kondur_007
07-19 02:49 PM
I understand why you all are not favoring my call, since you all are EB2, EB3 is suffering because of no movement and huge backlog and EB2 is gaining because of Spillover, so you all are not favoring this. Anyway we are trying our best to get some relief for those hanging around with older priority date, let's see...
Let's please not start EB2 and EB3 fight again.
What I understand (and I am not a lawyer), is to change the current situation, law must be changed. Congressman can be helpful here, but only if there is going to be a change in law. A congressman can not simply call USCIS to change the way they do things. They must come up with legislative change that can then be followed by USCIS.
Now for any legislative change, there is resistance from CHC to let it pass as a small piece, rather they want more comprehensive approach. This issue is so complex and no political party or politicians are interested in opeing the can of worms.
Did you see O'Riely interview Sarah Palin?? She could not answer the question that was "yes or no" (I am not much impressed with her IQ any way...but that was one example).
Under current circumstances, the only two hopes for EB3 India are:
1. Port over to EB2.
2. Legislative change which effectively will mean immigration reform with good provisions for EB immigration.
What can we relay to our congressmen? (and we all should do it):
- Employment based immigration is good for the economic health of this country: it creates jobs, EB immigrants pay taxes, buy houses, they are educated etc.
- EB immigration is only a small fraction of immigration currently (I forgot the exact %, I believe it is 12%). And it carries "country cap" in the name of "diversity". However no such control exist for the majority of rest of immigration (88%) and so there is no diversity clause there....why is it only on EB immigration.
- EB immigrants pay a major portion of income to USCIS. While data is not availabe from USCIS, if we do the math (based on filing fees), it pays for > 50% of income of USCIS while it constitutes only 12% of their workload.
Bottom line:
- Increasing EB immigration can only bring prosperity to this country. If at all immigration needs to be curbed, it should be other areas where rest of 88% of immigration is occuring which may not be good for the country's economy.
- Increase the annual quota of EB immigration, remove the country cap, make it simple to attract more talent from the rest of the world.
- In fact anyone who completes masters of higher degree in STEM, should be oferred immigration benefit automatically.
Let's please not start EB2 and EB3 fight again.
What I understand (and I am not a lawyer), is to change the current situation, law must be changed. Congressman can be helpful here, but only if there is going to be a change in law. A congressman can not simply call USCIS to change the way they do things. They must come up with legislative change that can then be followed by USCIS.
Now for any legislative change, there is resistance from CHC to let it pass as a small piece, rather they want more comprehensive approach. This issue is so complex and no political party or politicians are interested in opeing the can of worms.
Did you see O'Riely interview Sarah Palin?? She could not answer the question that was "yes or no" (I am not much impressed with her IQ any way...but that was one example).
Under current circumstances, the only two hopes for EB3 India are:
1. Port over to EB2.
2. Legislative change which effectively will mean immigration reform with good provisions for EB immigration.
What can we relay to our congressmen? (and we all should do it):
- Employment based immigration is good for the economic health of this country: it creates jobs, EB immigrants pay taxes, buy houses, they are educated etc.
- EB immigration is only a small fraction of immigration currently (I forgot the exact %, I believe it is 12%). And it carries "country cap" in the name of "diversity". However no such control exist for the majority of rest of immigration (88%) and so there is no diversity clause there....why is it only on EB immigration.
- EB immigrants pay a major portion of income to USCIS. While data is not availabe from USCIS, if we do the math (based on filing fees), it pays for > 50% of income of USCIS while it constitutes only 12% of their workload.
Bottom line:
- Increasing EB immigration can only bring prosperity to this country. If at all immigration needs to be curbed, it should be other areas where rest of 88% of immigration is occuring which may not be good for the country's economy.
- Increase the annual quota of EB immigration, remove the country cap, make it simple to attract more talent from the rest of the world.
- In fact anyone who completes masters of higher degree in STEM, should be oferred immigration benefit automatically.
wallpaper Horses galloping on the
siva008
11-17 03:27 PM
Done
desi3933
07-10 10:57 AM
Link to EB-1 case where I-140 was denied because job offered was not "permanent".
Link
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
As per this document
Pursuant to regulations at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(i)(2), "permanent," in reference to a research position, means either tenured, tenure-track, or for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration, and in which the employee will ordinarily have an expectation of continued employment unless there is good cause for termination..
