desi3933
02-15 08:03 PM
....
....As far as your pre application post is concerned, desi3933 is right on money. .....
So far kate123 has not responded to my post. May be because reply was something he wasn't looking for .....
....As far as your pre application post is concerned, desi3933 is right on money. .....
So far kate123 has not responded to my post. May be because reply was something he wasn't looking for .....
wallpaper Royal Wedding Special 6th
raj3078
07-07 01:06 PM
Guys and Gals,
Lets not bash anyone here. IEEE might sound anti-immigrant on the surface in true sense, its only anti H1B for all the right reason. I am not trying to defend IEEE but just getting the facts straight. Please check the attached file which is a letter sent by IEEE-USA president to Gov of Minnasota.
Raj
On the surface, yes, IEEE-USA supports EB visas and opposes H1-B visas. But if you take a closer look, its not as clear cut as that. What they really want is to restrict immigration to the most exceptional foreign scientists and engineers (roughly those who would qualify for EB1), and make the path to a GC faster for them. They are dead opposed to foreigners being hired for general engineering jobs, and the current practise of almost everyone on an H1-B being eligible to apply for a GC. I would think twice before calling them a friend to any of us; they are at best anti free-trade restrictionists minus the rabidity and political incorrectness of our "friends". A while ago there was a discussion on IEEE-USA's reaction to CIR, where they expressed displeasure on the increase in H1-Bs along with the increase in permanent visas.
Lets not bash anyone here. IEEE might sound anti-immigrant on the surface in true sense, its only anti H1B for all the right reason. I am not trying to defend IEEE but just getting the facts straight. Please check the attached file which is a letter sent by IEEE-USA president to Gov of Minnasota.
Raj
On the surface, yes, IEEE-USA supports EB visas and opposes H1-B visas. But if you take a closer look, its not as clear cut as that. What they really want is to restrict immigration to the most exceptional foreign scientists and engineers (roughly those who would qualify for EB1), and make the path to a GC faster for them. They are dead opposed to foreigners being hired for general engineering jobs, and the current practise of almost everyone on an H1-B being eligible to apply for a GC. I would think twice before calling them a friend to any of us; they are at best anti free-trade restrictionists minus the rabidity and political incorrectness of our "friends". A while ago there was a discussion on IEEE-USA's reaction to CIR, where they expressed displeasure on the increase in H1-Bs along with the increase in permanent visas.
Macaca
09-13 09:17 AM
People are always blaming
their circumstances for what they are.
I don't believe in circumstances.
The people who get on in this world are
the people who get up and
look for the circumstances they want, and
if they can't find them,
make them
George Bernard Shaw
their circumstances for what they are.
I don't believe in circumstances.
The people who get on in this world are
the people who get up and
look for the circumstances they want, and
if they can't find them,
make them
George Bernard Shaw
2011 Royal Wedding:
go_guy123
02-10 06:02 PM
And there is an important lesson to be learned from the health industry lobby. They just did not say they want CIR or skil and then went back when both cir and skil failed. They started chipping away at individual items like 50000 visas for Schedule A last year and 90000 this year from unused\recaptured visas. We should also be asking for our individual line item, 485 measure. This is how a war is won, one battle at a time. It is unrealistic to have an "all or nothing" attitude that people opposing 485 measure have. If the health industry lobby had such "all or nothing" attitude they would not have got the 50000 visas last year nor would they have been trying to get the 90000 this year. Hope we learn from them.
H1B was misused and abused so much by the industry that the local
population has become hostile to the whole concept of foreign engineers/IT workers. Companies like Infosys, TCS hire 100% IT staff from India etc.
(saying that no US citizen/GC available...thats like lying in broad daylight)
Nurses came on Green cards and were free to change jobs etc. so
they affected the local job market to a far lesser degree so the opposition
is less.
H1B was misused and abused so much by the industry that the local
population has become hostile to the whole concept of foreign engineers/IT workers. Companies like Infosys, TCS hire 100% IT staff from India etc.
