MERAMICBOY
08-01 12:26 AM
Hi Samay,
We would really appreciate if you could provide your inputs on our case.
My wife came to usa on H4, and transferred to H1 in 2006 to work for a desi consultancy.
Recently she took a full-time position with a fortune 500 company. Her H1 transferred to new company without any problem.
We would like to appear for her first time H1b stamping at Vancouver during next month. We have some concerns regarding the following issues. Any inputs are highly appreciated.
She graduated in India and worked for an IT company in India for 2.5 years before coming to USA. Can she appear for visa interview in canada, though she does not have degree from USA.
Her H1 started on Oct 1st,2006. But she did not find a job until Mid November during the first year. Her employer is not willing to put the start date on work experience letter as Oct 1st, rather on both offer letter and work experience letter the start date has been mentioned as Mid Nov. Will this discrepancy in H1b start date and offer letter start date would be a problem during stamping?
She has some intermittent large gap in work experience due to the pregnancy. Thus, she has significantly smaller wages (50% less)on w-2 compared to offer letter during second year. But the work experience from previous letter does not state any gaps in work experience. Will the VO would ask for any additional details regarding the wage difference.
Also, there is a gap of 15 days between the last date on previous employers work experiene and new job start date, and the same can be found from the letters from different employers.
After she changed to full-time, she has all the required docuemntation for H1B stamping.
We would like to know the severities of these concerns and suggestions to overcome the same.
We would really appreciate if you could provide your inputs on our case.
My wife came to usa on H4, and transferred to H1 in 2006 to work for a desi consultancy.
Recently she took a full-time position with a fortune 500 company. Her H1 transferred to new company without any problem.
We would like to appear for her first time H1b stamping at Vancouver during next month. We have some concerns regarding the following issues. Any inputs are highly appreciated.
She graduated in India and worked for an IT company in India for 2.5 years before coming to USA. Can she appear for visa interview in canada, though she does not have degree from USA.
Her H1 started on Oct 1st,2006. But she did not find a job until Mid November during the first year. Her employer is not willing to put the start date on work experience letter as Oct 1st, rather on both offer letter and work experience letter the start date has been mentioned as Mid Nov. Will this discrepancy in H1b start date and offer letter start date would be a problem during stamping?
She has some intermittent large gap in work experience due to the pregnancy. Thus, she has significantly smaller wages (50% less)on w-2 compared to offer letter during second year. But the work experience from previous letter does not state any gaps in work experience. Will the VO would ask for any additional details regarding the wage difference.
Also, there is a gap of 15 days between the last date on previous employers work experiene and new job start date, and the same can be found from the letters from different employers.
After she changed to full-time, she has all the required docuemntation for H1B stamping.
We would like to know the severities of these concerns and suggestions to overcome the same.
wallpaper m one World
hibworker
09-15 02:57 PM
Since EB2-I is slowly catching up with EB2-C, future spill overs will be split between the two categories and not all will go to EB2-I.
tikka
07-03 11:02 PM
Immigration lawyers raised unusually irate protests yesterday after the State Department and the immigration service abruptly withdrew tens of thousands of job-based visas they had offered last month to foreign professionals hoping to become permanent residents in the United States.
The outcry was provoked by a terse announcement on Monday in which the State Department said it would not grant any more visas for the 2007 fiscal year to foreigners applying to become permanent residents based on their job skills. That notice reversed one the department had issued on June 13 announcing a two-month window starting July 2 for aspiring, high-skilled immigrants from around the world to present applications for visas known as green cards.
The State Department said the 60,000 visas it had expected to offer would no longer be available because of �sudden backlog reduction efforts� by Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that processes applications for the visas offered by the department.
In a statement yesterday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association accused the two agencies of perpetrating a �hoax� and a �bait and switch� against hopeful legal immigrants who played by the book.
�Here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces,� said Kathleen Campbell Walker, the president of the association.
