sanju
02-14 12:44 AM
I totally agreed with you. This system has to be cleaned. If a system is being misused then the Gov will take some action. I also dont think they want to remove all Indians from US. I believe they will link this system with a new system similar to JRE and TOFFEL so that a police inspector from India can not come as PL/Sql programmer no matter who is hiring. I know my comment will hurt lot of people here.
I bet you, Urban legend or joke about 'police inspector as PL/Sql programmer' is what you heard in some desi party. I have heard that story many times from multiple people, each one telling their own version. Its just like religion, where every one is stupified by other's ignorance and having fun at others expense. Can you name that police officer? Now you won't reply. I bet lot of others on this forum may have also heard this joke. Is there anyone who knows the name of that police officer pl/sql programmer? You see, fun jokes are good only for desi pani puri parties. This is serious discussion going on here, so if you would please excuse us and take your 20 year old jokes to your standard weekend desi parties, please?
.
I bet you, Urban legend or joke about 'police inspector as PL/Sql programmer' is what you heard in some desi party. I have heard that story many times from multiple people, each one telling their own version. Its just like religion, where every one is stupified by other's ignorance and having fun at others expense. Can you name that police officer? Now you won't reply. I bet lot of others on this forum may have also heard this joke. Is there anyone who knows the name of that police officer pl/sql programmer? You see, fun jokes are good only for desi pani puri parties. This is serious discussion going on here, so if you would please excuse us and take your 20 year old jokes to your standard weekend desi parties, please?
.
wallpaper selena gomez at justin bieber
H1bslave
09-26 09:56 AM
I think IV core must be taking some action in response to this CNN report. Does anyone know about action from core?
nomi
12-12 04:19 PM
USCIS is not a legislative body, they cannot pass a law. The Congress does. In order to change any existing laws Congress has to pass it and USCIS just implements it. So I do not think meeting USCIS will help. BTW what is DOS ?
I know USCIS is not legislative body and they can`t pass law either. But we need to know what USCIS can do for us to give us temp. relief. We need to know what are under their control. They do lot of rules with out going into Congress. So its nothing to lose to ask them what they can do for us without any bill. We will not lose if they say "They can`t do anything" but this will give us some hope that we did our best and also contact to USCIS too.
I know USCIS is not legislative body and they can`t pass law either. But we need to know what USCIS can do for us to give us temp. relief. We need to know what are under their control. They do lot of rules with out going into Congress. So its nothing to lose to ask them what they can do for us without any bill. We will not lose if they say "They can`t do anything" but this will give us some hope that we did our best and also contact to USCIS too.
2011 justin bieber birthday
shreekhand
07-04 10:28 PM
A nicely presented opinion by Ramba, but there are obvious flaws in the anaylsis. Here are my observations
1.) The contention that they followed the recommendations of the Omb report and went back to pre-1982 method cannot be true. They cannot follow that without violating 8 USC Section 1255 (b) which clearly states that a visa number is reduced AFTER the approval of the I-485.
2.)There were 40K visas remaining at the time of the Jun 13 bulletin according to AILA. The 60K number as per DoS might have been from end of May. We most note the fact from the CIS I-485 Standard Operating Procedure that when a petition is "documentarily qualified and approvable" a request is made for a visa number, if such number is not available that petition is put into a approved pending availability of visa number list. This makes it amply clear that the CIS knew the exact number of approvable petitions.(might be ~40-60K) The DoS might also have known that.
3.) So what happened ? Looks like the DoS did not expect the CIS to get those petitions quickly from storage, assign a visa number, stamp and sign petitions with the speed that CIS did it with. As a matter of fact, we can clearly deduce from inquiries made my petitioners in the month of May that soon after the June bulletin was released in May, the petitioners were informed by IO's that their files are now been retrieved and have been assigned to officers for approval in June !
4.) This shows that the CIS swift approval (i.e retrieval, assigning visa #, stamp, signature) activity especially the retrieval part did not start on June 1, or June 13 but well before in mid May if not earlier.
5.) Now maybe they assigned the visa #'s to the approvable petitions (in line with the law) already but they are still going on with the stamp, signature part (as evidenced by people receiving approvals e-mails even on July 2nd and 3rd.. and other forums)
6.) Suspension of PPS at NSC and TSC -- Now why should that happen ?
If they have already used up the EB quota one would ask that much amount of man hours are now free isn't it !!?
But the above points might show us that they might need it to simply finish off the paperwork of the approvable petitions in the month of July. Remember signing off on 40K+ petitions is not a 1 month job, but just assigning visa numbers might be. It is very certain to me that we will see approvals well within July!
Loose ends:
1.) What baffles though is the allocation of all visa numbers before the last quarter of FY 07 ! Maybe there is loophole there that allowed them to do so.
2.) How did visa number for EB1 for a top scientist from say an undersubscribed country such as Ukraine also get used up ??!
