dvsnm
07-08 11:53 AM
Guys I am looking at this thread for the first time today and want to put some comments:
1) 3 people were making hunger strike at SJSU over the last weekend for DREAM act and we come to know about it thru 1510 AM, KLIVE in Bay Area.
2) Immigration Voice members are planning to make a rally in SJ and we need to read it in the forum of (only) their website.
3) We are hungry about media coverage and want utmost attention of the congressmen about our issues.
BUT, you know what we are missing?:
1) No postings on the windows of those Bharat Bajars and Cash N Carrys and Kumuds. Can't the i-phone designers and router gurus make Ashas and Abhijeets invisible with some eye catching posters?
2) No postings on those other popular websites like murthy.com, immigration-law.com, bata.org etc. Did they say no for this?
3) No usage of the library notice boards.
4) No usage of SMS. Isn't it much cheaper than making contributions to the IV repeatedly?
I hope to see all these channels being utilized fully for July 14/21 march in Bay Area before we talk about CNNs and WPs.
Once the streets of SJ are hit with 1000+ people, those NBCs and CNNs and SJMs will come to us rather than we going to them.
As for myself, I am in whenever the event takes place and will try to bring at least 5 of my friends to the march.
P.S.: This is not an effort to criticize anyone here but just an attempt to help the organizers in whatever way I can.
1) 3 people were making hunger strike at SJSU over the last weekend for DREAM act and we come to know about it thru 1510 AM, KLIVE in Bay Area.
2) Immigration Voice members are planning to make a rally in SJ and we need to read it in the forum of (only) their website.
3) We are hungry about media coverage and want utmost attention of the congressmen about our issues.
BUT, you know what we are missing?:
1) No postings on the windows of those Bharat Bajars and Cash N Carrys and Kumuds. Can't the i-phone designers and router gurus make Ashas and Abhijeets invisible with some eye catching posters?
2) No postings on those other popular websites like murthy.com, immigration-law.com, bata.org etc. Did they say no for this?
3) No usage of the library notice boards.
4) No usage of SMS. Isn't it much cheaper than making contributions to the IV repeatedly?
I hope to see all these channels being utilized fully for July 14/21 march in Bay Area before we talk about CNNs and WPs.
Once the streets of SJ are hit with 1000+ people, those NBCs and CNNs and SJMs will come to us rather than we going to them.
As for myself, I am in whenever the event takes place and will try to bring at least 5 of my friends to the march.
P.S.: This is not an effort to criticize anyone here but just an attempt to help the organizers in whatever way I can.
wallpaper Natalie Portman has revealed
greenlight
08-08 01:56 AM
I have to say this is the first time ever that I want my checks cahsed very soon when my natural tendency is wanting to hold onto money in the checking account as long as possible. I am, too, waiting for the day to see canceled checks for AOS, EAD & AP. I've been obssessed to check the latest news on USCIS' broken system, and it is a nice break to amuse myself about this whole check cashing business.
Hang in there, everyone. There shall be a light at the end of the tunnel. I hope and pray that the light comes before I retire ;)
Hang in there, everyone. There shall be a light at the end of the tunnel. I hope and pray that the light comes before I retire ;)
asdqwe2k
07-02 03:15 PM
Your greed got you...
2011 makeup Mila Kunis says she
chi_shark
07-10 11:49 AM
desi,
so what is your point? i have no doubts that i can prove point 1, 2 and 3 below... i.e. real business, planned business (with only me as the employee), contracts and orders. i dont think anyone here is talking about a non-bonafide job with a "paper shop" (in your words)...
what is your point about If business is new, it becomes difficult to show that business can offer full time job to someone at say 60k salary per year? doesnt that sounds like "ability to pay" issue? if yes, that is not an issue at I-485 stage... the yates memo clearly states this...
The problem with self employment is demonstrate
1. AC-21 job is in same classification as original labor/I-140
2. New job is bonafide
In order to show that the new job is "real", one has to show
1. The business is real, not just paper shop
2. Business Plan, Funding to support employees
3. Any contracts, orders etc
If business is new, it becomes difficult to show that business can offer full time job to someone at say 60k salary per year. Now, if business has some capital funding or line of credit from bank or some long term contracts, then it is relatively easy to show that business can support employees.
The burden of proof, in case of RFE, lies on beneficiary.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
so what is your point? i have no doubts that i can prove point 1, 2 and 3 below... i.e. real business, planned business (with only me as the employee), contracts and orders. i dont think anyone here is talking about a non-bonafide job with a "paper shop" (in your words)...
what is your point about If business is new, it becomes difficult to show that business can offer full time job to someone at say 60k salary per year? doesnt that sounds like "ability to pay" issue? if yes, that is not an issue at I-485 stage... the yates memo clearly states this...