To apply, immigrants must undergo medical examinations and assemble documents to prove their job skills and show that a United States employer has sponsored them. Foreigners must be in the United States when they present their applications, which are processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
Because of backlogs for employment-based visas, foreigners have had to wait many years just to be allowed to file their applications.
Thousands of medical and technology professionals, including many working here on temporary visas, scrambled for weeks to get their documents together, in some cases canceling travel plans, in order to file their applications on Monday, the first day of the window. The State Department and the immigration agency closed the window without accepting a single application.
�I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system,� Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California who is chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, wrote in letters yesterday to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. Ms. Lofgren warned that the federal government could face costly litigation because of its change of course.
The State Department said it would begin accepting applications on Oct. 1 for 2008 visas. On July 30, the immigration agency will raise its processing fees by an average of 66 percent.
The outcry was provoked by a terse announcement on Monday in which the State Department said it would not grant any more visas for the 2007 fiscal year to foreigners applying to become permanent residents based on their job skills. That notice reversed one the department had issued on June 13 announcing a two-month window starting July 2 for aspiring, high-skilled immigrants from around the world to present applications for visas known as green cards.
The State Department said the 60,000 visas it had expected to offer would no longer be available because of �sudden backlog reduction efforts� by Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that processes applications for the visas offered by the department.
In a statement yesterday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association accused the two agencies of perpetrating a �hoax� and a �bait and switch� against hopeful legal immigrants who played by the book.
�Here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces,� said Kathleen Campbell Walker, the president of the association.
To apply, immigrants must undergo medical examinations and assemble documents to prove their job skills and show that a United States employer has sponsored them. Foreigners must be in the United States when they present their applications, which are processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
Because of backlogs for employment-based visas, foreigners have had to wait many years just to be allowed to file their applications.
Thousands of medical and technology professionals, including many working here on temporary visas, scrambled for weeks to get their documents together, in some cases canceling travel plans, in order to file their applications on Monday, the first day of the window. The State Department and the immigration agency closed the window without accepting a single application.
�I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system,� Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California who is chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, wrote in letters yesterday to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. Ms. Lofgren warned that the federal government could face costly litigation because of its change of course.
The State Department said it would begin accepting applications on Oct. 1 for 2008 visas. On July 30, the immigration agency will raise its processing fees by an average of 66 percent.
2011 WAR#39;s Archmage vs WOW#39;s Blood
sachug22
09-15 03:25 PM
Hi ocpmachine,
But in 2008 and 2009 EB2 India got the maximum share of the spill over visas. But still the dates are in the first month of 2005. So hardly EB2 India moved forward about 6 months to 9 months in the duration of 2008 and 2009 with the help of spill overs. That too in this bad economy where there would be comparatively less labors applied than the previous years.
vdlrao,
I agree the forward movement will be slow, and i am expecting it to go pass PD of 2005 in 2010 fiscal year. In 2009 CIS has many EB2-ROW application pending, and they have processed most of them by now(in 2009). So for 2010, unless they see flood of new applications (from EB2 ROW) we will see EB2-India pass 2005 PD in 2010.
But in 2008 and 2009 EB2 India got the maximum share of the spill over visas. But still the dates are in the first month of 2005. So hardly EB2 India moved forward about 6 months to 9 months in the duration of 2008 and 2009 with the help of spill overs. That too in this bad economy where there would be comparatively less labors applied than the previous years.
vdlrao,
I agree the forward movement will be slow, and i am expecting it to go pass PD of 2005 in 2010 fiscal year. In 2009 CIS has many EB2-ROW application pending, and they have processed most of them by now(in 2009). So for 2010, unless they see flood of new applications (from EB2 ROW) we will see EB2-India pass 2005 PD in 2010.
more...
bayarea07
07-22 02:54 PM
I would agree with you on this for normal people but not for amway folks, when you are continously being pushed to being on the verge of harrasment then i would think that every human being would behave the way as we do
Moreover they are the ones who push people to behave that way.
Respect is all give and take.
