Milind123
09-12 05:35 PM
Thanks IV...way to go.
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Not at all modest, I would say it is really nice contribution. Thanks
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Not at all modest, I would say it is really nice contribution. Thanks
wallpaper 2010 mark zuckerberg sean
nlssubbu
10-01 04:20 PM
A cut-off date avoids submission of AOS applications with PD after cut-off date. In my opinion, this was the only reason to retrogress on July 2: avoid AOS submission whose PDs became current in July.
Now nearly all AOS applications have been submitted. Hence, setting cut-off dates conservatively is not that motivating.
Cut-off days not only determine number of applications that can be received at their end, but also the make eligible applications approvable. I think at times when the cut-off date resulted in more approvable cases than USCIS can handle, then they move it back as well.
May be they should have two cut-off days instead of one like this:
1. One for receiving applications beyond that date.
2. Another for approval.
This may help them to pick necessary applications needed from this pool and approve them without losing the allocated visas.
I think change has to come from the legislation wing to amend the procedure in USCIS.
Thanks
Now nearly all AOS applications have been submitted. Hence, setting cut-off dates conservatively is not that motivating.
Cut-off days not only determine number of applications that can be received at their end, but also the make eligible applications approvable. I think at times when the cut-off date resulted in more approvable cases than USCIS can handle, then they move it back as well.
May be they should have two cut-off days instead of one like this:
1. One for receiving applications beyond that date.
2. Another for approval.
This may help them to pick necessary applications needed from this pool and approve them without losing the allocated visas.
I think change has to come from the legislation wing to amend the procedure in USCIS.
Thanks
kuhelica2000
09-14 11:15 AM
A lot of people had applied in EB3 since EB3 was current for a fairly long time and their lawyers suggested them to do so to avoid additional documentation. Many of these people could have applied in EB2 as they had the required qualification including me (US masters). Just like you could have applied in EB1 since you have a Ph.D; but you decided to apply in EB2.
The catagory on which a person applies for greencard doesn't necessarily reflect his/her capability or intelligence. After all, if Michael Dell or Bill Gates had to apply for green card they had to apply in EB3. On the other hand, a lot of EB2 filers just fabricated their resumes with years of experience to qualify for EB2. But that shouldn't overcast shadows on real EB2 peoples ability.
I don't know from where you got your Ph.D but it definitely didn't inprove your ability to think rationally as evident in your post.
are bhagwan... kash maine substitue labor use kiya hota....
I would have been approved by then...
Been here since 1996 and have a doctorate .. but still in EB2.. and i don't regret it .... but i don't want anymore line jumping for sure.
The catagory on which a person applies for greencard doesn't necessarily reflect his/her capability or intelligence. After all, if Michael Dell or Bill Gates had to apply for green card they had to apply in EB3. On the other hand, a lot of EB2 filers just fabricated their resumes with years of experience to qualify for EB2. But that shouldn't overcast shadows on real EB2 peoples ability.
I don't know from where you got your Ph.D but it definitely didn't inprove your ability to think rationally as evident in your post.
are bhagwan... kash maine substitue labor use kiya hota....
I would have been approved by then...
Been here since 1996 and have a doctorate .. but still in EB2.. and i don't regret it .... but i don't want anymore line jumping for sure.
2011 mark zuckerberg sean parker
vallabhu
03-09 03:45 PM
Eating away from the regular Quota does not make sense to me, all the people who get the visas after the end of quota will not count for next year. Assuming this is true the number of required visas goes down for next year? Which may be partially good news.
I don�t know, I am just guessing things here.
I don�t know, I am just guessing things here.
more...
HeeKwan
02-23 11:45 PM
Yo estoy totalmente de acuerdo.
WillIBLucky
12-18 02:59 PM
I think you do have to change your ideas in this case. Its very simple we cannot do what you plan to do. Lobbying is the only way for us. Illegals did that because they did not anything to loose. We are not in that situation, GC would be nice to have else we can go home or another country and we can survive.
So instead of waisting our time in talking about this, we should try to add members and contribute. I know you are an active member but I am just telling.
first, I don't know what you mean by "Senior Member like you coming up with this idea". Seniority on this site I think is by how long the have been registered. Second, even if it means older members, what does age have to do with this idea?
I have already said that most IV members (clearly you are one) are opposed to this.
My thoughts happen to be different from yours, and I dont plan on changing my ideas anytime soon.