(saying that no US citizen/GC available...thats like lying in broad daylight)
Nurses came on Green cards and were free to change jobs etc. so
they affected the local job market to a far lesser degree so the opposition
is less.
more...
sledge_hammer
03-05 09:20 AM
Count me in for the contribution...
nrupendra
09-20 08:40 PM
However its better to conduct a rally in a week-end. Sometimes congress works in a week-end, if we conduct the rally in a week-end then many from NOVA will be able attend. That gives the nos. we are looking for. The other thing is the drive each and every one of the member need to do create awareness among like us. Some are not aware though on the same boat others are afraid due to lack of awareness.
Even my manager who is a white American told me he will join us for the rally if one conducted to show his solidarity.
Thanks
Even my manager who is a white American told me he will join us for the rally if one conducted to show his solidarity.
Thanks
more...
jchan
02-15 02:29 PM
Sorry, you totally got me wrong. What I suggested is that you may want to open a thread 'Campaign to remove the similar/same job requirements in AC21 cases', it can happen at the same time we request pre-application of AOS. This thread is for discussion of pre-application of AOS, so if this is not your goal, you may open a thread for your own goals, but please leave this thread to us to discuss the pre-application of AOS.
thank you.
I hear some people saying childish things like hijacking this thread if anybody says anything different from what they say. What do you prefer, should I open another thread with title "oppose prefiling AOS", nobody wins neither will I or you when somebody does that. Please tolerate others views then they will tolerate yours.
Without strengthening AC21 if you allow everyone to file AOS then anti eb folks like Grassley, Sanders, Sessions, Durbin will move from targeting H1b to targeting EAD. It takes 6 months to get Perm approval, with pre filing AOS everyone can get EAD in 6 months, anti eb folks and USCIS know that people will be jumping to EAD to escape H1 crackdown, what do you think they will do, they will add amendments and Bills to put restrictions on hiring EAD just like they put restrictions on hiring H1b. We cannot make EAD into another H1b like hell.
Prefiling should be done to give relief to people who missed July fiasco only after
1. Remove\dilute same similar job requirement
2. Make sure EAD is extended without any rfe. USCIS will invent thousand things to issue rfe, EAD should be in a different league to h1 and it should not turn into another h1 where you are slapped with rfe left right and center. Example Pay stub rfe, ability to pay rfe, customer Purchase order RFE etc etc etc, Green card holders don�t have any problem working in these same jobs so why should EAD people face this nonsense (otherwise it is just like h1). Before people complain this will become like a green card, lets me answer in advance, if a person from ROW can get his green card within 12 months of coming to US, why cannot people from India\china who have worked in US for the last 5 to 10 years get the above mentioned relief on EAD. EAD should be superior to h1.the only restriction should be you should work in the same field, i.e. if your labor certification is for Software engineer, programmer analyst etc , then you work in a software related job and cannot become a greeter in walmart :-)
Without strengthening EAD\AC21 with the above mentioned items you are turning EAD into just another h1.If we push for prefiling AOS without strengthening Ac21 it is a big disadvantage and slap on the face for all the people with older priority date. Because of July fiasco when everybody got current and filed for AOS, USCIS issued GC to people from 2006 leaving behind people from 2003, 04 and 05. USCIS should have gradually moved the dates from 2003 to 04 to 05 that way people with older PD would have got it first. With prefiling AOS it will become a lottery like in August 2008 where 2006 PD got GC over 03,04 and 05 in eb2. Safeguards have to be put in place for order of priority date otherwise USCIS will indulge in this lottery mode and excuse there behavior by claiming they did this to save visa wastage.
thank you.
I hear some people saying childish things like hijacking this thread if anybody says anything different from what they say. What do you prefer, should I open another thread with title "oppose prefiling AOS", nobody wins neither will I or you when somebody does that. Please tolerate others views then they will tolerate yours.
Without strengthening AC21 if you allow everyone to file AOS then anti eb folks like Grassley, Sanders, Sessions, Durbin will move from targeting H1b to targeting EAD. It takes 6 months to get Perm approval, with pre filing AOS everyone can get EAD in 6 months, anti eb folks and USCIS know that people will be jumping to EAD to escape H1 crackdown, what do you think they will do, they will add amendments and Bills to put restrictions on hiring EAD just like they put restrictions on hiring H1b. We cannot make EAD into another H1b like hell.
