stucklabor
07-25 08:43 PM
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Once more unto the breach, my English friends.
BKarnik, there are sections in INA that use the phrase "Employment Authorization". For instance, see this base page for INA.
http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act
Sec. 106 deals with Employment authorization of battered spouses, right on the front page of the link. There are other sections in INA that deal specifically with Employment Authorization. The problem obviously is that each class of aliens eligible for Employment Authorization has their EAD specified in their own section. 8CFR ties all of these classes together in a single place.
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Once more unto the breach, my English friends.
BKarnik, there are sections in INA that use the phrase "Employment Authorization". For instance, see this base page for INA.
http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act
Sec. 106 deals with Employment authorization of battered spouses, right on the front page of the link. There are other sections in INA that deal specifically with Employment Authorization. The problem obviously is that each class of aliens eligible for Employment Authorization has their EAD specified in their own section. 8CFR ties all of these classes together in a single place.
wallpaper Ashley Mary Olsen Kate Olsen
amitjoey
07-05 04:38 PM
Added my $100 towards our common dreams and goals! I still vote to keep this site free for everyone's benefit. Believe me ppl will come around..took me a while but as they say better late than never!
IV you have our support! United we stand!
Paypal Confirmation Number: 8GH00265XS5850731
PD: Aug 04
RD: ????
Thanks Rohit!.
IV you have our support! United we stand!
Paypal Confirmation Number: 8GH00265XS5850731
PD: Aug 04
RD: ????
Thanks Rohit!.
grinch
03-11 04:15 PM
Here's my entry with wire :
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/wire.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/wire.jpg
2011 Fashion hairstyles Ahley Olsen
indigokiwi
03-04 08:43 AM
^^^^^^^^^
more...
abd
09-23 03:24 PM
We had CEO of HR sign it. Here is general format.
1. BACKGROUND of Company
2. description and requirement for the position
3. AC21 compatibility explaination - 180 days etc, Job description comparision with PERM
4. Conclusion and offer for employment with salary details.
I must say in my case the salary i had in original perm was way(40%) more than i am getting on my current job due to location change and economy etc. But it seems salary didn't matter.
1. BACKGROUND of Company
2. description and requirement for the position
3. AC21 compatibility explaination - 180 days etc, Job description comparision with PERM
4. Conclusion and offer for employment with salary details.
I must say in my case the salary i had in original perm was way(40%) more than i am getting on my current job due to location change and economy etc. But it seems salary didn't matter.
mygc2006
10-16 02:45 PM
PD is Aug 2002 / EB3 India / I 140 Approved / 485 Pending
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
2010 Mary-Kate Olsen obviously
tushar123
02-13 05:26 PM
Its funny to see that people call this ethinic cleansing.... it is the right of America to punish people who disobey the law. reservation now in india is a better example which deprives people from certain community to persue higher education or employment in govt jobs.
more...
himu73
07-02 07:34 AM
Hope you understand this is not the only issue we are concerned. If you feel this organization is not for you , why are you browsing here. Keep away. This is not the time we need negative energy like you.
i can say only one thing..IV willl not be able to do anythingin this regard.USCIS can do anything whatever the way hat want to do.
i can say only one thing..IV willl not be able to do anythingin this regard.USCIS can do anything whatever the way hat want to do.
hair Celebrity Style: Rosario
acecupid
07-03 12:50 PM
I remember there was a proposal to give one Green Card per family to eliminate the retrogression for EB categories. I don't know what happen to that. It was like one year ago or so.
Thats a wonderful idea. Amen to that!
Thats a wonderful idea. Amen to that!
more...
NKR
09-05 03:52 PM
like Reliable Desi Consultant? I think they become Extinct with dinosaurs!
No, you still find them in JuraSICK park
No, you still find them in JuraSICK park
hot Mary Kate And Ashley Olsen
gc_lover
07-18 08:00 AM
Hi Guys,
Please post any July 2nd cases on this thread so that we all know if there really are any rejections. All I heard in the past few days was "A friend of mine got rejected on 2nd... My friend's friend got his rejected..Somebody got rejected..."
I didn't see a single post from anyone who got their OWN 485 REJECTED when they filed on July 2nd.
So please post your information as to when your app is received at USCIS.
Mine reached USCIS on July 2, 2007 @ 10AM via FEDEX.
Thanks.
Mine reached on July 2nd 9:01 AM. I don't think they must have rejected any application. I think, if someone is saying "rejected" means USCIS refused to accept the fedex, in which case package should be returned back to lawyers in 3/4 days.
If your package was accepeted by USCIS then it would be on hold and based on yesterday's news, now it should be ready for processing. I am checking this with couple of lawyers and I will update this thread with anything I find out.
Please post any July 2nd cases on this thread so that we all know if there really are any rejections. All I heard in the past few days was "A friend of mine got rejected on 2nd... My friend's friend got his rejected..Somebody got rejected..."
I didn't see a single post from anyone who got their OWN 485 REJECTED when they filed on July 2nd.
So please post your information as to when your app is received at USCIS.