Link
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
As per this document
Pursuant to regulations at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(i)(2), "permanent," in reference to a research position, means either tenured, tenure-track, or for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration, and in which the employee will ordinarily have an expectation of continued employment unless there is good cause for termination..
2011 The speeds of the gallop
JunRN
09-06 04:51 PM
....Aug '06 that is ;)
you must really be kidding...hahaha...
I am not yet ready to push the panic button...
you must really be kidding...hahaha...
I am not yet ready to push the panic button...
more...
AirWaterandGC
05-23 01:22 PM
Patrick J. Leahy http://leahy.senate.gov/contact.html
Chuck Hagel http://hagel.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fu...n=Contact.Home
John Cornyn http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f...&lid=1#contact
Harry Reid http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm
Mitch McConnell http://mcconnell.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm
Mel Martinez http://martinez.senate.gov/public/in...TOKEN=66357958
Trent Lott http://lott.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fus...=Contact.Email
Lindsey Graham http://lgraham.senate.gov/index.cfm?mode=contactform
Sent to all these guys but have not heard back yet. will keep on sending and calling. Go IV ! Anyone who is not contributing, this may be your last chance. I urge every member to contribute and spread the word. Lets not wait .... there might not be anything to watch later on. Help yourselves !!
Chuck Hagel http://hagel.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fu...n=Contact.Home
John Cornyn http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f...&lid=1#contact
Harry Reid http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm
Mitch McConnell http://mcconnell.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm
Mel Martinez http://martinez.senate.gov/public/in...TOKEN=66357958
Trent Lott http://lott.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fus...=Contact.Email
Lindsey Graham http://lgraham.senate.gov/index.cfm?mode=contactform
Sent to all these guys but have not heard back yet. will keep on sending and calling. Go IV ! Anyone who is not contributing, this may be your last chance. I urge every member to contribute and spread the word. Lets not wait .... there might not be anything to watch later on. Help yourselves !!
caliducas
09-17 09:57 PM
My attorney got the receipt notices in the mail today. See my signature below.
more...
clubJWP
05-07 05:35 AM
iam planning to go to edmonton, alberta. what are the things that i should keep in mind before landing there, if anybody know share it with me
JWP
JWP
2010 GALLOPING HORSES
gc28262
07-21 10:07 AM
Where can we find a copy of the document that is used by USCIS to interpret the spillover rules?
Uscis.gov --> LAWS-->Immigration and Nationality act-->Immigration and Nationality Act (Legal Code)->203 Allocation of immigrant visas
Uscis.gov --> LAWS-->Immigration and Nationality act-->Immigration and Nationality Act (Legal Code)->203 Allocation of immigrant visas
more...
eb3_nepa
06-26 04:30 PM
Umm, Eb3_Nepa, speeding is breaking the law. A speed limit is the law. In pointing out that a speeder is fined but an illegal immigrant is deported, you are pointing out the difference in punishment for breaking the law. The punishment is man's decree, nothing more, nothing less. One could argue that a speeder can cause more harm to society (by driving way faster than conditions permit, for instance) than an illegal immigrant. Yes, an illegal immigrant is breaking the law, but who knows what we would do if we had a bad life and made $1 a day and someone promises a better paying job in some other country. So let us not point fingers here, but focus instead on the value we add.
You are getting into this discussion late and I have edited/deleted posts, but from my comments you have an idea of what was said. It wasn't productive.
Stucklabour i am not going deep into the illegals issue here. What i am saying is, that if some members sympathise with the illegals, that is perfectly fine with me, you may be more humanitarian than i am and you have a right to be. My point was, that being in the country illegally is considered more of an offence than a speeding violation not by you, or me, or anyone BUT by the US Govt.
Also just to let everyone know i am not pointing any fingers at anyone here. I dont know about you, but let me tell you why I came here. It was not money particularly that brought me here. It was the fact that inspite of doing an Engineering degree, jobs were almost impossible to come by. Inspite of being a BE from a Fairly decent Engineering college in India, i have had to work in conditions Far worse than some of the workers in that company would have to (and this was after holding a supervisor's position). My family could not afford to send me here to study outright, so we scrambled for loans and scholarships. That being done I changed professions to do a Master's in IT and completely change fields. My point is, i did all that by staying WELL under the umbrella of the law. I speak for the many many master's students who come here after studying in India and go thru faily poor student life conditions due to lack of money during college. Once again we did it the LEGAL way. We waited for our turns. You gave me a figure of $1/day that illegals make. I was making Indian Rs 4,500/month (after doing a 4 year bachelors in Engineering) which is abt $3.00/day. I also knew my batch mates making even less than that a month. So does that mean that if i came to the US illegally, i would be justified in doing so coz we were making really less money? Also while staying here, we were 3 roommates accompanied by 3 mice in our apartment and abt 2000 roaches coz the apartment was REALLY old. :) Even there i know lots of my batch mates who underwent similar and worse problems.