Of course for this to work there has to be a signficant number of participants, otherwise actually nothing is going to work. And even with significant participation, there are no guarantees: look at how many people called Sen Sessions, but still made no difference.
Last, dont you guys get vacation?? Who is talking abut losing money? If you are paid hourly then dont take part.
and if you dont agree you dont need me to tell you dont be a part of this.
But, as mentioned many, many, many times before, I am for this idea, or something that gets attention in a big way.
So instead of waisting our time in talking about this, we should try to add members and contribute. I know you are an active member but I am just telling.
first, I don't know what you mean by "Senior Member like you coming up with this idea". Seniority on this site I think is by how long the have been registered. Second, even if it means older members, what does age have to do with this idea?
I have already said that most IV members (clearly you are one) are opposed to this.
My thoughts happen to be different from yours, and I dont plan on changing my ideas anytime soon.
Of course for this to work there has to be a signficant number of participants, otherwise actually nothing is going to work. And even with significant participation, there are no guarantees: look at how many people called Sen Sessions, but still made no difference.
Last, dont you guys get vacation?? Who is talking abut losing money? If you are paid hourly then dont take part.
and if you dont agree you dont need me to tell you dont be a part of this.
But, as mentioned many, many, many times before, I am for this idea, or something that gets attention in a big way.
more...
chanduv23
11-20 07:48 PM
Don't get me wrong. There are so many good lawyers. I have talked to few of them who are reputed and didn't even charge me for my first call. However what I said above is based on this (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18642&postcount=9). If you read entire thread, you would know what I meant.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5293
"As those of you who have read this forum for many years know, I believe that it is a waste of time and money for someone to try to maintain H status while waiting for AOS approval. I know that the conventional Internet wisdom is that this is the thing to do. The problem is, proponents of that position cannot offer any legal or rational authority for their position.
There are a number of law firms that represent employers only. They do work on behalf of their clients' employees, but they don't directly represent those employees. The employees are third party beneficiaries of their work.
While it costs an employer more to keep an employee in H status, many companies undertake this cost because they know that if an employee wishes to move elsewhere, it is more difficult to do so if the new employer has to file an H transfer petition, rather than simply recording the new employee's EAD number.
If an attorney represents the company, and not the employee, then the attorney has no duty to the employee and does not have to advise the employee as to what is best for him or her. Also, attorney's make far more money filing H petitions as opposed to filing EAD/AP applications."
So one MUST ALWAYS keep EAD in hand till 485 is adjujicated.
This is a very interesting find. But lets keep doing more research until we are concrete about whats the best option
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5293
"As those of you who have read this forum for many years know, I believe that it is a waste of time and money for someone to try to maintain H status while waiting for AOS approval. I know that the conventional Internet wisdom is that this is the thing to do. The problem is, proponents of that position cannot offer any legal or rational authority for their position.
There are a number of law firms that represent employers only. They do work on behalf of their clients' employees, but they don't directly represent those employees. The employees are third party beneficiaries of their work.
While it costs an employer more to keep an employee in H status, many companies undertake this cost because they know that if an employee wishes to move elsewhere, it is more difficult to do so if the new employer has to file an H transfer petition, rather than simply recording the new employee's EAD number.
If an attorney represents the company, and not the employee, then the attorney has no duty to the employee and does not have to advise the employee as to what is best for him or her. Also, attorney's make far more money filing H petitions as opposed to filing EAD/AP applications."
So one MUST ALWAYS keep EAD in hand till 485 is adjujicated.
This is a very interesting find. But lets keep doing more research until we are concrete about whats the best option
2010 mark zuckerberg sean parker
9years
11-30 02:05 PM
Just noticed there is an update on LUD on my previous EAD (not the current one). Not sure what that means though. Still waiting for response after sending interfiling letter.
Thank you for the update. I don't have any updates or LUDs. Best of luck to you.
Thank you for the update. I don't have any updates or LUDs. Best of luck to you.
more...
NKR
04-02 02:33 PM
That is right. People can express their opinions. No name calling and rough language.
That�s right, no name calling and no country name calling. D.R.D owes us an apology.
That�s right, no name calling and no country name calling. D.R.D owes us an apology.
hair mark zuckerberg sean parker
delhikadesi
09-14 12:44 AM
whats wrong with you guys...you guys are filed in EB3 category...does not mean that you are less then any EB2 person.
cant you understand one simple logic? EB2 category(not an individual) will get cards sooner then EB3 category.