Prefiling should be done to give relief to people who missed July fiasco only after
1. Remove\dilute same similar job requirement
2. Make sure EAD is extended without any rfe. USCIS will invent thousand things to issue rfe, EAD should be in a different league to h1 and it should not turn into another h1 where you are slapped with rfe left right and center. Example Pay stub rfe, ability to pay rfe, customer Purchase order RFE etc etc etc, Green card holders don�t have any problem working in these same jobs so why should EAD people face this nonsense (otherwise it is just like h1). Before people complain this will become like a green card, lets me answer in advance, if a person from ROW can get his green card within 12 months of coming to US, why cannot people from India\china who have worked in US for the last 5 to 10 years get the above mentioned relief on EAD. EAD should be superior to h1.the only restriction should be you should work in the same field, i.e. if your labor certification is for Software engineer, programmer analyst etc , then you work in a software related job and cannot become a greeter in walmart :-)
Without strengthening EAD\AC21 with the above mentioned items you are turning EAD into just another h1.If we push for prefiling AOS without strengthening Ac21 it is a big disadvantage and slap on the face for all the people with older priority date. Because of July fiasco when everybody got current and filed for AOS, USCIS issued GC to people from 2006 leaving behind people from 2003, 04 and 05. USCIS should have gradually moved the dates from 2003 to 04 to 05 that way people with older PD would have got it first. With prefiling AOS it will become a lottery like in August 2008 where 2006 PD got GC over 03,04 and 05 in eb2. Safeguards have to be put in place for order of priority date otherwise USCIS will indulge in this lottery mode and excuse there behavior by claiming they did this to save visa wastage.
2010 for Royal Wedding william
casinoroyale
07-27 11:49 AM
bumping
more...
vkotval
06-13 08:56 PM
CHECKLIST OF DOCUMENTS FOR ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS
**Please make sure all COPIES are Clear and Legible
1.Original I-140 Approval Notice /Receipt Notice (Legal Dept. will have this)
2.*Copy of Birth Certificate of Employee and ALL Dependent Family Members
(Please provide translations if not in English)
** If NO birth certificate is available then a �Non-Availability Certificate� MUST BE
SUBMITTED with Affidavits of Birth, Executed by two immediate family
members who were 5 years of age or older at the time the birth took place�
(Please see attached sample)
*** If a birth certificate was recently issued, then it MUST BE SUBMITTED along with Affidavits of Birth, Executed by two immediate family members who were 5 years of age or older at the time the birth took place�(Please see attached sample)
**** Please also include U.S. Citizen Children�s Birth Certificate(s)
3. Copy of Marriage Certificate
(Please provide translations if not in English)
4. Copy of all Divorce Decrees
(Please provide translations if not in English)
5. U.S. Federal Tax Returns - IRS Form 1040 for the last THREE (3) years
*(Please do not send W-2�s unless requested)
6. 3 Months of most recent Paystubs
7. 6 photos of employee and each dependent
8. Form I-693 Medical Examination � by U.S. Civil Surgeon
(Please call 1-800-375-5283 for a list of registered U.S. Civil Surgeons in your area)
9. Copy of ALL pages (including blank pages) of Current and Expired passports for employee and dependents
**Please make COLOR copies of the front page of your passport(s) and visa page(s)
10. Copies of ALL I-94 cards, I-797 Approvals (H-1B & H-4s), I-20s, and EAD cards.
11. COLOR Copy (front and back) of State issued Drivers� License and/or State Identification Card
**Please make sure all COPIES are Clear and Legible
1.Original I-140 Approval Notice /Receipt Notice (Legal Dept. will have this)
2.*Copy of Birth Certificate of Employee and ALL Dependent Family Members
(Please provide translations if not in English)
** If NO birth certificate is available then a �Non-Availability Certificate� MUST BE
SUBMITTED with Affidavits of Birth, Executed by two immediate family
members who were 5 years of age or older at the time the birth took place�
(Please see attached sample)
*** If a birth certificate was recently issued, then it MUST BE SUBMITTED along with Affidavits of Birth, Executed by two immediate family members who were 5 years of age or older at the time the birth took place�(Please see attached sample)
**** Please also include U.S. Citizen Children�s Birth Certificate(s)
3. Copy of Marriage Certificate
(Please provide translations if not in English)
4. Copy of all Divorce Decrees
(Please provide translations if not in English)
5. U.S. Federal Tax Returns - IRS Form 1040 for the last THREE (3) years
*(Please do not send W-2�s unless requested)
6. 3 Months of most recent Paystubs
7. 6 photos of employee and each dependent
8. Form I-693 Medical Examination � by U.S. Civil Surgeon
(Please call 1-800-375-5283 for a list of registered U.S. Civil Surgeons in your area)