The problem with self employment is demonstrate
1. AC-21 job is in same classification as original labor/I-140
2. New job is bonafide
In order to show that the new job is "real", one has to show
1. The business is real, not just paper shop
2. Business Plan, Funding to support employees
3. Any contracts, orders etc
If business is new, it becomes difficult to show that business can offer full time job to someone at say 60k salary per year. Now, if business has some capital funding or line of credit from bank or some long term contracts, then it is relatively easy to show that business can support employees.
The burden of proof, in case of RFE, lies on beneficiary.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
eager_immi
12-12 03:16 PM
Does anyone know what bill was AC21 attached to in Clinton's Administartion. That will give us some clue what bills we can tag to. I know the world is really very different after 9/11 but this is something we should look into to see what worked before might work again.
gc_bulgaria
09-20 10:15 AM
Today I saw that my checks were cashed and I called USCIS to get the receipt numbers. The IO was very polite and gave me the numbers. Although I had filed at the Nebraska center, the receipt number starts with SRC (Texas).
EB2 ROW (Cross Charge)
PD: 1/11/07
I 140 Approved (Texas): 8/22/07
AOS sent (Nebraska) : 7/26/07
Receipt /Notice (SRC): 9/17/07
EB2 ROW (Cross Charge)
PD: 1/11/07
I 140 Approved (Texas): 8/22/07
AOS sent (Nebraska) : 7/26/07
Receipt /Notice (SRC): 9/17/07
more...
kosars
02-14 10:58 PM
contributed $ 100
Transaction ID: 71H4440142718204T
Transaction ID: 71H4440142718204T
2010 Natalie Portman says lesbian
shantak
05-21 06:11 PM
i had biometric yesterday but no Lud yet until today .
when i will see LUD?
what is soft LUD and hard LUD?
Soft meaning just the date changes and not the message. Hard meaning even the online status message changes
when i will see LUD?
what is soft LUD and hard LUD?
Soft meaning just the date changes and not the message. Hard meaning even the online status message changes
more...
gc_on_demand
07-08 10:07 AM
desi - the reason we face all these issues is not because of anyone's fault.
Reporting an employer is not as easy as it sounds.
The most educated and experienced people have always recommended to "protect yourself" - look for yourself and keep out of trouble.
The issue here is - people in this situation are mere scapegoats - a common man who approaches beaucracy has to deal with crap that is worse.
The entire process of immigrating to US via a employment based system is so loosely organized and puts people in unfair situations.
It is just not desi employers or consulting companies, in general, but any employer can have an upper hand on you when you are at their mercy.
People say big companies have policies and they abide. I agree, but it is not always the case. If someone is in business - they do things in their business interest - if dealing with USCIS is getting difficult - they may say "enough of it - no more responding to RFEs".
One person contacted me - he is having a fulltime job and filed for AC21. he got RFE for EVL 2 times. The first time his HR gave EVL without any hasstles, the second time she was pissed, said "We do not want to deal with this - I have contacted legal and they recommend not to issue such letters".
Now such a situation puts this person in a tough spot -the issue is not because of his employer because his employer did give a proper letter but USCIS asked it again.
Just imagine what is this person's situation for no fault of his?
We can always argue that "If you are worth and if company wants to retain you then they will not have any issues" - which once again may not always be true because we all know how relationships work out at companies - with ass kissing, nepotism, situations, financial etc......
This is very true. People may want to come forward and complain about employes but is there clear guidence on what will be status of employee if employer withdraw her/his h1b ?
Reporting an employer is not as easy as it sounds.
The most educated and experienced people have always recommended to "protect yourself" - look for yourself and keep out of trouble.
The issue here is - people in this situation are mere scapegoats - a common man who approaches beaucracy has to deal with crap that is worse.
The entire process of immigrating to US via a employment based system is so loosely organized and puts people in unfair situations.
It is just not desi employers or consulting companies, in general, but any employer can have an upper hand on you when you are at their mercy.
People say big companies have policies and they abide. I agree, but it is not always the case. If someone is in business - they do things in their business interest - if dealing with USCIS is getting difficult - they may say "enough of it - no more responding to RFEs".
One person contacted me - he is having a fulltime job and filed for AC21. he got RFE for EVL 2 times. The first time his HR gave EVL without any hasstles, the second time she was pissed, said "We do not want to deal with this - I have contacted legal and they recommend not to issue such letters".
Now such a situation puts this person in a tough spot -the issue is not because of his employer because his employer did give a proper letter but USCIS asked it again.
