go_guy123
10-11 10:54 AM
It seems that the bill S 1085 (the Reuniting Families Act (RFA) has become active again. I received e-mails from Senator Menedez and Senator Lautenberg talking about the bill. Senator Menendex mentioned the recapture employment-based visas that haven't been used in past years so that they may be used in future years. Among other things, he also mentioned that he will continue to address the concerns of employment-based visas in the context of comprehensive immigration reform. He is the sponsor of the S 1085 bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senator Menendez in charge of this...looks like Fox guarding the hen house. I suspect he is more interested in hostage taking "employment-based immigrants " for his
"comprehensive immigration reform". Dream act advocates know this and are openly attacking the "frenemies" or "two-faced" pro-immigrant politicians and Senetor Reid in the democratic party.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senator Menendez in charge of this...looks like Fox guarding the hen house. I suspect he is more interested in hostage taking "employment-based immigrants " for his
"comprehensive immigration reform". Dream act advocates know this and are openly attacking the "frenemies" or "two-faced" pro-immigrant politicians and Senetor Reid in the democratic party.
wallpaper world war 2 soldiers on
leoindiano
08-28 02:56 PM
apume,
I am just asking why i lost my Donor Access? Not begging.
They opened a thread, "Good News on preadjudication"...I just wanted to take a look at it.
If you count how many people contributed more than me, you will not find more than 100 members. If top 100 contributers dont have access, who will have accesss to Donor Forums.... What is the freaking use? Why even have Donor Threads?
No Accountability results in No Credibility.
I am not against donating (have done it myself) but do you guys really think they are giving out GCs to the donors?
Or is someone giving out the secret to a quicker GC in the donor forum?
Or is there the address of the shop selling GCs?
Whatever appears in RED color - supposedly for donors - to me seems to be a marketing trick to attract more donation (sadly, they had to resort to this) - but remember that if there is a big news that is relevant to us - it will be flashed everywhere, even in Indian newspapers!
Don't go begging access to the donor forum or start salivating at the thought of accessing it... just seems kinda childish to me.
Don't gimme reds for this, it was only worth 0.02 - not enough for donation!
Chill, Peace!
I am just asking why i lost my Donor Access? Not begging.
They opened a thread, "Good News on preadjudication"...I just wanted to take a look at it.
If you count how many people contributed more than me, you will not find more than 100 members. If top 100 contributers dont have access, who will have accesss to Donor Forums.... What is the freaking use? Why even have Donor Threads?
No Accountability results in No Credibility.
I am not against donating (have done it myself) but do you guys really think they are giving out GCs to the donors?
Or is someone giving out the secret to a quicker GC in the donor forum?
Or is there the address of the shop selling GCs?
Whatever appears in RED color - supposedly for donors - to me seems to be a marketing trick to attract more donation (sadly, they had to resort to this) - but remember that if there is a big news that is relevant to us - it will be flashed everywhere, even in Indian newspapers!
Don't go begging access to the donor forum or start salivating at the thought of accessing it... just seems kinda childish to me.
Don't gimme reds for this, it was only worth 0.02 - not enough for donation!
Chill, Peace!
abhijitp
07-18 07:39 PM
Thanks for the replies !! I have everything ready as I was planning for concurrent filing. But since the decision was changed on July 2nd, my attorney just filed I 140.
sure, I would sign up for the contribution.
I thought you applied under the "Labor Certification" system not PERM. If you did PERM (only then can you file concurrently), nothing stops you from filing for AOS rightaway, so go for it!
sure, I would sign up for the contribution.
I thought you applied under the "Labor Certification" system not PERM. If you did PERM (only then can you file concurrently), nothing stops you from filing for AOS rightaway, so go for it!
2011 New Zealand World War II
bsnf
07-12 02:30 PM
I called my lawyer yesterday and he told me that he did not get a single case send back.
He filed 300 applications.
He filed 300 applications.
more...
rkm
07-17 06:52 PM
Just made payment $100.00
Thank you
Thank you
waitingmygc
09-08 04:26 PM
I am convinced with Prashanthi.
Now these days, its relevantly easier for company to file GC for senior position which requires a higher minimum qualification (let�s say Masters) to avoid a lot of resume and/or audit. If a GC seeker has enough number of experience (10/11 +) and a higher degree then its comparatively easier than non-senior.
For a non-senior positions, prepare a good job adv with combination of skill set. If received a resumes without the combination then your company HR can reject the resume. No problem, as long as everything has been done properly, so that in case of an audit a proper response can be given.
