sparky_jones
03-04 12:29 PM
My application is filed with Texas Service Centre.
That's interesting. This is the first TSC case of pre-adjudication activity for EB3-I with PD similar to yours that I have noticed in the forums.
That's interesting. This is the first TSC case of pre-adjudication activity for EB3-I with PD similar to yours that I have noticed in the forums.
wallpaper wallpaper vintage flower
$eeGrEeN
09-10 12:40 PM
request to all help increase my rep. points////
arnab221
06-25 12:01 PM
Got approved just now. Labor filed EB3 on 23rd Feb Govt job. Thinsg are moving ... Best of luck to all !!!
-M
Dude ,
You owe us all a plate of Panipuri each .:D CONGRATS once again . Enjoy your day .
-M
Dude ,
You owe us all a plate of Panipuri each .:D CONGRATS once again . Enjoy your day .
2011 floral backgrounds for tumblr.
apet2007
03-10 11:18 PM
You must be a permanent resident to open or own an S-Corp. An LLC is the best way to go and if you are not engaged in actual sale of goods, you can register this LLC in Nevada and pay no corporate taxes. I've done it. All income then passes through your own filing. Have a CPA and I strongly recommend you do this. Registering a NV LLC only costs $195 annually. Go to incorpservices.com and it will walk you through.
more...
jonty_11
07-05 05:06 PM
called CA senators, as I am outa state they said they are not entertaining outa state calls at this point...huh!!
They only do this when call volume is high....Does this mean at least CAlif guys are calling..
Go IV go@@
They only do this when call volume is high....Does this mean at least CAlif guys are calling..
Go IV go@@
Ramba
10-21 04:07 PM
How can USCIS can judge the legitimacy of the intent of the applicant - it can be very subjective and depend a lot on the way visa officer interprets. For example how long after six months is considered a "long wait"?
There will be always some descretionary powers to visa adjudicators but AC21 guidelines and associated memo's are detailed enough to give a clear explanation that once I485 is pending for six months, the applicants underlying I140 is valid (if its revoked or if it is not yet approved) and I485 continue to be processed - as long as the new job is same or similar. One thing that is not clear is the definitions of this same/similar job thing. We all expected some hiccups based on this interpretation. But the rejection of I485 (and subsequent MTR) based on I140 revocation is something that came out of blue and the number of these cases makes it really scary.
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
There will be always some descretionary powers to visa adjudicators but AC21 guidelines and associated memo's are detailed enough to give a clear explanation that once I485 is pending for six months, the applicants underlying I140 is valid (if its revoked or if it is not yet approved) and I485 continue to be processed - as long as the new job is same or similar. One thing that is not clear is the definitions of this same/similar job thing. We all expected some hiccups based on this interpretation. But the rejection of I485 (and subsequent MTR) based on I140 revocation is something that came out of blue and the number of these cases makes it really scary.
It is tricky. The intent can be proved only by how long the employee has worked for sponsor. If he/she worked considerable period (lets say for 2-3 years in non-immigrant visa (H.L,E) before filing 485 and worked for about 1 year after filing 485) then, it is very easy for the employee to prove his/her intent to have a permanent employment relationship with sponser, if employer try to revoke 140 based on the fact that employee does not have intent. The longivity of the employment relationship with sponser is a great proof. Some people are abusing (by misguidence of few lawyers, as they claim GC is for future job) AC21, without even working for single day with sponser, trying to get GC. USCIS may be controlling that kind of abuse.
One historical background reason for AC21 is that, in 2000, even though all catagories are "current", INS was very slow in approving 485. The delay for approval of 485 in year 2000 is caused by USCIS poor customer service. It took atleast 2 years for 485 approval, though the visa numbers were continously available for the entire 2 years. Therefore, the AC21 is an incentive for USCIS delay.