Just imagine what is this person's situation for no fault of his?
We can always argue that "If you are worth and if company wants to retain you then they will not have any issues" - which once again may not always be true because we all know how relationships work out at companies - with ass kissing, nepotism, situations, financial etc......
This is very true. People may want to come forward and complain about employes but is there clear guidence on what will be status of employee if employer withdraw her/his h1b ?
hair Mila Kunis is also opening up
mygoodluck
08-13 05:38 PM
^bump^
more...
rc0878
09-20 01:13 PM
seshuvaidehi,
You can use the following link to check the status of any application. Simply enter your WAC receipt numbers -:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do;jsessionid=baclUg5aAK5E J5v5t4Jur
Also you can use the same link to register your account, that ways you will automatically recieve an email, once there is an update on your case.
Good luck!!!!!
Labor Certified in June 2006-India
I-140 approved Dec 2006
I-485 filed on July 23rd 2007 > Checks got cashed > Got Recipt:WAC ###
EAD filed on July 23rd 2007 > Checks got cashed > Got Recipt:WAC ###
AP filed on July 23rd 2007 > Checks got cashed > Got Recipt : WAC ###
How do I check if EAD card has been ordered and/or AP approved?
Your all are awesome and Thanks to Immigration Voice.
You can use the following link to check the status of any application. Simply enter your WAC receipt numbers -:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do;jsessionid=baclUg5aAK5E J5v5t4Jur
Also you can use the same link to register your account, that ways you will automatically recieve an email, once there is an update on your case.
Good luck!!!!!
Labor Certified in June 2006-India
I-140 approved Dec 2006
I-485 filed on July 23rd 2007 > Checks got cashed > Got Recipt:WAC ###
EAD filed on July 23rd 2007 > Checks got cashed > Got Recipt:WAC ###
AP filed on July 23rd 2007 > Checks got cashed > Got Recipt : WAC ###
How do I check if EAD card has been ordered and/or AP approved?
Your all are awesome and Thanks to Immigration Voice.
hot sex scene with Mila Kunis.
amsgc
07-04 11:23 PM
Are you sure about that...never heard of I140 portability. If it were true...why would there be such a big ho ha about AC-21.
Iam a novice at this, and am by no means contradicting your point...just skeptical..
To be more accurate, it is not porting I-140, it is retaining your old priority date, and using it with your new I-140 petition.
When you move, your new company will have to start the GC process from the begining - Labor, I-140. It is just that when they file your new I-140, you will have to provide a copy of your old one and request to keep the old priority date.
I think there are some requirements to get this right - one of them being your job classification should be the same. There is a thread on this subject somewhere on this forum, you can dig it out and ask questions there.
Iam a novice at this, and am by no means contradicting your point...just skeptical..
To be more accurate, it is not porting I-140, it is retaining your old priority date, and using it with your new I-140 petition.
When you move, your new company will have to start the GC process from the begining - Labor, I-140. It is just that when they file your new I-140, you will have to provide a copy of your old one and request to keep the old priority date.
I think there are some requirements to get this right - one of them being your job classification should be the same. There is a thread on this subject somewhere on this forum, you can dig it out and ask questions there.
more...
house Natalie Portman,Mila Kunis
mikkisu
06-04 11:18 AM
I don't know if IV is already doing it But the i think it is Good idea to call into Good Syndycates talk shows and let America hear about our Concerns and the Unfairness in the proposed Bill.
ex:- Sean Hannity,Bill Orily..
we should be calling in both the Liberal and conservative talk shows..
ex:- Sean Hannity,Bill Orily..
we should be calling in both the Liberal and conservative talk shows..
tattoo Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis
caydee
08-31 11:40 AM
Received CPO email 31Aug10:)
more...
pictures Mila Kunis kiss scene,
felix31
09-09 07:39 PM
LOL
EB3 ROW went to June 2002
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Since I will never get GC, this may be a good time to plan the big change for my life. :D:D
Good luck, everyone!
:D
EB3 ROW went to June 2002
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Since I will never get GC, this may be a good time to plan the big change for my life. :D:D
Good luck, everyone!
