a greencard to each one of us. :D
I propose to dissolve USCIS. No matter what USCIS failed in all respects of appeasing
1. Indians
2. Chinese
3. Mexicans
4. ROW
5. Philippines
6. EB1
7. EB2 - NOW
8. EB2
9. EB3
10. EB4
11. EB5
I propose to dissolve USCIS. No matter what USCIS failed in all respects of appeasing
1. Indians
2. Chinese
3. Mexicans
4. ROW
5. Philippines
6. EB1
7. EB2 - NOW
8. EB2
9. EB3
10. EB4
11. EB5
more...
house wallpaper gundam. free
kartikiran
06-15 04:35 PM
Eb3 v/s Eb2 is a nonsensical nonproductive meaningless argument. If you actively participate in speaking with the lawmakers, you would know the bogus nature of this squabble. Each one of us has a choice. We can continue with this pissing contest or we could do something to fix the backlogs. We all understand the frustration and anxiety due to the long delays. It is easy to be drawn in meaningless eb2 v/s eb3 quarrel in the virtual world when one is not privy to how things work in the real world.
If you feel compelled to engage in infra and trivia, please utilize your energy for your benefit by understanding the larger debate so that each one of us can employ our energy to fix our issues. Please use your energy in a positive manner. There is no point of this discussion. It is easy to write/post arguments just to support your own application/position in line. Anybody can do that. But such narrow minded approach will not help even a single soul on this planet, including yours. For those of you who want to continue with this bickering, you can do so at the expense of your own time. And when you engage in such arguments, please remember that whatever you all write or post about this nonsensical back-and-forth is not helping you or your family. But if you are sincere and care for this issue, if you truly care for your issue, then please consider participating actively to meet with the lawmakers to make our voices heard.
Members who actively engage in the advocacy effort know when we are saying. For example � talk to nearly 125 IV members who lead the lobby day in DC during the past week. They will tell you the bogus nature of this Eb2 v/s Eb2. Stop wasting your energy arguing thing which have no meaning. Please utilize your energy in finding fix for the backlogs because there will never ever be a bill/set of provisions only for Eb3 or only for Eb2.
Understood every point of yours & I stand by what you said except for the language as it could have been a bit better. Regarding EB3 or EB2, maybe IV should work attaching a provision as part of its CIR work, which makes USCIS determine whether a candidate is in EB3 or EB2 based on the PERM & 140 instead of letting companies & attorneys mention it. If this happens the process will be much better as USCIS controls the categories & applicants do not need to beg a company to throw them into an EB2 basket or EB3 basket. Also, applicants can have certain amount of freedom from the companies.
When a process is flawed, there is always room for abuse. Of course, the abuse might be minimal, but when we see people with masters & 15 years of experience toiling in EB3 category it pains my heart. It is a fact there could be lesser qualified inidividuals who are in EB2 category, but the companies have managed to use these to hold the employees as hostage.
Hopefully USCIS someday understands this and takes control of assigning applicants into categories than asking company & attorney to mention.
Just sharing my two cents. Also, frustrations from EB3 should be tolerated by IV members, instead of beating them with "red dots". Because if we request members to put their time and effort then it would be mostly EB3 members as they are the "worst" affected. I am sure every year between july-sept most of EB2 members will do bulletin-watching & there is nothing wrong in it.
If you feel compelled to engage in infra and trivia, please utilize your energy for your benefit by understanding the larger debate so that each one of us can employ our energy to fix our issues. Please use your energy in a positive manner. There is no point of this discussion. It is easy to write/post arguments just to support your own application/position in line. Anybody can do that. But such narrow minded approach will not help even a single soul on this planet, including yours. For those of you who want to continue with this bickering, you can do so at the expense of your own time. And when you engage in such arguments, please remember that whatever you all write or post about this nonsensical back-and-forth is not helping you or your family. But if you are sincere and care for this issue, if you truly care for your issue, then please consider participating actively to meet with the lawmakers to make our voices heard.
Members who actively engage in the advocacy effort know when we are saying. For example � talk to nearly 125 IV members who lead the lobby day in DC during the past week. They will tell you the bogus nature of this Eb2 v/s Eb2. Stop wasting your energy arguing thing which have no meaning. Please utilize your energy in finding fix for the backlogs because there will never ever be a bill/set of provisions only for Eb3 or only for Eb2.