Please dont take my post the wrong way, i am sure there are many many more like me who have had it MUCH worse than i did. I dont want to bring my personal problems in public. But when i read things like, "lets put ourselves in their shoes" argument, i could not just sit back and and pretend like it is ok to break the law and actually be rewarded for it.
You are a moderator and by that right you may delete my post, but just to clear matters, i am not againt any community in particular, just against people being rewarded for breaking the law on grounds that they were making less money.
You are getting into this discussion late and I have edited/deleted posts, but from my comments you have an idea of what was said. It wasn't productive.
Stucklabour i am not going deep into the illegals issue here. What i am saying is, that if some members sympathise with the illegals, that is perfectly fine with me, you may be more humanitarian than i am and you have a right to be. My point was, that being in the country illegally is considered more of an offence than a speeding violation not by you, or me, or anyone BUT by the US Govt.
Also just to let everyone know i am not pointing any fingers at anyone here. I dont know about you, but let me tell you why I came here. It was not money particularly that brought me here. It was the fact that inspite of doing an Engineering degree, jobs were almost impossible to come by. Inspite of being a BE from a Fairly decent Engineering college in India, i have had to work in conditions Far worse than some of the workers in that company would have to (and this was after holding a supervisor's position). My family could not afford to send me here to study outright, so we scrambled for loans and scholarships. That being done I changed professions to do a Master's in IT and completely change fields. My point is, i did all that by staying WELL under the umbrella of the law. I speak for the many many master's students who come here after studying in India and go thru faily poor student life conditions due to lack of money during college. Once again we did it the LEGAL way. We waited for our turns. You gave me a figure of $1/day that illegals make. I was making Indian Rs 4,500/month (after doing a 4 year bachelors in Engineering) which is abt $3.00/day. I also knew my batch mates making even less than that a month. So does that mean that if i came to the US illegally, i would be justified in doing so coz we were making really less money? Also while staying here, we were 3 roommates accompanied by 3 mice in our apartment and abt 2000 roaches coz the apartment was REALLY old. :) Even there i know lots of my batch mates who underwent similar and worse problems.
Please dont take my post the wrong way, i am sure there are many many more like me who have had it MUCH worse than i did. I dont want to bring my personal problems in public. But when i read things like, "lets put ourselves in their shoes" argument, i could not just sit back and and pretend like it is ok to break the law and actually be rewarded for it.
You are a moderator and by that right you may delete my post, but just to clear matters, i am not againt any community in particular, just against people being rewarded for breaking the law on grounds that they were making less money.
hair Images Of Horses Galloping.
sanjay
12-19 02:02 PM
I have a question regarding the 180 day rule. I am a July 2nd filer, got EAD and AP and did my FP. my I-140 was also approved in oct 2007. So, I will be meeting the 180 day rule and I-140 approved criteria in jan 2nd,08.
Can I change job after Jan 2nd or I have to wait for 180 days from the time of 140 approval date. I think if its from 485 receipt date, I do meet 180 days rule and am safe to move on with another job/employer.
I know this question should had been asked by other members also, but I don't want to search all threads.
Looking for some genuine answers instead of thread bashings.
Thanks in Adv.
Can I change job after Jan 2nd or I have to wait for 180 days from the time of 140 approval date. I think if its from 485 receipt date, I do meet 180 days rule and am safe to move on with another job/employer.
I know this question should had been asked by other members also, but I don't want to search all threads.
Looking for some genuine answers instead of thread bashings.
Thanks in Adv.
more...
jonty_11
07-28 12:02 PM
alrite the same war of words again.. Lets just cut it and unite.
I just wanted to disagree the with title of the thread.. All EB3 is "U" why only call to action for EB3-I.. Please dont limit your view of the world(in this case IV)...Work for the betterment of all in EB3 and EB2 and all EB categories....
UNITE and we will WIN.