I have been following this thread for last couple of days and I feel I need to make few points. I remember when this amway/qucikstar thing started several of my close friends got entangled and tried to involve me. However, every time I bailed myself out by clearly mentioning to them "Right now, making lot of money is not in my top priorities. I want to focus on my carrier." Fortunately, I was able to fend off the proposals and clearly make my point.
In this thread, several of you are mentioning to ridicule, diminish, embarrass, and even socially out casting an amway/quickstar member. I feel its going a little bit too far. If you dont like to be in the amway/quickstar business stay clear of it, nobody will be able to force you in it. Setting up anti-amway websites, sharing names of the "bugging" amway members, distributing their phone numbers, and destroying their social reputation is harming the person personally, not the amway/quickstar business. We all know by now the amway/quickstar is a scam, majority of its signed members end up losing valuable time and money. How do you feel if some of your mentioned action emotionally push a distressed person off the cliff. Think about it a bit !!!
Moreover they are the ones who push people to behave that way.
Respect is all give and take.
I have been following this thread for last couple of days and I feel I need to make few points. I remember when this amway/qucikstar thing started several of my close friends got entangled and tried to involve me. However, every time I bailed myself out by clearly mentioning to them "Right now, making lot of money is not in my top priorities. I want to focus on my carrier." Fortunately, I was able to fend off the proposals and clearly make my point.
In this thread, several of you are mentioning to ridicule, diminish, embarrass, and even socially out casting an amway/quickstar member. I feel its going a little bit too far. If you dont like to be in the amway/quickstar business stay clear of it, nobody will be able to force you in it. Setting up anti-amway websites, sharing names of the "bugging" amway members, distributing their phone numbers, and destroying their social reputation is harming the person personally, not the amway/quickstar business. We all know by now the amway/quickstar is a scam, majority of its signed members end up losing valuable time and money. How do you feel if some of your mentioned action emotionally push a distressed person off the cliff. Think about it a bit !!!
gomirage
06-17 07:22 PM
Outsourcing is bad for not only for US citizens but also for future H1bs and GC aspirants also.
Still all the jobs cannot be outsourced. Also if that would have been the case I would have been out of job. But My salary was increasing steadily and in this tough economy also I was able to get a new job with 20% rise in pay after I lost job . There are many companies in USA who are only hiring USA citizens and discouraging outsourcing. Wherever I was working I discouraged those companies from outsourcing but encouraged them to hire h1bs ,GC holders or US citizens. Many start up companies in California cannot afford to do outsourcing because of tight release schedules.
oh yeah !!! Like the companies in this story.
Still all the jobs cannot be outsourced. Also if that would have been the case I would have been out of job. But My salary was increasing steadily and in this tough economy also I was able to get a new job with 20% rise in pay after I lost job . There are many companies in USA who are only hiring USA citizens and discouraging outsourcing. Wherever I was working I discouraged those companies from outsourcing but encouraged them to hire h1bs ,GC holders or US citizens. Many start up companies in California cannot afford to do outsourcing because of tight release schedules.
oh yeah !!! Like the companies in this story.
more...
jungalee43
12-17 08:20 AM
Thanks for the update. No need to reveal any more details. At least I know the e-mails that I sent made their way to some one who matters.
We have taken these ideas to executive and legislative branches of the government. Our suggestions/proposals have been taken up at the top most level. This has been discussed more than few times with favorable consideration. Without being able to share the specifics, we have received extremely positive feedback for our suggestions. Specific events have to occur before this and similar ideas could possibly be considered in the new administration.
Thanks,
We have taken these ideas to executive and legislative branches of the government. Our suggestions/proposals have been taken up at the top most level. This has been discussed more than few times with favorable consideration. Without being able to share the specifics, we have received extremely positive feedback for our suggestions. Specific events have to occur before this and similar ideas could possibly be considered in the new administration.
Thanks,
2010 Commission: Blood Elf Warlock
hibworker
09-15 02:57 PM
Since EB2-I is slowly catching up with EB2-C, future spill overs will be split between the two categories and not all will go to EB2-I.
more...
satyasaich
12-13 02:10 PM
Well, interesting topic and here are my 2 cents.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
hair video-game-babe-lood-elf-from
tikka
07-04 12:22 AM
lets focus on this one..