Now these days, its relevantly easier for company to file GC for senior position which requires a higher minimum qualification (let�s say Masters) to avoid a lot of resume and/or audit. If a GC seeker has enough number of experience (10/11 +) and a higher degree then its comparatively easier than non-senior.
For a non-senior positions, prepare a good job adv with combination of skill set. If received a resumes without the combination then your company HR can reject the resume. No problem, as long as everything has been done properly, so that in case of an audit a proper response can be given.
more...
gcformeornot
04-30 09:21 AM
out... that's from yesterday....
2010 World War 2
Gundark
08-26 11:40 AM
Thanks guys! It was fun making somebody else's idea, I never would have thought of making a Sonic smiley.
We need more suggestions!
We need more suggestions!
more...
raj2007
02-18 01:45 AM
All, Help me understand this.
If I look at this link below on # of immigrant visa's approved every year for for each country it shows the total for India (all category EB 1-5) as
06 -10.7k
05 -46K
04 - 39k
03 - 20k
02 - 41k
01 - 41k
Am I reading this right because this certainly is more than the country limit. Also the total # of visa's given seem to be more than the annual limit. I thought there were some 250k visas that were lost, were the limits higher during these years?
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Under each link look for - Immigrant Visas Issued (by Foreign State Chargeability or Area of Birth): Fiscal Year 2006 (preliminary data)
The captured visa were available for all the categories regardless of country of birth. Therefore no country limit was there.
If I look at this link below on # of immigrant visa's approved every year for for each country it shows the total for India (all category EB 1-5) as
06 -10.7k
05 -46K
04 - 39k
03 - 20k
02 - 41k
01 - 41k
Am I reading this right because this certainly is more than the country limit. Also the total # of visa's given seem to be more than the annual limit. I thought there were some 250k visas that were lost, were the limits higher during these years?
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Under each link look for - Immigrant Visas Issued (by Foreign State Chargeability or Area of Birth): Fiscal Year 2006 (preliminary data)
The captured visa were available for all the categories regardless of country of birth. Therefore no country limit was there.
hair File:2BDE 1ID WWII troops road
lifestrikes
01-26 11:30 AM
Its time to meet our Senators and House Representatives.
more...
grupak
08-10 11:17 PM
Hi, my I-485 approval might be close according to current processing time. I have moved within the same city. I wonder whether change of address at this time will cause any delay:
1. how likely due to change of address, my I-485 processing will be affected and got delayed?
2. how likely I will get a REF due to change of address?
3. Is it better to make an effort to keep the old address?
Thanks.
One option is to change the address at USCIS and also put a hold on your mail for 30 days (max allowed) at the Post Office. Picking up held mail should be easy since you are in same city.
1. how likely due to change of address, my I-485 processing will be affected and got delayed?
2. how likely I will get a REF due to change of address?
3. Is it better to make an effort to keep the old address?
Thanks.
One option is to change the address at USCIS and also put a hold on your mail for 30 days (max allowed) at the Post Office. Picking up held mail should be easy since you are in same city.
hot World War II American Soldiers
immi_enthu
09-28 05:05 PM
That's the reason why they are now changing the receipt date to September even if you filed on July 2nd..
I think this is just their way of saying......give us another month.
They have already got around it. They ARE NOT receipting the applications on the actual date they receive them. They are stamping the received dates only when they 'enter' it into their system.
The receipt date on my receipt notice days July 2nd not September. The online one says September 7th. I have evedence by document from them that my application was received on July 2nd.
I think this is just their way of saying......give us another month.
They have already got around it. They ARE NOT receipting the applications on the actual date they receive them. They are stamping the received dates only when they 'enter' it into their system.
The receipt date on my receipt notice days July 2nd not September. The online one says September 7th. I have evedence by document from them that my application was received on July 2nd.
more...
house Soldiers in World War ii
Munshi75
11-24 08:27 AM
I was on OPT for certain amount of time. But my H1B was approved during my 6th month of OPT . So unless there is any mention of future starting date on your H1B approval notice, you stand to loose the OPT and will be on H1B the moment you receive your receipt number. The REF does not matter at all as you have the receipt number and if you feel confident to deal with your reference.
Hope I did not confuse you further.
Hope I did not confuse you further.
tattoo World War II Soldiers in the
yestogc
06-30 01:37 PM
You can have 2 H1B active at one time, but one should be fulltime and other which we call as concurrent H1B (part time).