I just wanted to disagree the with title of the thread.. All EB3 is "U" why only call to action for EB3-I.. Please dont limit your view of the world(in this case IV)...Work for the betterment of all in EB3 and EB2 and all EB categories....
UNITE and we will WIN.
hot Horses Galloping At Dawn
saisujatha123
05-11 02:35 PM
What location?
How and where do we send flowers to obama?
How and where do we send flowers to obama?
more...
house Horse Galloping Decal
h1bmajdoor
09-30 01:00 PM
Hi,
Can someone explain the process of using AC21 for self employment? I have searched the web without much luck. If someone can throw some light on this topic along with how to deal with issues that come up with AC21 and self employment I would really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance
best talk to a lawyer. It is worth the money in this case. These are arcane areas of the law, and once you make a mistake, you will be harassed all your life here.
Can someone explain the process of using AC21 for self employment? I have searched the web without much luck. If someone can throw some light on this topic along with how to deal with issues that come up with AC21 and self employment I would really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance
best talk to a lawyer. It is worth the money in this case. These are arcane areas of the law, and once you make a mistake, you will be harassed all your life here.
tattoo Galloping horse 3-d plate
andy007
07-07 10:07 PM
That's nice to hear. Can he guess what would be the likely outcome? If the judge just takes USCIS/DOS to task then it doesn't help us.
1. Will they make the July visa bulletin current again?
2. If not, will they allow everyone to file for EAD and AP?
3. If neither #1 nor #2, will there be any financial reimbursement?
Regards,
Jayant
:mad:
1. Will they make the July visa bulletin current again?
2. If not, will they allow everyone to file for EAD and AP?
3. If neither #1 nor #2, will there be any financial reimbursement?
Regards,
Jayant
:mad:
more...
pictures Icelandic horses galloping
Macaca
03-09 08:05 PM
Go Outback tonight.
Don't forget Cheese Fries and a drink that rocks your boat!:cool:
Don't forget Cheese Fries and a drink that rocks your boat!:cool:
dresses Early gallop, Priory Bay
Ramba
07-12 11:59 PM
Suppose you're on the 3rd month of a 3-month contract on self-employment in same/similar occupation (a "permanent" job). Now, can't you say your "projected" annual income on self-employment, esp. if the project is *likely* to be extended for an unknown period? Another scenario: In a month you're *expected* to start working on a three-month project (@$60/hr). Can't you calculate your annual income ("projected," of course)?
Statistically speaking, there is always a high probability of H1B getting denied than for GC. Also, H-1B fraud (and now L1, EB1-GC "frauds"), esp. by desi IT bodyshoppers, is more prevalent (as noted by BusinessWeek) than GC fraud. In any case, just because a large number of H-B petitions are getting rejected, on *genuine* grounds, you can't assume the same proportion of GCs getting rejected.
H1B is a temporary job from USCIS perspective. Most of the time the employer is hiring an H-1B to fill a FT, "permanent" position. Why would that employer (e.g., an R&D or oil company) give the commitment for, say, just 3 (initial) years of contract? Most of the time, the employer has *intent* to keep the H-1B on that same job after GC.
Current recession/depression doesn't mean the USCIS/DOL flout their rules/laws (e.g., AC21)--it just means they need to follow the rules more strictly and reject any potential fraudulent cases. This enforcement is only going to increase as it takes more time for the economy to bottom out. Law-abiding H-1B and GC petitioners need not fear that.
If AC21 memo is non-binding, which immigartion law is binding? We can go with only current rules/laws; the rest is speculation.
-Learn about what is law, rules, regulation; which is binding which is not; then post here.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/i-140-job-portability/4396-cis-memo-on-i-140-job-portability.html
http://www.immitips.com/?p=1116
Very good arguments. If they issue any RFE for your self-employment (if you are in it) argue with them with these points; and good luck
Statistically speaking, there is always a high probability of H1B getting denied than for GC. Also, H-1B fraud (and now L1, EB1-GC "frauds"), esp. by desi IT bodyshoppers, is more prevalent (as noted by BusinessWeek) than GC fraud. In any case, just because a large number of H-B petitions are getting rejected, on *genuine* grounds, you can't assume the same proportion of GCs getting rejected.
H1B is a temporary job from USCIS perspective. Most of the time the employer is hiring an H-1B to fill a FT, "permanent" position. Why would that employer (e.g., an R&D or oil company) give the commitment for, say, just 3 (initial) years of contract? Most of the time, the employer has *intent* to keep the H-1B on that same job after GC.