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
the faster it gets to 100 DIGS the popular the article will be. Will help give our issue exposure
thank you !!
and counting.....
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
the faster it gets to 100 DIGS the popular the article will be. Will help give our issue exposure
thank you !!
and counting.....
more...
grupak
02-13 10:02 AM
I agree that quota system is cumbersome. It would've been much easier just to have one bucket. But I fail to see how it is discriminatory when every coutry gets an equal piece of the pie. It is a classic supply and demand issue, but it's not a discrimination. Consider also the fact that GC is a grace not a right. "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?"
Forget discrimination, unfairness, etc.
First, everyone agrees that IV is working to remove backlog in the employment-based GC.
Then just removing the country cap is not going to help as there isn't enough visa to go around. Second, just increasing the visa numbers is not going to help without removing/significantly increasing the country cap as most employment-based GC demands are from a few countries.
IV is not the place to argue about 'us' and 'them' in EB GC. IV is to help all EB GC without discrimination based on country of birth, national origin, etc., so IV fights for (1) increasing GC numbers and (2) removing cap/significantly increasing cap.
There is no way around it if we want to remove backlog in EB GC.
Forget discrimination, unfairness, etc.
First, everyone agrees that IV is working to remove backlog in the employment-based GC.
Then just removing the country cap is not going to help as there isn't enough visa to go around. Second, just increasing the visa numbers is not going to help without removing/significantly increasing the country cap as most employment-based GC demands are from a few countries.
IV is not the place to argue about 'us' and 'them' in EB GC. IV is to help all EB GC without discrimination based on country of birth, national origin, etc., so IV fights for (1) increasing GC numbers and (2) removing cap/significantly increasing cap.
There is no way around it if we want to remove backlog in EB GC.
hot World of Warcraft Series 3
Administrator2
12-15 09:48 PM
We have taken these ideas to executive and legislative branches of the government. Our suggestions/proposals have been taken up at the top most level. This has been discussed more than few times with favorable consideration. Without being able to share the specifics, we have received extremely positive feedback for our suggestions. Specific events have to occur before this and similar ideas could possibly be considered in the new administration.
Thanks,
Thanks,
more...
house Blood Elves -- WoW Insider
msp1976
02-18 11:28 AM
This is an excellent analysis of why do you see so many EB based immigrants from India and not from other places...The same arguments can apply almost identically to the Chinese immigrants...
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/sep2006/sb20060913_157784.htm?chan=search
I have been following your arguments and I get a sense that though not explicitly anti immigrants, you are opposed to any concentration of EB immigrants from any particular place..It just happens so that at this time it happens to be the Indians....
But a large concentration of Indians in this immigrant category is not an accident....nor is it just because of people preferring their kins for sponsoring....But because of the numerous facts enumerated in this article.....
Of course you can dismiss this argument as Indians promoting themselves...but what the heck... I have to at least try...
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/sep2006/sb20060913_157784.htm?chan=search
I have been following your arguments and I get a sense that though not explicitly anti immigrants, you are opposed to any concentration of EB immigrants from any particular place..It just happens so that at this time it happens to be the Indians....
But a large concentration of Indians in this immigrant category is not an accident....nor is it just because of people preferring their kins for sponsoring....But because of the numerous facts enumerated in this article.....
Of course you can dismiss this argument as Indians promoting themselves...but what the heck... I have to at least try...
tattoo makeup Blood Elf Paladin Epic
advad
07-15 01:01 AM
Hi there,
Here is my situation, any help to resolve this is appreciated.
- My self (primary) & my wife's(derivative) I-485's (PD June 2002) were filed in March 2007.
- My I-485 was approved in July 2007, my wife's was pending due to NC.
- My wife's employer filed PERM (PD June 2007) & then filed I-140 in March 2008.