1.) The contention that they followed the recommendations of the Omb report and went back to pre-1982 method cannot be true. They cannot follow that without violating 8 USC Section 1255 (b) which clearly states that a visa number is reduced AFTER the approval of the I-485.
2.)There were 40K visas remaining at the time of the Jun 13 bulletin according to AILA. The 60K number as per DoS might have been from end of May. We most note the fact from the CIS I-485 Standard Operating Procedure that when a petition is "documentarily qualified and approvable" a request is made for a visa number, if such number is not available that petition is put into a approved pending availability of visa number list. This makes it amply clear that the CIS knew the exact number of approvable petitions.(might be ~40-60K) The DoS might also have known that.
3.) So what happened ? Looks like the DoS did not expect the CIS to get those petitions quickly from storage, assign a visa number, stamp and sign petitions with the speed that CIS did it with. As a matter of fact, we can clearly deduce from inquiries made my petitioners in the month of May that soon after the June bulletin was released in May, the petitioners were informed by IO's that their files are now been retrieved and have been assigned to officers for approval in June !
4.) This shows that the CIS swift approval (i.e retrieval, assigning visa #, stamp, signature) activity especially the retrieval part did not start on June 1, or June 13 but well before in mid May if not earlier.
5.) Now maybe they assigned the visa #'s to the approvable petitions (in line with the law) already but they are still going on with the stamp, signature part (as evidenced by people receiving approvals e-mails even on July 2nd and 3rd.. and other forums)
6.) Suspension of PPS at NSC and TSC -- Now why should that happen ?
If they have already used up the EB quota one would ask that much amount of man hours are now free isn't it !!?
But the above points might show us that they might need it to simply finish off the paperwork of the approvable petitions in the month of July. Remember signing off on 40K+ petitions is not a 1 month job, but just assigning visa numbers might be. It is very certain to me that we will see approvals well within July!
Loose ends:
1.) What baffles though is the allocation of all visa numbers before the last quarter of FY 07 ! Maybe there is loophole there that allowed them to do so.
2.) How did visa number for EB1 for a top scientist from say an undersubscribed country such as Ukraine also get used up ??!
more...
nomi
12-11 03:58 PM
USCIS cannot do anything on the matter. INA is clear on the AOS conditions, one of which is "An immigrant visa is IMMEDIATELY available at time of filing for adjustment of status" (INA 245, 8 USC 1225)
INA should be changed which should be done through a legislative process, not through any rule making.
Thank xbohdukc. I think, this door is also close.
INA should be changed which should be done through a legislative process, not through any rule making.
Thank xbohdukc. I think, this door is also close.
newbie2020
02-10 06:48 AM
I have some Delta Skymiles (3729miles), Not sure how to donate. If anyone needs them let me know.
more...
senthil1
02-04 12:58 PM
Most of your points are ok. But someone has to arrive with a calculation that how much improvement will EB3 get. If it is atleast 2 years then the time and money spent may be Ok. I am sure EB2 will get a very big benefit and I doubt EB3 will get much benefit. My assumption may be wrong. If it is ok even for small benefit we can go ahead with this campaign as the main aim is to remove unfairness in law.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
2010 hair Justin Bieber Ticket
meridiani.planum
03-13 11:51 AM
Has any one working on EAD experienced delays in renewals and how does HR department react to such delay's. Least on H1 it is clear that you can work for 8 months on receipt.
where I work one of two things happen:
- HR department is clueless about EAD expiry date, so people can continue to (illegally) work once EAD expires before the new EAD comes. Or they can choose to tell HR and stop working.
- If hte case is handled by company attorneys (some AC-21 folks have stuck to their own attorneys), then company attorney sends a mail to HR saying its illegal for tha tperson to work starting from so-and-so date, and that person is put on unpaid leave starting that date.
File the extension as soon as possible (120 days) and then start praying you get it before th eold one expires.
where I work one of two things happen:
- HR department is clueless about EAD expiry date, so people can continue to (illegally) work once EAD expires before the new EAD comes. Or they can choose to tell HR and stop working.
- If hte case is handled by company attorneys (some AC-21 folks have stuck to their own attorneys), then company attorney sends a mail to HR saying its illegal for tha tperson to work starting from so-and-so date, and that person is put on unpaid leave starting that date.
File the extension as soon as possible (120 days) and then start praying you get it before th eold one expires.
more...
legal_la
07-02 06:05 PM
contributed 100 just now, my drop in the ocean, I will try to add more drops in coming days.
hair justin bieber birthday party
India_USA
04-13 01:09 PM
I am new to this country........reading the posts from members, I wonder if we did the right thing in coming to the usa? Life in India is improving a lot.
Planning to study here.......is it better to go back after a couple of years?