Mine reached USCIS on July 2, 2007 @ 10AM via FEDEX.
Thanks.
Mine reached on July 2nd 9:01 AM. I don't think they must have rejected any application. I think, if someone is saying "rejected" means USCIS refused to accept the fedex, in which case package should be returned back to lawyers in 3/4 days.
If your package was accepeted by USCIS then it would be on hold and based on yesterday's news, now it should be ready for processing. I am checking this with couple of lawyers and I will update this thread with anything I find out.
more...
house Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen
GC_Waiter_2000
07-12 06:08 PM
Current again after 2 Years.
Is it necessary to act (like opening SR, Info-pass, meeting Senators, Congressman etc..) so that I can get a seat in the Bus at least this time? Not to mention there is no proper queue this system (FIFO) here.
Thanks
Is it necessary to act (like opening SR, Info-pass, meeting Senators, Congressman etc..) so that I can get a seat in the Bus at least this time? Not to mention there is no proper queue this system (FIFO) here.
Thanks
tattoo 2011 Mary Kate Olsen first
PD_Dec2002
07-05 04:41 PM
nixstor, for all your efforts (and I admire them) here to promote people to join IV and contribute, check what other senior members are doing...they are driving new members (and potential contributors) away.
See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6113. So what if the poster is using a substitute LC? Didn't logiclife quote today that unfortunately life is not fair?
Thanks,
Jayant
See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6113. So what if the poster is using a substitute LC? Didn't logiclife quote today that unfortunately life is not fair?
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
pictures Mary-Kate Olsen attends a
dehradoon
08-16 06:13 PM
Because you guys are not as clever as EB2s.
you sir, certainly are not as smart to file in EB1. more ever its not about being clever it can sometimes also be a company policy, the exp, the qualification. There are plenty to shops that do not entertain EB2. EB2 or EB3 hardly makes a difference at professional level. Its only a counter in GC.
Once this is all over, an EB2 case just might be reporting to an EB3 Manager.
Please do not post comments like this, everyone is in this for a cause, You did not make a first impression as a concerned member of IV and since you are here the cleverness is itself proven.
you sir, certainly are not as smart to file in EB1. more ever its not about being clever it can sometimes also be a company policy, the exp, the qualification. There are plenty to shops that do not entertain EB2. EB2 or EB3 hardly makes a difference at professional level. Its only a counter in GC.
Once this is all over, an EB2 case just might be reporting to an EB3 Manager.
Please do not post comments like this, everyone is in this for a cause, You did not make a first impression as a concerned member of IV and since you are here the cleverness is itself proven.
dresses Ashley Olsen And Mary-Kate
sanjaymm
11-17 05:00 PM
I got a confirmation that my request for information has been put on a complex track.
more...
makeup tattoo Mary-Kate Olsen Hair
gk_2000
08-10 01:48 PM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
girlfriend i love mary-kate olsen! her
desi485
03-16 12:50 AM
who the hell is asking you to???!!! and anyhow, you are probably not good enough to work with me anyways.....
kyun, sach padh kar buraa laga??
I find it hilarious to see the so-called "highly skilled" EB3 India folks behave like ostriches.............like they don't know what the scam is!!!
i don't care about them, and i care about your comments just about as much as i care about the dirt that sticks on the soles of my shoes.
goodnite, take care, pleasant dreams!
fyi - i m not in eb3 category and I work for a fortune 100.
this fool and self proclaimed selfish idiot has no knowledge of immigration issues. He is even more frustrated and pissed off with his own inability to understand finer details. He says he doesn't care but still care enough to reply this comments at midnight:p
kyun, sach padh kar buraa laga??
I find it hilarious to see the so-called "highly skilled" EB3 India folks behave like ostriches.............like they don't know what the scam is!!!
i don't care about them, and i care about your comments just about as much as i care about the dirt that sticks on the soles of my shoes.
goodnite, take care, pleasant dreams!
fyi - i m not in eb3 category and I work for a fortune 100.
this fool and self proclaimed selfish idiot has no knowledge of immigration issues. He is even more frustrated and pissed off with his own inability to understand finer details. He says he doesn't care but still care enough to reply this comments at midnight:p
hairstyles mary kate olsen anorexia
GCBy3000
07-12 11:32 PM
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.
vandanaverdia
09-11 12:04 PM
Help IV help you...
Come to DC....
Lets join hands & lets be heard!!!!
GET UP!!!
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!!
Come to DC....
Lets join hands & lets be heard!!!!
GET UP!!!
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!!
potatoeater
05-26 04:36 PM
I-94 is a complete proof of your immigration status in the US.
carrying your gc is understandable, its just a card like your license.
But expecting folks to carry their immigration papers all the time, even when they haven't travelled abroad is a bit too much. As long as i have my license or state id with me, it should suffice.
This is just a classic case of harassing immigrants.
carrying your gc is understandable, its just a card like your license.
But expecting folks to carry their immigration papers all the time, even when they haven't travelled abroad is a bit too much. As long as i have my license or state id with me, it should suffice.
This is just a classic case of harassing immigrants.