- We recently contacted NSC regarding my wife's case status, we received a letter from them stating that, her I485 is waiting for I-140 to get approved.
They linked her new I-140 to her pending I-485 that was filed as derivative.Is this USCIS error?.How to correct this error and have them consider her I-485 application as a derivative application?.
Thanks for your help.
Here is my situation, any help to resolve this is appreciated.
- My self (primary) & my wife's(derivative) I-485's (PD June 2002) were filed in March 2007.
- My I-485 was approved in July 2007, my wife's was pending due to NC.
- My wife's employer filed PERM (PD June 2007) & then filed I-140 in March 2008.
- We recently contacted NSC regarding my wife's case status, we received a letter from them stating that, her I485 is waiting for I-140 to get approved.
They linked her new I-140 to her pending I-485 that was filed as derivative.Is this USCIS error?.How to correct this error and have them consider her I-485 application as a derivative application?.
Thanks for your help.
more...
pictures The Blood Elfs from World of
![world of warcraft blood elf. [Warcraft Babe] Blood Elf](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uM7I3g__DCFt4_IdGHqtHWSEztDTvpuicVdVRktIwk2pLdJbAoVdd_4c8xb99ahq4U2W-t2tonJ382IbpGL1dFGYOBlhrOo6HEJXr7sVJl0JxPO_PAmEnO7U2x3BjlNjFszS1VCVM2CxlCiS0kNetMnxYGyB09FC-gBjbKBUCbh9nbP-_4=s0-d "[Warcraft Babe] Blood Elf")
snram4
01-24 05:41 PM
If most members are opposing the memo that is fine for me. I will take neutral Stand. Anyhow best wishes for winning the lawsuit if you file and win
I am not sure if this snram4 is sadist or outright idiot. On more than one occaction couple of guys spit on his face and still he is not bothering and enjoying that. Reponding to his thread is simply waste of time. I dont know if there is a special category for GC and thats what he got.
I am simply amazed how stupiid he is. When this thread started there were couple of people supporting this memo. Once they understood no longer they are supporting. Snram4 is the only guy still supporting and talking all nonsense. I tried to educate him but failed miserably.
snram4...whatever may be the case whether people are going for law suit or not, You are not going to add any value with your pea nut size brain. Why dont you simply go away rather than talking all nonsense and wasting everyone's time. No one is bothering you or stupid comments. So many people asked you to go away...why dont you consider that for GOD shake.
I am not sure if this snram4 is sadist or outright idiot. On more than one occaction couple of guys spit on his face and still he is not bothering and enjoying that. Reponding to his thread is simply waste of time. I dont know if there is a special category for GC and thats what he got.
I am simply amazed how stupiid he is. When this thread started there were couple of people supporting this memo. Once they understood no longer they are supporting. Snram4 is the only guy still supporting and talking all nonsense. I tried to educate him but failed miserably.
snram4...whatever may be the case whether people are going for law suit or not, You are not going to add any value with your pea nut size brain. Why dont you simply go away rather than talking all nonsense and wasting everyone's time. No one is bothering you or stupid comments. So many people asked you to go away...why dont you consider that for GOD shake.
dresses dresses Posted in Blood Elf,
HereIComeGC
02-15 12:46 PM
Oh and by the way, if people sue and WIN lawsuits for "COFFEE BEING TOO HOT" or the one "McDonalds made me fat" This one has much more credibility
"CLASS ACTION AGAINST USCIS? My god, you have no idea what you're talking about"
Freedom without violence?? Man on the Moon?
Sounds familiar?
You would have said few months back "GC without FBI Namechecks? You have no idea what you are talking about"
You can't win if you don't even try. Simple as that. At the minimum, lawsuit will highlight all the issues in the broken process and get some serious media action.
"CLASS ACTION AGAINST USCIS? My god, you have no idea what you're talking about"
Freedom without violence?? Man on the Moon?
Sounds familiar?