9. Copy of ALL pages (including blank pages) of Current and Expired passports for employee and dependents
**Please make COLOR copies of the front page of your passport(s) and visa page(s)
10. Copies of ALL I-94 cards, I-797 Approvals (H-1B & H-4s), I-20s, and EAD cards.
11. COLOR Copy (front and back) of State issued Drivers� License and/or State Identification Card
hair Royal Wedding, April 29
xeixas
06-27 03:58 PM
If we don't receive a notification today saying that our EAD has been approved, does that mean that we would get a 2-Year EAD card? Or do you think that they will work over the weekend? :D
more...
vjkypally
11-15 08:13 PM
I wasn't trying to undermine the role iv had in the flower campaign. All I was trying to suggest is that initially some opposition did exist and once it gathered momentum on its own iv supported it whole heartedly which led to it's success. I was only comparing it to the "we fast while you feast" idea. I m the one who proposed it and will gladly shove it in the dustbin if there is some solution to our common suffering.Lets not undermine IV's efforts in promoting the flower campaign. IV may not have started it, but the publicity on IV went a long way in making the campaign a big success.
hot Royal Wedding 29th April 2011
VSS2007
07-02 04:27 PM
Hi,
I recd EAD physical card today. My application was approved on 6/27/2008 and I had two LUD on my I-765 Case one on 06/29/2008 and 06/30/2008.
Mine is paper file renewal @NSC Applied on 05/18/2008.
I have one year validity starting from the old expiry date.
Thanks
I recd EAD physical card today. My application was approved on 6/27/2008 and I had two LUD on my I-765 Case one on 06/29/2008 and 06/30/2008.
Mine is paper file renewal @NSC Applied on 05/18/2008.
I have one year validity starting from the old expiry date.
Thanks
more...
house the royal wedding april 2011.
Totoro
07-22 10:38 PM
Just an update. I am still working on this, but I have nothing new to report.
tattoo Royal wedding - 29th april
gk_2000
03-28 08:35 PM
Plainspeak.. I dont get mad at females... You have lots of time and sounds to me you are single. PM me your number we can talk and pass some time.
in case you are male.. still pass me your number.. we can still talk and fight.
No point in getting angry in forum. talk to me face to face.
and for snathan, i am not mad at him i just want to know his PD..
Well spoken bhishma pitamah... you do need a . to kill you and something tells me there is one around here
in case you are male.. still pass me your number.. we can still talk and fight.
No point in getting angry in forum. talk to me face to face.
and for snathan, i am not mad at him i just want to know his PD..
Well spoken bhishma pitamah... you do need a . to kill you and something tells me there is one around here
more...
pictures Zoom. Royal
pointlesswait
02-25 12:47 PM
I had emailed CIS Ombudsman's requesting temporary relief in such uncertain times...by allowing ppl to file for AOS..even if their PD is not current.
They replied to me ..but i think a more co-ordinated and deluge of such requests will make them take this issue seriously.
I think desi3933 is right -- that one cannot file AOS without PD being current. However, this does not mean we should give up pursuing our goal. The secretary of DHS specially made it clear that she is willing to push for changes both regulatory AND legislative. But before putting in any effort, she will need to know what changes to push for. She even specifically mentioned the issue with pre-application of AOS, which seems to me a real good chance to get the message delivered.
Just for starters, here are the benefits I can think of about pre-filing of AOS:
- By having all applications on file, let USCIS better predict case load and allow DOS Visa Office to make informed decision on Cutoff Date movements
- Create more revenue for USICS (DHS) via AP and EAD applications
- Reduce the work load of Overseas Consulates when applicants with AP does not have to apply re-entry H1B visa.