Now, if the visa numbers are continously available (for example EB1, EB2-ROW) USCIS is approving 485 within 6 months, except july 07 fiasco surge. So now AC21 users are only those who suffers in retrogression, not by USCIS administartive delay. That may be the another reason why USCIS becoming hard on AC21.
more...
villamonte6100
04-02 01:57 PM
Villamonte,
Thanks for ur support and understanding. I think we better let these guys take a shot at what they are about to do. Immature and narrow minded is what they are and thats how they wanna be. Looks like they've been watching those Indian vigilante movies a lot and they think that they can get away with fighting a foreign Govt agency. They'll understand what we meant when they receive a cold shoulder from USCIS :D.
Peace out!
D-E-D
No worries mate. Just trying to help clear things but I get rebutted all the time and I'm sure they are misinterpreting me.
I have nothing against them and as part of IV, I am just voicing an opinion which they could reject politely.
Some of the comments on my comments are really harsh as if I am personally attacking them.
You are right, it will be tough to dig into an agency that does approve your status here.
They can do whatever they want and good luck to them.
BTW, I used to have several red dots before and I don't know why they changed it to green. They still have a block on one of my IP address.
Thanks for ur support and understanding. I think we better let these guys take a shot at what they are about to do. Immature and narrow minded is what they are and thats how they wanna be. Looks like they've been watching those Indian vigilante movies a lot and they think that they can get away with fighting a foreign Govt agency. They'll understand what we meant when they receive a cold shoulder from USCIS :D.
Peace out!
D-E-D
No worries mate. Just trying to help clear things but I get rebutted all the time and I'm sure they are misinterpreting me.
I have nothing against them and as part of IV, I am just voicing an opinion which they could reject politely.
Some of the comments on my comments are really harsh as if I am personally attacking them.
You are right, it will be tough to dig into an agency that does approve your status here.
They can do whatever they want and good luck to them.
BTW, I used to have several red dots before and I don't know why they changed it to green. They still have a block on one of my IP address.
2010 makeup vintage flower
santb1975
05-22 06:13 PM
That is our second contribution for the day
I have made a one time contribution of $100.
Receipt ID: 97J49355KG857603M
Thanks
I have made a one time contribution of $100.
Receipt ID: 97J49355KG857603M
Thanks
more...
rajamanikannan
09-10 06:15 PM
I made my contribution today!
hair Layouts vintage flower
vban2007
07-15 10:24 AM
Done - Confirmation Number: 7YDRL-8BCFT
more...
GCBy3000
02-12 02:26 PM
Check here on how to support IV with contribution.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=25
Hi All,
I'm new to immigration Voice. I've read abt this in immigration portal and understand that a group of people are leading this. I wish them all the best and i extend my full support. Also i heard that this group is collecting funds. Can someone please point me where would i contribute.
Thanks
RAJ
SWA: Virginia
SWA Receipt Date (Priority Date): October 31,2002
EB2 - RIR
Forwarded to Philadelphia Regional DOL on June 22, 2004
BEC Case Number: P-04282-*****
45 Day Letter Received and Replied : Feb 2005
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=25
Hi All,
I'm new to immigration Voice. I've read abt this in immigration portal and understand that a group of people are leading this. I wish them all the best and i extend my full support. Also i heard that this group is collecting funds. Can someone please point me where would i contribute.
Thanks
RAJ
SWA: Virginia
SWA Receipt Date (Priority Date): October 31,2002
EB2 - RIR
Forwarded to Philadelphia Regional DOL on June 22, 2004
BEC Case Number: P-04282-*****
45 Day Letter Received and Replied : Feb 2005
hot vintage floral Way i have floral tumblrformspringtumblr themes, layouts
ramus
06-02 04:54 PM
Southsky.
Nothing going to happen just with Pray.. We need to help our self.. Please contribute to IV and also send web-fax..
We have to do this now or it might be too late..
Please ask your friend to join IV.
I received good news on June 1, 2007 that my I-140 is approved. It was received by USCIS on May 22, 2007. Then later that day I saw the new immigration bill. If this very unreasonable bill (EB backlog) will be passed the wasting of all the money, time, stress, anxiety and hope towards the GC procedure will make the whole thing look like a bitter joke. This is beyong my wildest imagination on how bad things can go since we are all hard-working and law-abiding legal immigrants. Is it a punishment for being a good member of society?