You would have said few months back "GC without FBI Namechecks? You have no idea what you are talking about"
You can't win if you don't even try. Simple as that. At the minimum, lawsuit will highlight all the issues in the broken process and get some serious media action.
more...
makeup WOW fanart: Blood Elf DK by
imm_pro
01-13 04:24 PM
Just wondering what IV Core's stand is regarding this memo
girlfriend Tags: world of warcraft, lood
ajaypr
06-24 01:55 PM
..I am waiting for the punch line. What's the point of this? We all know it...
Well this is just another source or confirmation that EB-1 and EB-2 India is going to become unavailable in the coming months or year.
"In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories."
Well this is just another source or confirmation that EB-1 and EB-2 India is going to become unavailable in the coming months or year.
"In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories."
hairstyles former Blood Elf) created
Lasantha
02-15 01:41 PM
You are welcome Dyana. Also if you search this forum, you might be able to find lots of threads on filing 485, doing medicals etc from last June/July/August. These topics were beaten to death on this forum last year when a whole bunch of us filed 485. Good luck!
Thank U all for your quick answers&good advice.It feels good to know I have new friends who can help me with my questions.
About the cheques u're right, that's how we have done it. Separate personnal cheques for each of us, easy to track online.
Hopefully we are not out-of-status and my husband's employer is not on th black list.
How couldn't I figure it out by myself what IV means????Shame,shame...
Thank U all for your quick answers&good advice.It feels good to know I have new friends who can help me with my questions.
About the cheques u're right, that's how we have done it. Separate personnal cheques for each of us, easy to track online.
Hopefully we are not out-of-status and my husband's employer is not on th black list.
How couldn't I figure it out by myself what IV means????Shame,shame...
vkrishn
07-28 03:25 AM
Sure with dead bobhead braincells of yours, nobody expects your self image to be high enough. Its not for wimps wearing zippers to the side like you. If you are man enough come and talk to me, and will see who gets handcuffed.
Talk to you about what? Amway?:D Whole point is we don't Amway guys chasing us with your cheesy lines or "brilliant" ideas.. So stop chasing us! Go rope in your relatives or any other insane person.
Why would i want to talk to a Amway guy when i am saying i don;t want to. If one comes to me and talks about Amway and does not understand the word "NO", "I AM NOT INTERESTED" and keeps chasing me he will face the law.
Now if you are a man/women/whatever and if you talk to me about AMWAY be ready to face the music!
Talk to you about what? Amway?:D Whole point is we don't Amway guys chasing us with your cheesy lines or "brilliant" ideas.. So stop chasing us! Go rope in your relatives or any other insane person.
Why would i want to talk to a Amway guy when i am saying i don;t want to. If one comes to me and talks about Amway and does not understand the word "NO", "I AM NOT INTERESTED" and keeps chasing me he will face the law.
Now if you are a man/women/whatever and if you talk to me about AMWAY be ready to face the music!
gc28262
01-13 08:51 PM
Unfortunately some of our members are deriving some sadistic pleasure out of this development. However what we as a community should realize is this is just the first trick under the sleeves of anti-immigrants supported by grassley and co. Once consulting companies are out of the picture, they will target permanent employers with conditions like "the company should not have fired any US citizen in the past 6 months or plan to layoff any citizen in the upcoming 6 months." They could come up with additional restrictions for direct employers as well. At that point none of us will have any consulting companies to fall back on.
Anti-immigrants are bypassing legislative process of the country by writing letters to USCIS director and forcing USCIS to issue an internal memo which is probably illegal.
Those of you deriving sadistic pleasure out of this development, this will affect our entire community irrespective of consulting or permanent/direct at some point.
H1B restrictions for TARP companies shouldn't have faded out from our memory in this short timespan.
Anti-immigrants are bypassing legislative process of the country by writing letters to USCIS director and forcing USCIS to issue an internal memo which is probably illegal.
Those of you deriving sadistic pleasure out of this development, this will affect our entire community irrespective of consulting or permanent/direct at some point.
H1B restrictions for TARP companies shouldn't have faded out from our memory in this short timespan.