- Many H1B visa holders have to go through the administrative procedure when applying re-entry visa. This process is more or less a duplicate with the background check required for green card application. When the applicant is allowed to travel with AP, the effort of background check is consolidated and allow resources to be better utilized.
- EAD allows applicants more freedom to change job, this will results in better resource distribution to accommodate the rapid changes of the economy, and it makes the market the most important factor to determine wages.
Please add whatever you feel missing to the points and maybe we'll come up with a formal letter to communicate to the secretary.
Last, to address the concern that USCIS may be flooded by AOS applications from freshly off-the-boat H1B's, restrictions need to be put on the qualification of AOS. What I could think of is:
- Must have approved I-140 (immigration visa. I think this restriction makes the most sense)
- Must have priority date older than a certain number of years
- Must have been in the US legally for five years
- etc.
They replied to me ..but i think a more co-ordinated and deluge of such requests will make them take this issue seriously.
I think desi3933 is right -- that one cannot file AOS without PD being current. However, this does not mean we should give up pursuing our goal. The secretary of DHS specially made it clear that she is willing to push for changes both regulatory AND legislative. But before putting in any effort, she will need to know what changes to push for. She even specifically mentioned the issue with pre-application of AOS, which seems to me a real good chance to get the message delivered.
Just for starters, here are the benefits I can think of about pre-filing of AOS:
- By having all applications on file, let USCIS better predict case load and allow DOS Visa Office to make informed decision on Cutoff Date movements
- Create more revenue for USICS (DHS) via AP and EAD applications
- Reduce the work load of Overseas Consulates when applicants with AP does not have to apply re-entry H1B visa.
- Many H1B visa holders have to go through the administrative procedure when applying re-entry visa. This process is more or less a duplicate with the background check required for green card application. When the applicant is allowed to travel with AP, the effort of background check is consolidated and allow resources to be better utilized.
- EAD allows applicants more freedom to change job, this will results in better resource distribution to accommodate the rapid changes of the economy, and it makes the market the most important factor to determine wages.
Please add whatever you feel missing to the points and maybe we'll come up with a formal letter to communicate to the secretary.
Last, to address the concern that USCIS may be flooded by AOS applications from freshly off-the-boat H1B's, restrictions need to be put on the qualification of AOS. What I could think of is:
- Must have approved I-140 (immigration visa. I think this restriction makes the most sense)
- Must have priority date older than a certain number of years
- Must have been in the US legally for five years
- etc.
dresses royal-wedding-date-set-for-
santb1975
03-04 12:18 AM
The new deadline is March 10'th
Is the new deadline March 10th?
Can an administrator put it on the home page?
Thanks,
Is the new deadline March 10th?
Can an administrator put it on the home page?
Thanks,
more...
makeup Royal Wedding Special
gdilla
02-28 01:41 PM
Since you are a Canadian you can apply for a visitor visa (B1) – by applying the visa we will be in legal status until a decision is taken. B1 visa is generally approved if you give the reason of finishing up matters in US (like selling house/cars/closing bank accounts/credit accounts etc). I guess you are asking just to be informed but if it really happens another option for you is TN1 – if you have not yet applied for 485.
But they never know when you leave really, at least if you're canadian. By going home, all I do is give the CANADIAN immigration officer the i-94 paper with the h1 stamp when i enter canada if i don't plan on returning to the US again, at least on that visa. Plus, they never ask, so it's really up to you to give it to them. And getting a visitor visa, canadians automatically enter on 6month visitor status as default, no stamping required. If you're flying, all you have to do is tell them you're coming back to canada. If you drive across the border, they don't care to ask. So i guess i can just hop back to vancouver for a weekend and come back as a visitor and be fine then (to clean up affairs, or just hang out for 6 months).