Planning to study here.......is it better to go back after a couple of years?
more...
permfiling
11-27 07:37 PM
You can add additional white paper sheet and mention the section number and details.
hot justin bieber birthday party
actaccord
03-01 04:02 PM
.....
more...
house Justin Bieber is preparing for
ImmiLosers
11-22 07:41 PM
Document URL
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
PAGE 27
(1) Determining the Priority Date.
In general, if a petition is supported by an individual labor certification issued by DOL, the priority date is the earliest date upon which the labor certification application was filed with DOL. In those cases where the alien�s priority date is established by the filing of the labor certification, once the alien�s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation. This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred; however, the new employer must obtain a new labor certification if the classification requested requires a labor certification (see the section on successor in interest).
PAGE 28
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions. For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification:)
It looks like law is not clear about revocation of I-140 or am I missing something
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
PAGE 27
(1) Determining the Priority Date.
In general, if a petition is supported by an individual labor certification issued by DOL, the priority date is the earliest date upon which the labor certification application was filed with DOL. In those cases where the alien�s priority date is established by the filing of the labor certification, once the alien�s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation. This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred; however, the new employer must obtain a new labor certification if the classification requested requires a labor certification (see the section on successor in interest).
PAGE 28
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions. For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification:)
It looks like law is not clear about revocation of I-140 or am I missing something
tattoo girlfriend Justin Bieber
sundevil
06-12 02:58 PM
If people think that after CIR fails, we will have a better chance of getting favorable provisions with some other Bill or on coat tails of appropriation bills, it could be a risky gamble.
However, looking at the mood of Senate there is a very good chance that post-CIR we might be thrown a curve ball with some hard line H1B restrictions and fee increases extracted from almost passed CIR. So opposing CIR due to H1 alone is not the best strategy.
CIR is on the table because there are lot of interests driving its existence. If Compete America and us(IV) cannot drive in a small amendment into a popular bill like this, it would be a big blow. Is there enough bite in the coalition to create our own bill or fight an anti-H1 wave out there? That's up for judgement.
My point is, please do not assume H1B status quo will stay that way even if CIR fails. Like someone pointed out in these forums, big Corporations might enlist these anti-consulting restrictions/fee increases and use as compromise to increase H1 numbers(even post CIR).
And we thought life was tough now, imagine paying 10K for every H1 extension and not being able to consult and status quo on current GC system still place. Thats a hair raising thought for me.
However, looking at the mood of Senate there is a very good chance that post-CIR we might be thrown a curve ball with some hard line H1B restrictions and fee increases extracted from almost passed CIR. So opposing CIR due to H1 alone is not the best strategy.
CIR is on the table because there are lot of interests driving its existence. If Compete America and us(IV) cannot drive in a small amendment into a popular bill like this, it would be a big blow. Is there enough bite in the coalition to create our own bill or fight an anti-H1 wave out there? That's up for judgement.
My point is, please do not assume H1B status quo will stay that way even if CIR fails. Like someone pointed out in these forums, big Corporations might enlist these anti-consulting restrictions/fee increases and use as compromise to increase H1 numbers(even post CIR).
And we thought life was tough now, imagine paying 10K for every H1 extension and not being able to consult and status quo on current GC system still place. Thats a hair raising thought for me.
more...
pictures house printable justin bieber
perm2gc
12-29 02:42 PM
It good to see some activity on the thread..Please carry on the advertising..we are near to our goal ..
Thks for all who have spent their valuable time on posting about IV.
Thks for all who have spent their valuable time on posting about IV.
dresses Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
django.stone
11-11 05:19 PM
Guys..
If your are with me please respond to this thread
We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand
Yes, good idea and something that will benefit the entire I & C community in the long run including EB3. I will support the initiative.
If your are with me please respond to this thread
We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand
Yes, good idea and something that will benefit the entire I & C community in the long run including EB3. I will support the initiative.
more...
makeup justin bieber birthday 2011
andymajumder
11-10 09:11 PM
I am with you and willng to contribute, but unless we are united and willing to take some action here, there's no hope. Even people who get approved now, never come back to contibute a penny - there has to be some provision of visa recapture.
girlfriend Justin Bieber Birthday Romance
nixstor
07-05 12:47 PM
Lets stop this thread and core decide about this ( who are running IV )
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
Spciy thread?? This is not spicy. This is serious stuff. I am not the OP, but the subject of the thread might be spicy to some folks. This discussion has come so many times. Atleast now we see that we have equal number of people split on both sides.
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
Spciy thread?? This is not spicy. This is serious stuff. I am not the OP, but the subject of the thread might be spicy to some folks. This discussion has come so many times. Atleast now we see that we have equal number of people split on both sides.
hairstyles VIDEOS. SNTV - Justin Bieber#39;s
jnagendra
09-10 02:10 PM
extended lunch session...!!! .
They went at EST and back at PST:D
They went at EST and back at PST:D
Ramba
07-14 10:02 PM
--
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
delax
07-13 08:19 AM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
No comments:
Post a Comment