As per my understanding Concurrent one does not fall under quota since it is a part time one and needs to be approved before you can start working unlike h1B transfer where you can work as soon as transfer is filed w/o waiting for approval.
The underlying H1B or the concurrent H1B does not protect you on status, so if you loose status on your fulltime h1B job then you cannot jump on this to save your status.
As per my understanding Concurrent one does not fall under quota since it is a part time one and needs to be approved before you can start working unlike h1B transfer where you can work as soon as transfer is filed w/o waiting for approval.
The underlying H1B or the concurrent H1B does not protect you on status, so if you loose status on your fulltime h1B job then you cannot jump on this to save your status.
more...
pictures surrender in World War II.
mallu
07-19 08:49 PM
And ask many Indians,Chinese etc about their namecheck experience :-)
But this won't be easy "Do you want us to compromise on national security", will be the first question asked . They will acknowledge the applicants pain and won't budge . "We know thousands like you are getting screwed for many years, but national security is foremost'.
I really hope they rely on electronic documents and don't push paper from one office to another.
First, I would like to congratulate each and every member of IV for having an effect on USCIS and successfully able to submit the 485 in July. The things that mattered were the unity and direction / advise from the core team. Its a victory by any standard.
The next big problem will be the delay in FBI name check. With the very little workload they have there are backlogged cases from 2003. It is again like a black box (Hope you remember philly BEC). You can do anything you want but FBI wont budge. And with this extra 200K + applications, the situation would get worse and worse. You really do not want to get stuck here for years. The only thing that works is WOM, and thats not an easy thing to do.
I would strongly urge the core team to consider this as an agenda along with ongoing effort of legislative solution of retrogression (Increasing the number of GCs). I would also ask all the members who were able to file 485 to read some of the forums (Yahoo namecheck tracker, immigration.com etc), and prepare yourself of what is coming. Right now, if you are unlucky, you get stuck, but later if you are lucky, you will get through.
We will win at the end, because we have not done anything wrong. Just keep unity.
Thanks
I contributed $150
But this won't be easy "Do you want us to compromise on national security", will be the first question asked . They will acknowledge the applicants pain and won't budge . "We know thousands like you are getting screwed for many years, but national security is foremost'.
I really hope they rely on electronic documents and don't push paper from one office to another.
First, I would like to congratulate each and every member of IV for having an effect on USCIS and successfully able to submit the 485 in July. The things that mattered were the unity and direction / advise from the core team. Its a victory by any standard.
The next big problem will be the delay in FBI name check. With the very little workload they have there are backlogged cases from 2003. It is again like a black box (Hope you remember philly BEC). You can do anything you want but FBI wont budge. And with this extra 200K + applications, the situation would get worse and worse. You really do not want to get stuck here for years. The only thing that works is WOM, and thats not an easy thing to do.
I would strongly urge the core team to consider this as an agenda along with ongoing effort of legislative solution of retrogression (Increasing the number of GCs). I would also ask all the members who were able to file 485 to read some of the forums (Yahoo namecheck tracker, immigration.com etc), and prepare yourself of what is coming. Right now, if you are unlucky, you get stuck, but later if you are lucky, you will get through.
We will win at the end, because we have not done anything wrong. Just keep unity.
Thanks
I contributed $150
dresses world war 2 pictures of
sathyaraj
11-01 10:45 PM
Let us assume that we have totally 70,000 Nurses pending now.
a. PD <= 2006 is 10000
b. PD > 2006 is 60000
This would not help much of ppl waiting in EB3 with PD earlier than Nov 2006 bcoz it takes only 10,000 of their queue. But it really helps the ppl with PD > 2006.
Also it depends on whether 7% country limit is applicable. It would help RoW better than retrogressed countries.
In either case, it is a win-win situation for EB3 India 61,000 * .07 = 4270. Still it is worth of about 1 yr worth of EB3 visas for retrogressed countries.
Any thoughts or corrections?
Could you please explay why is that? What if there are nurses with PD 2002, 03, 04 or 05
a. PD <= 2006 is 10000
b. PD > 2006 is 60000
This would not help much of ppl waiting in EB3 with PD earlier than Nov 2006 bcoz it takes only 10,000 of their queue. But it really helps the ppl with PD > 2006.
Also it depends on whether 7% country limit is applicable. It would help RoW better than retrogressed countries.
In either case, it is a win-win situation for EB3 India 61,000 * .07 = 4270. Still it is worth of about 1 yr worth of EB3 visas for retrogressed countries.