Current recession/depression doesn't mean the USCIS/DOL flout their rules/laws (e.g., AC21)--it just means they need to follow the rules more strictly and reject any potential fraudulent cases. This enforcement is only going to increase as it takes more time for the economy to bottom out. Law-abiding H-1B and GC petitioners need not fear that.
If AC21 memo is non-binding, which immigartion law is binding? We can go with only current rules/laws; the rest is speculation.
-Learn about what is law, rules, regulation; which is binding which is not; then post here.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/i-140-job-portability/4396-cis-memo-on-i-140-job-portability.html
http://www.immitips.com/?p=1116
Very good arguments. If they issue any RFE for your self-employment (if you are in it) argue with them with these points; and good luck
more...
makeup Horses galloping in the
trueguy
07-28 12:47 PM
Sorry to read blaming debates between eb3 and eb2. Insted of blaming, it is better to take some action. Based on current practice by DOS, EB3-I will be like this for ever, unless more number opens up by any legislative changes. As per law, each EB catagories are allowed to have 40K visas. As demand for EB2 is more, (paricularly by In,Ch) one can not expect any flow from EB2 to EB3 . This is law one can not change it.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
You already see that happening. EB2-ROW with PD as early as Jan 2008 are getting approved. So they get their GC in less than 8 months (including all the stages).
EB3-ROW will never be current and hence no spillover to EB3-I. EB3-I is screwed up royally. EB3-I will get 3000 visas per year and that will not help move PD by one month even.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
You already see that happening. EB2-ROW with PD as early as Jan 2008 are getting approved. So they get their GC in less than 8 months (including all the stages).
EB3-ROW will never be current and hence no spillover to EB3-I. EB3-I is screwed up royally. EB3-I will get 3000 visas per year and that will not help move PD by one month even.
girlfriend stock photo : Horses galloping
mita
08-11 11:02 AM
Guys,
Let us update any developments so that it might help others to know the chain of updates after receiving the magic e-mail.
Mita
Same exact sequence of events happened to me. I am sure we will have our cards this week God willingly.
Let us update any developments so that it might help others to know the chain of updates after receiving the magic e-mail.
Mita
Same exact sequence of events happened to me. I am sure we will have our cards this week God willingly.
hairstyles Feng Shui Galloping Horses
gc_chahiye
09-28 04:33 PM
If Labor Certification and I-140 Approval Notices are a property of the Employer, how the "Beneficiary" is supposed to invoke 'AC-21' for changing jobs in the future without having the approval notices? - My employer has a policy of NOT giving out approval notices of LC and I-140.
for AC-21 (if you choose to inform USCIS: its recommended, but some people dont do it) you only need to provide a letter explaining you are porting, and include a copy of your new employers offer letter. You provide receipt number of your 485. I-140/LC copies not needed. If you are trying to port after 6 years of H1, and need to extend H1 with new employer, thats when you need copy of I-140 approval notice or LC. If your employer does not provide it, I think you will be forced to use AC-21 with EAD in that case.
for AC-21 (if you choose to inform USCIS: its recommended, but some people dont do it) you only need to provide a letter explaining you are porting, and include a copy of your new employers offer letter. You provide receipt number of your 485. I-140/LC copies not needed. If you are trying to port after 6 years of H1, and need to extend H1 with new employer, thats when you need copy of I-140 approval notice or LC. If your employer does not provide it, I think you will be forced to use AC-21 with EAD in that case.
ryan
02-21 10:10 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/2301599-post1.html
Done! I just want to say, your efforts and drive, are incredibly commendable. Thanks.
Done! I just want to say, your efforts and drive, are incredibly commendable. Thanks.
Amma
02-26 01:46 PM
Mailed a cheque for $50 today.
Have faith in IV guys. I have seen a lot of dedicated members of IV which inspired me a lot. Don't probe IV too much with our highly intellectual brain and do nothing.
If IV is not there ,we will be murmuring with ourselves and resigned to our fate.
Keep going.I salute those dedicated guys.
Have faith in IV guys. I have seen a lot of dedicated members of IV which inspired me a lot. Don't probe IV too much with our highly intellectual brain and do nothing.
If IV is not there ,we will be murmuring with ourselves and resigned to our fate.
Keep going.I salute those dedicated guys.
No comments:
Post a Comment