But they never know when you leave really, at least if you're canadian. By going home, all I do is give the CANADIAN immigration officer the i-94 paper with the h1 stamp when i enter canada if i don't plan on returning to the US again, at least on that visa. Plus, they never ask, so it's really up to you to give it to them. And getting a visitor visa, canadians automatically enter on 6month visitor status as default, no stamping required. If you're flying, all you have to do is tell them you're coming back to canada. If you drive across the border, they don't care to ask. So i guess i can just hop back to vancouver for a weekend and come back as a visitor and be fine then (to clean up affairs, or just hang out for 6 months).
girlfriend to the Royal Wedding, 29th
anilsal
02-12 02:59 AM
Based on last week's BusinessWeek article, I have a feeling that we will see an effort to restrict initial H1B applications in some way. That would be a good opportunity to push for allowing naturalization applications for people who have been on work visas for a long time (say 8-10 yrs?). Fighting for citizenship would have a stronger emotional dimension and may connect better with the American public. A direct filing for citizenship will work around retrogression by providing an avenue for people to move out of the GC queue.
That would be nice. Citizenship for people who have been on visa and been in the country legally for a number of years. But I doubt it will happen anytime soon.
That would be nice. Citizenship for people who have been on visa and been in the country legally for a number of years. But I doubt it will happen anytime soon.
hairstyles Royal Wedding Photos: Prince
svam77
07-23 10:58 AM
Talked to them and they think that there is no harm in doing it ...
Manish (who works with Aman) did the same .......
He put the whole I 140 application along with the I 485 filing.
These people are awesome ......... There are many other immigration forms but they dont even lift the calls.
I am just amazed with the way these people are dedicated.
Manish (who works with Aman) did the same .......
He put the whole I 140 application along with the I 485 filing.
These people are awesome ......... There are many other immigration forms but they dont even lift the calls.
I am just amazed with the way these people are dedicated.
qvadis
03-20 08:33 PM
The visa office's interpretation is correct and if you read 202 (a) (5) it clearly says that the country limits should be ignored for unused visa numbers.
Well, which interpretation? The one from April '08 or from November '05? They substantially differ. That's part of the controversy. What motivated them to change it?
I do think that the interpretation is, at least, debatable, and I can see both interpretations. In the end, the question comes down to: does the country limit have priority over the EB category, and I don't think you can have a conclusive answer.
I have gone through the sections of 202 (a) (5) and 203 (b) and the text of the law does not say that prefer country limits over categories.
But it also doesn't say the opposite.
In 202 (a) (5) it actually says assign visa numbers wasted in any category can be assigned with out per country limits. If you look at how they overflow from one category to another, those visa numbers belong to that category before they do NOT belong to a oversubscribed state or belong to ROW.
It also states: if Visas available. You can certainly construe the case that Visas can only be available if they cannot be assigned to a lower category. 202 (a) (5) (B) actually states that only in application of 202 (e), Visas should be deemed to be required. Does that mean they are not required otherwise? 203(b) actually uses the same terminology to allow non-required visas to fall through.
Historically, before AC-21 was added, Visa numbers were wasted because they needed to be assigned in proportion. Irrespective of the interpretation of 202 (a) (5) this cannot happen with AC-21.
Well, which interpretation? The one from April '08 or from November '05? They substantially differ. That's part of the controversy. What motivated them to change it?
I do think that the interpretation is, at least, debatable, and I can see both interpretations. In the end, the question comes down to: does the country limit have priority over the EB category, and I don't think you can have a conclusive answer.
I have gone through the sections of 202 (a) (5) and 203 (b) and the text of the law does not say that prefer country limits over categories.
But it also doesn't say the opposite.
In 202 (a) (5) it actually says assign visa numbers wasted in any category can be assigned with out per country limits. If you look at how they overflow from one category to another, those visa numbers belong to that category before they do NOT belong to a oversubscribed state or belong to ROW.
It also states: if Visas available. You can certainly construe the case that Visas can only be available if they cannot be assigned to a lower category. 202 (a) (5) (B) actually states that only in application of 202 (e), Visas should be deemed to be required. Does that mean they are not required otherwise? 203(b) actually uses the same terminology to allow non-required visas to fall through.
Historically, before AC-21 was added, Visa numbers were wasted because they needed to be assigned in proportion. Irrespective of the interpretation of 202 (a) (5) this cannot happen with AC-21.
FinalGC
10-08 08:16 AM
Can somebody post the exact logistics (location address, time etc....). I would love to come, so put my name under MAYBE category. If in the last minute my plans get changed (not in my control unfortunately), I will come on my own from Lansing......
No comments:
Post a Comment