:D
dresses Mila Kunis says kissing
nixstor
07-08 11:24 AM
no it will not be voilation of the law at all. consider this scenario thats been going on for the last 30+ years. For example July 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was jan 2003 and the August 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was unavailable. EB2 india visa numbers might have already been used up when the August 2006 visa bulletin was released but they still accepted the AOS petitions filed until the end of July 2006, they did not issue an updated visa bulletin or a revised visa bulletin saying eb2 india numbers are used up and they will not accept eb2 india aos applications, they continued accpeting AOS applications until the end of july 2006.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
Absolutely, Those who filed in June 2006 had a visa number available which were exhausted by the month of Aug 2006. I am not saying that there is a one to one match between availability of visa number and adjudication of visa number. To be more clear, DOS and USCIS might have took 30K applications when there were 20k visa numbers. I am totally aware of this. How ever, all these went unnoticed because there was not a deluge of applications like this and USCIS did not care much about the extra 10K, who will wait until they are available. It could also be possible that they were doing this so randomly like they have done right now, with out proper communication and have not hurt each other. But the deluge of applications sure did bothered USCIS and hence they worked over time to exhaust numbers. As we all know, there is no rule to say that if there are 20K visa numbers, stop accepting applications once you reach 20K, they have to honor the VB for that month even though they get 200k applications. Thats why they exhausted the number by July 1st and when they could not complete by Jun 30th. I feel that USCIS will have a tough time answering
a) How USCIS used the numbers before the start of the quarter, even though they are not authorized to?
b) How USCIS approved some folks on July 1st , when the July VB is already effective?
c) lastly the poor communication between agencies and the grievances suffered by every one involved, if at all.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
Absolutely, Those who filed in June 2006 had a visa number available which were exhausted by the month of Aug 2006. I am not saying that there is a one to one match between availability of visa number and adjudication of visa number. To be more clear, DOS and USCIS might have took 30K applications when there were 20k visa numbers. I am totally aware of this. How ever, all these went unnoticed because there was not a deluge of applications like this and USCIS did not care much about the extra 10K, who will wait until they are available. It could also be possible that they were doing this so randomly like they have done right now, with out proper communication and have not hurt each other. But the deluge of applications sure did bothered USCIS and hence they worked over time to exhaust numbers. As we all know, there is no rule to say that if there are 20K visa numbers, stop accepting applications once you reach 20K, they have to honor the VB for that month even though they get 200k applications. Thats why they exhausted the number by July 1st and when they could not complete by Jun 30th. I feel that USCIS will have a tough time answering
a) How USCIS used the numbers before the start of the quarter, even though they are not authorized to?
b) How USCIS approved some folks on July 1st , when the July VB is already effective?
c) lastly the poor communication between agencies and the grievances suffered by every one involved, if at all.
more...
makeup Mila Kunis: Sex Scene With
ub27
02-17 10:07 AM
Donated $50.
Paypal transaction ID: 4P412963A81144324
Paypal transaction ID: 4P412963A81144324
girlfriend pictures natalie portman and
yardin
09-08 02:03 AM
I140 Applied on 16th July
485 Applied on 27th July
Received Receipt on 6th Sept
485 Applied on 27th July
Received Receipt on 6th Sept
hairstyles correctly: Natalie Portman
Cheran
11-08 08:46 AM
I am going to complete my 180 days by 1st week of Decemeber. The company I work for, is offering me a Project Manager position. My labor is filed for a programmer. I asked my lawyer and he told me that they sent a email to Florida State Workforce Agency to classify my new position and depending on the reply he tells me that I may or maynot port my labor.
Is anyone in the same boat? Is there any work around? I have been on H1 for 10 years now working for the same company (2 yrs as Contractor and 8 as employee), they have screwed me many times, I just don't want another disappointment. If this does not work, then I guess I have switch another company....
Is anyone in the same boat? Is there any work around? I have been on H1 for 10 years now working for the same company (2 yrs as Contractor and 8 as employee), they have screwed me many times, I just don't want another disappointment. If this does not work, then I guess I have switch another company....
thomachan72
07-08 02:46 PM
I think your interpretation of this situation makes sense. I would like to add that the jumbs and increased activity in the uscis/dos etc all happened in anticipation of the CIR passing through and becoming law to be effective in the next FY. They probably wanted to clear of as many legal applicants/backlogs as possible before the next rush based on point system. I agree with you that this is not a conspiracy but more a miscommunication. Whatever the case, hopefully, the AILF litigation will bring some order to the system.
diptam
06-22 01:50 PM
Please keep us posted how you managed your employer...
I laid out my plan above but yet to execute that :)
My situation is similar too.
The employer is not ready to file the 485, thinking that I may leave the company after 6 months.
I have the I-140 receipt notice , but no approval notice.
There is no way he is going to issue a employment letter , still debating my options.
I laid out my plan above but yet to execute that :)
My situation is similar too.
The employer is not ready to file the 485, thinking that I may leave the company after 6 months.
I have the I-140 receipt notice , but no approval notice.
There is no way he is going to issue a employment letter , still debating my options.
No comments:
Post a Comment