I'm praying that it will not be given any consideration by those who have powers.
Nothing going to happen just with Pray.. We need to help our self.. Please contribute to IV and also send web-fax..
We have to do this now or it might be too late..
Please ask your friend to join IV.
I received good news on June 1, 2007 that my I-140 is approved. It was received by USCIS on May 22, 2007. Then later that day I saw the new immigration bill. If this very unreasonable bill (EB backlog) will be passed the wasting of all the money, time, stress, anxiety and hope towards the GC procedure will make the whole thing look like a bitter joke. This is beyong my wildest imagination on how bad things can go since we are all hard-working and law-abiding legal immigrants. Is it a punishment for being a good member of society?
I'm praying that it will not be given any consideration by those who have powers.
more...
house Floral+ackground+tumblr
(ex).jpg "Vintage Floral Backgrounds For")
zoooom
07-14 07:10 PM
^^^
tattoo hot flower background tumblr.
chanduv23
11-20 08:54 PM
I can understand attorney's thinking: H1B is good to have. If there is no reason for its revocation (i.e applicant is still working for H1 sponsor), then there is some level of protection for you. Another aspect is a legal status. While EAD gives you an opportunity to continue work legally if I-485 is denied, it does not protect your legal status (accumulate more than 180 days of unlawful presence and you lose eligibility to adjust status and are a subject to re-entry ban). Having H1B gives you a protection in this case. But if H1B is revoked, I-485 is denied and a person does not have EAD, then there is no escape. It's nice to have both, but maintaining EAD should be the priority.
Typically, if someone is doing a AC21 jump + H1b transfer, it means that the h1b gets transferred to the new employer and the new employer is the h1b petitioner. If the h1b is based on an approved 140 - the beneficiary gets it for 3 years and unless the person is completing his 3 years with the new employer when the 140 revoke happens, the h1b is still valid unless the new employer decides he will cancel it or the person is layed off and thats when the person is in deep trouble because he/she does not have EAD. Correct me if I am wrong. H1b revocation by ex employer may not affect the candidate because candidate already did a transfer
Typically, if someone is doing a AC21 jump + H1b transfer, it means that the h1b gets transferred to the new employer and the new employer is the h1b petitioner. If the h1b is based on an approved 140 - the beneficiary gets it for 3 years and unless the person is completing his 3 years with the new employer when the 140 revoke happens, the h1b is still valid unless the new employer decides he will cancel it or the person is layed off and thats when the person is in deep trouble because he/she does not have EAD. Correct me if I am wrong. H1b revocation by ex employer may not affect the candidate because candidate already did a transfer
more...
pictures layouts, tumblr may,flower
desi3933
09-11 03:43 PM
Its shocking!!! They've foolishly approved many 2006 cases and dont tell me it was unpredictable and now ppl with 2003 r still waiting....how logical is this? A bunch of A** H**** working there or what?
I understand your frustration. Since there is no spillover in the first quarter of new fiscal year, it was expected that PD would move back. How can you you expect 2006 PD for Oct when there is no spillover visa numbers.
Next year Jul-Sep 2009, PD should move to mid 2006 again.
My 2 cents.
I understand your frustration. Since there is no spillover in the first quarter of new fiscal year, it was expected that PD would move back. How can you you expect 2006 PD for Oct when there is no spillover visa numbers.
Next year Jul-Sep 2009, PD should move to mid 2006 again.
My 2 cents.
dresses 2010 floral backgrounds floral
BostonGCVictim
01-02 04:45 PM
This is from a guy who left after years of waiting. I don't know him personally but his prose is very powerful.
Read it here at http://tired-immigrant.blogspot.com/
Read it here at http://tired-immigrant.blogspot.com/
more...
makeup vintage flower ackgrounds for
priti8888
07-25 02:30 PM
We applied in Nebraska in August 2003, Cleared in State on August 29th 2003, Transferred to Chicago DOL on Sept 1st 2003..Got Certfied on Oct 16th 2003...So yes..in some states Labor was VERY Quick.