Any thoughts or corrections?
Could you please explay why is that? What if there are nurses with PD 2002, 03, 04 or 05
more...
makeup Troops waiting for a train
paskal
02-22 06:14 PM
Not sure if people understood the question. Based on this data it shows India got much more then what was in the quota and there were more GC given than the yearly total limit. If this is true, why do I keep hearing that in forums that there were 250K visa's over the last 5 years that were lost because they GC's were not processed in time? If anything there were more visa's given and a disproportionately higher # for India.
suggest you read the ombudsman report.
and yes the numbers available were higher because
1. a recapture was in progress
2. recaptured visas were fifo not by country quota
and country quota is deceptive. when ROW is current, eg last july, uscis gives out GC numbers by fifo availability not by country quota.
of course last july was a freak...not coming back anytime soon!
suggest you read the ombudsman report.
and yes the numbers available were higher because
1. a recapture was in progress
2. recaptured visas were fifo not by country quota
and country quota is deceptive. when ROW is current, eg last july, uscis gives out GC numbers by fifo availability not by country quota.
of course last july was a freak...not coming back anytime soon!
girlfriend during World War II
srikondoji
07-02 02:17 PM
Please step back. You need to grow up to know what is racism and you need to listen/read with some context in the background.
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
You are a disgrace for the "Senior Member" title. So much so that you will snap back at another Senior IV Member. Tcch...tcch....
Thanks,
Jayant
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
You are a disgrace for the "Senior Member" title. So much so that you will snap back at another Senior IV Member. Tcch...tcch....
Thanks,
Jayant
hairstyles Attack | Soviet soldiers
logiclife
01-31 10:47 AM
You are not helping yourself by saying such things.
Believe me, everyone here knows ins and outs of consulting business, the desi employer, the Nick Mandallappas of the world etc. etc.
By saying such things on public forum you are helping the enemies who are arguing the exact thing they say to oppose H1b and oppose EB greencards.
I would urge you to restrain raw emotions, especially on public forums, and help us put arguments in an articulate way.
Sarcasm and rhetoric will not take you an inch away from where you are right now.
--logiclife.
Believe me, everyone here knows ins and outs of consulting business, the desi employer, the Nick Mandallappas of the world etc. etc.
By saying such things on public forum you are helping the enemies who are arguing the exact thing they say to oppose H1b and oppose EB greencards.
I would urge you to restrain raw emotions, especially on public forums, and help us put arguments in an articulate way.
Sarcasm and rhetoric will not take you an inch away from where you are right now.
--logiclife.
fall2004us
11-07 03:25 PM
I went to school in huntsville.....sweet home alabama....
good luck on starting a new IV chapter.
good luck on starting a new IV chapter.
mhtanim
09-15 02:05 PM
I can see it. Refresh your browser
Thanks inskrish for the news.
Anyway, the Proc. dates are a heap of bull shit. The NSC Proc date for I-485 says July 08 2007. We all know the dates were 'U' and noone could have filed a I-485 between July 2 - July 17th (July 2 fiasco). So how can the oldest application that the NSC is blocked on can be dated July 08 2007 !!!
Even if they came across ineligible applications like that, wouldn't they just outright reject them and quickly move on to some other application that they can process??? Why would they consider themselves blocked on such application(s) and issue the processing date to reflect such transient status ???
Some people actually did file during July 2 through July 17 and I am one of them. My law firm (one of the top immigration law firms) was actively involved with the AILF to file the lawsuit against DOS at that time. The law firm recommended all their clients to file I-485 even after July 1st as they though AILF has really good chances of winning the lawsuit.
Thanks inskrish for the news.
Anyway, the Proc. dates are a heap of bull shit. The NSC Proc date for I-485 says July 08 2007. We all know the dates were 'U' and noone could have filed a I-485 between July 2 - July 17th (July 2 fiasco). So how can the oldest application that the NSC is blocked on can be dated July 08 2007 !!!
Even if they came across ineligible applications like that, wouldn't they just outright reject them and quickly move on to some other application that they can process??? Why would they consider themselves blocked on such application(s) and issue the processing date to reflect such transient status ???
Some people actually did file during July 2 through July 17 and I am one of them. My law firm (one of the top immigration law firms) was actively involved with the AILF to file the lawsuit against DOS at that time. The law firm recommended all their clients to file I-485 even after July 1st as they though AILF has really good chances of winning the lawsuit.
No comments:
Post a Comment