Understood every point of yours & I stand by what you said except for the language as it could have been a bit better. Regarding EB3 or EB2, maybe IV should work attaching a provision as part of its CIR work, which makes USCIS determine whether a candidate is in EB3 or EB2 based on the PERM & 140 instead of letting companies & attorneys mention it. If this happens the process will be much better as USCIS controls the categories & applicants do not need to beg a company to throw them into an EB2 basket or EB3 basket. Also, applicants can have certain amount of freedom from the companies.
When a process is flawed, there is always room for abuse. Of course, the abuse might be minimal, but when we see people with masters & 15 years of experience toiling in EB3 category it pains my heart. It is a fact there could be lesser qualified inidividuals who are in EB2 category, but the companies have managed to use these to hold the employees as hostage.
Hopefully USCIS someday understands this and takes control of assigning applicants into categories than asking company & attorney to mention.
Just sharing my two cents. Also, frustrations from EB3 should be tolerated by IV members, instead of beating them with "red dots". Because if we request members to put their time and effort then it would be mostly EB3 members as they are the "worst" affected. I am sure every year between july-sept most of EB2 members will do bulletin-watching & there is nothing wrong in it.
tattoo gundam 00 wallpapers. Gundam 00 wallpaper 5 Mobile
amitjoey
05-21 01:54 PM
Please email and also send out letters.
There is also a feature for the media -That lets you email reporters 5 at a time. It sorts through and picks the most prominent publications based on your zip code.
It is simple, fields can stay populated if you choose so, all you have to do is click.
There is also a feature for the media -That lets you email reporters 5 at a time. It sorts through and picks the most prominent publications based on your zip code.
It is simple, fields can stay populated if you choose so, all you have to do is click.
more...
pictures Gundam 00 - Gundam
logiclife
09-25 12:04 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED.
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED.
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
dresses New Gundam 00 Wallpaper
rag_1970
06-24 01:59 PM
Hi ! My H1B with current employer is valid till March 2010. I got a new job offer and employer is willing to transfer my H1B. I have submitted all the documents.
The attorney of the new employer says, that I can start working with new company once USCIS receives my application. Is it safe? She says Fedex tracking no. is enough. Did any one face this situation? pl.respond. She got instructions from the employer to apply in regular process.How much time it will take to get a receipt no. in regular process?
The attorney of the new employer says, that I can start working with new company once USCIS receives my application. Is it safe? She says Fedex tracking no. is enough. Did any one face this situation? pl.respond. She got instructions from the employer to apply in regular process.How much time it will take to get a receipt no. in regular process?
more...
makeup Suit Gundam 00 - Gundam
__THISRES__104153.jpg "wallpaper gundam. free")
cnag
07-10 11:16 AM
Is a 3 year Bachelor degree + 2-year Master degree (STEM - Foreign University) + 5 year US IT experience qualify under SKIL bill. Can anyone please clarify ?
girlfriend Suit Gundam 00 Wallpaper
amitjoey
05-27 05:48 PM
Thank you rajttu, nomad for your contributions.
Total $8,400
Total $8,400
hairstyles Gundam+00+quanta+burst+
smanikandan
04-25 06:33 PM
Great Job, IV !!! Contribution $100 thru Paypal.
Receipt Number: 3661-3435-0042-4542
Continue the good work !!! Thanks :D
Receipt Number: 3661-3435-0042-4542
Continue the good work !!! Thanks :D
pathmaker
09-20 01:19 PM
Any thoughts on organizing rallys state capitals ?
needhelp!
03-06 05:16 PM
Section 6: Time Limits for Agencies to Act on Requests Section 6 of the Open Government Act has two provisions that address time limits for complying with FOIA requests, and the consequences of failing to do so. Significantly, this section does not take effect until one year after the date of enactment and will apply to FOIA requests �filed on or after that effective date.� Accordingly, agencies have until December 31, 2008 to take any necessary steps to prepare for the implementation of this Section.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
No comments:
Post a Comment