I agree. Ours was transfered to Denver DOL and got certified in 5 months
I agree. Ours was transfered to Denver DOL and got certified in 5 months
girlfriend +ackgrounds+vintage
ilwaiting
04-25 10:28 AM
I was and is always a believer that PD should be the date a person started working on H1B. In this way fair treatment can be given to immigrants who are here "legally" and paying tens and thousands of dollars in taxes each year. The current immigration reform is broken. I was working in US since 1998 and was on H1B status since then. Due to simple twist of fate I had to move because my old employer was not doing well. I'm sure there are thousands of others like me.
In enacting this law it would actually help USCIS itself help them in adjudicating cases. Moreover USCIS has complete entry exit record of employees and easy to adjudicate who was in or out of status on H1B/or any work visa.
Think about it. When USCIS can allow a person who came in 2004/2005 get ahead me in the EB queue simply by using a substituted labor with an older PD and jumping in front of queue before me which "I think is unfair". I wonder why USCIS can't justify giving PD based on when a person started working on H1B visa(dual intent visa).
Mind boggling and troubling immigration laws :confused:
Does it make sense to request for first arrival date to be considered as the priority date for immigration purposes? Just a thought!!!
In enacting this law it would actually help USCIS itself help them in adjudicating cases. Moreover USCIS has complete entry exit record of employees and easy to adjudicate who was in or out of status on H1B/or any work visa.
Think about it. When USCIS can allow a person who came in 2004/2005 get ahead me in the EB queue simply by using a substituted labor with an older PD and jumping in front of queue before me which "I think is unfair". I wonder why USCIS can't justify giving PD based on when a person started working on H1B visa(dual intent visa).
Mind boggling and troubling immigration laws :confused:
Does it make sense to request for first arrival date to be considered as the priority date for immigration purposes? Just a thought!!!
hairstyles Floral vintage wallpaper
eb3_nepa
07-14 12:48 PM
Hello everyone,
I am starting a new campaign for IV's benefit. It is called "Give me a High Five".
The point of this campaign is to send Not $100, not $50, not even $10.
ALL you need to do is write out a $5 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=65
Please make sure you send in a cheque ONLY or do a bill pay so that no paypal/google checkout fees apply and all of the $5 ACTUALLY goes to IV.
We have 30,000 members on here. If EACH of us contributes just $5 we have $150,000.
For the sake of your OWN freedom, can you donate just FIVE dollars to IV? Every single one of you. IV has done a LOT for every legal immigrant. All we ask in return right now is FIVE dollars. FIVE dollars. Not the price of one month of Cable, but the price of a SUBWAY SANDWICH.
The following IV members have entered the High Five Hall of Fame:
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
I am starting a new campaign for IV's benefit. It is called "Give me a High Five".
The point of this campaign is to send Not $100, not $50, not even $10.
ALL you need to do is write out a $5 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=65
Please make sure you send in a cheque ONLY or do a bill pay so that no paypal/google checkout fees apply and all of the $5 ACTUALLY goes to IV.
We have 30,000 members on here. If EACH of us contributes just $5 we have $150,000.
For the sake of your OWN freedom, can you donate just FIVE dollars to IV? Every single one of you. IV has done a LOT for every legal immigrant. All we ask in return right now is FIVE dollars. FIVE dollars. Not the price of one month of Cable, but the price of a SUBWAY SANDWICH.
The following IV members have entered the High Five Hall of Fame:
bestofall, johnnybhai, Mahatma, sparklinks, kevinkris, hariswaminathan, akhilmahajan, a_paradkar, tejonidhi, ho_gaya_kaya_?, June05, chintainfogc, k_usa, Sri_1975, cheshirecat, satyasaich, pd_recapturing, sajidmd, govindk, mjdup, alok_msh, plreddy, naidu2543, venkygct, j_bharadwaj, gsrknth, cooldude0807, for_gc, Chiwere, jayleno, funny, eight_8, ita, GCOP, desi chala usa, gc_kaavaali, lakshman.easwaran, ebizash, srhari, srinivas_o, ndny, rameshvaid, mhathi, rajesh_kamisetty, shana04, Vsach, leo2606, sujijag, sam2006, dhirajs98, dhirajs98 , vsbalaji, shiankuraaf, nosightofgc, prasadn, prasha98, Mani, DDash, bgp, gc28262, Caliber, gc_on_demand, agc2005, SkilledWorker4GC, vban2007, vvicky72, sriv1, desidude, Suva, sandy_anand, ckichannagari, h1techSlave, kushaljn, sirinme, WeShallOvercome, rajvepa, dodsatya, gc78, hotammo, gcbikari, abhijitp, wizpal
cjain
08-11 10:35 AM
...the question is - where do you fall.
nyte_crawler
04-25 03:03 PM
There are three categories of people,
1) There are people stuck in the labor-queue with early dates. They would want to clear that backlog and they know the PD is so old that they will get their GCs easily.
2) There are people who are waiting to apply or have applied in the 2002-2003 range and they want more visas so that they would get their GCs.
3) There are others who are just filing with dates of 2005 and 2006, who would want to take a different approach as they do not know about their future
I clearly understand as a group, it is impossible to fulfill everyone's expectations. It can only fix the issues that is more relevant and practical at the present moment. But again, I believe by taking "Pay Now and Do what we told, because it is better for all" approach will only prevent people from participating. (Iam not flaming anybody) I believe by writing in one thread about an opinion, is not going to take the group's strategy away from its goal. If that is the case, then there is an underlying problem. Since I dont host this form, I dont expect any rights of free speech. But moderating heavy-handedly will only take away the participation, as I see this happening time and time again. I believe as long as people don't abuse forms, they should be allowed to express their ideas. It's upto the group to decide and take it whenever it is necessary.
But on the contrary, if IV believes that creating threads takes away the server space, IV could remind them of the usage and perhaps close them. But if the approach is once the short term goal of CIR implementation is done there is nothing to worry about, then whatever I said would become invalid.
Peace.
[QUOTE=Eb3_frustrated]Learning01,
There is too much curbing of free speech, you admins are taking a heavy handed approach to discussions. Deleting posts at will, diverting topics at whims and fancies...
Let there be discussins, there is nothing wrong in floating ideas.. allow members to express. Not every idea needs to be implemented.
[QUOTE]
1) There are people stuck in the labor-queue with early dates. They would want to clear that backlog and they know the PD is so old that they will get their GCs easily.
2) There are people who are waiting to apply or have applied in the 2002-2003 range and they want more visas so that they would get their GCs.
3) There are others who are just filing with dates of 2005 and 2006, who would want to take a different approach as they do not know about their future
I clearly understand as a group, it is impossible to fulfill everyone's expectations. It can only fix the issues that is more relevant and practical at the present moment. But again, I believe by taking "Pay Now and Do what we told, because it is better for all" approach will only prevent people from participating. (Iam not flaming anybody) I believe by writing in one thread about an opinion, is not going to take the group's strategy away from its goal. If that is the case, then there is an underlying problem. Since I dont host this form, I dont expect any rights of free speech. But moderating heavy-handedly will only take away the participation, as I see this happening time and time again. I believe as long as people don't abuse forms, they should be allowed to express their ideas. It's upto the group to decide and take it whenever it is necessary.
But on the contrary, if IV believes that creating threads takes away the server space, IV could remind them of the usage and perhaps close them. But if the approach is once the short term goal of CIR implementation is done there is nothing to worry about, then whatever I said would become invalid.
Peace.
[QUOTE=Eb3_frustrated]Learning01,
There is too much curbing of free speech, you admins are taking a heavy handed approach to discussions. Deleting posts at will, diverting topics at whims and fancies...
Let there be discussins, there is nothing wrong in floating ideas.. allow members to express. Not every idea needs to be implemented.
[QUOTE]
No comments:
Post a Comment