So if you were eligibile or had a choice, why you chose EB3????
now since you did choose, you are supporting this backgate system of porting to EB2? how do you justify that?????
you or your employer told USCIS to get a card for you in EB3 category, if you do not want that, file NEW !!!
In the eyes of americans we are skilled workers, but we all are selfish and vulnerable to white man politics!!!!
DAMN this card and I wish to see when we all cherish our self respect and does not get treated like beggars by USCIS.
If we all have balls then lets do some kind of bycott ...else keep watching your brother in this stupid ration line and you enjoy your food (if you get lucky by USCIS)
cant you understand one simple logic? EB2 category(not an individual) will get cards sooner then EB3 category.
So if you were eligibile or had a choice, why you chose EB3????
now since you did choose, you are supporting this backgate system of porting to EB2? how do you justify that?????
you or your employer told USCIS to get a card for you in EB3 category, if you do not want that, file NEW !!!
In the eyes of americans we are skilled workers, but we all are selfish and vulnerable to white man politics!!!!
DAMN this card and I wish to see when we all cherish our self respect and does not get treated like beggars by USCIS.
If we all have balls then lets do some kind of bycott ...else keep watching your brother in this stupid ration line and you enjoy your food (if you get lucky by USCIS)
more...
Raju
07-06 02:01 PM
coz we need some place to go for vacation ;)
:D nice one
:D nice one
hot Sean Parker Mark Zuckerberg
Desi Unlucky
07-19 11:38 AM
Google Order #618525716984962 - 100$
Happy to be here and contribute. Will follow up with more.
Interesting article in Business week this morning, not sure if this has been already posted here.
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070718_068854.htm?campaign_id=yhoo
Happy to be here and contribute. Will follow up with more.
Interesting article in Business week this morning, not sure if this has been already posted here.
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070718_068854.htm?campaign_id=yhoo
more...
house mark zuckerberg sean parker eduardo. Sean Parker arrested, Mark
ItIsNotFunny
03-12 10:50 AM
Looks like it only tracks people who donated for FOIA
Not true. Anybody donates will get Donor status. This is started for last few days, so people who donated in last few days get this. Pappu mentioned that he is planning to cross reference this with old donations but not sure whats happening there.
Not true. Anybody donates will get Donor status. This is started for last few days, so people who donated in last few days get this. Pappu mentioned that he is planning to cross reference this with old donations but not sure whats happening there.
tattoo have Sean Parker, Eduardo
desi485
11-26 01:19 PM
Ron Gotcher Latest ' ImmInfo Newsletter' states clearly 485 denial is illegal
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
*************************
Hmmm....I am still wondering...
1> How much money an applicant will spend on MTR? on self, on dependents?
2> How much money an applicant will bleed to move to US District Court?
3> If an applicant is working on EAD during all this farce, would he be able to continue working (atleast seeing paycheck) or will seat at home and bleed more?
4> if he looses EAD job, will CIS again punish him for not having a job?
5> Even after doing all these above, what if he accumulates 180 days of unlawful(?) presence? will he be deported for following the laws?
6> Last question: Are those undocumented workers are better positioned to get legal citizenship in long run than those legal skilled immigrants from retrogressed countries?
(sorry for my language, but I can't understand the logic behind such a serious painful punishment to an innocent lawful AC-21 user without any fault of his own? is there justice? what do I not understand here? I am sure I am missing something. Please guide!!!)
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
*************************
Hmmm....I am still wondering...
1> How much money an applicant will spend on MTR? on self, on dependents?
2> How much money an applicant will bleed to move to US District Court?
3> If an applicant is working on EAD during all this farce, would he be able to continue working (atleast seeing paycheck) or will seat at home and bleed more?
4> if he looses EAD job, will CIS again punish him for not having a job?
5> Even after doing all these above, what if he accumulates 180 days of unlawful(?) presence? will he be deported for following the laws?
6> Last question: Are those undocumented workers are better positioned to get legal citizenship in long run than those legal skilled immigrants from retrogressed countries?
(sorry for my language, but I can't understand the logic behind such a serious painful punishment to an innocent lawful AC-21 user without any fault of his own? is there justice? what do I not understand here? I am sure I am missing something. Please guide!!!)
more...
pictures mark zuckerberg sean parker eduardo. eduardo saverin, sean parker
UKannan
03-03 04:37 PM
Everyone feel like giving up but none of us give up :)
dresses Mark Zuckerberg Sean Parker
chanduv23
05-18 03:39 PM
ANOTHER UPDATE
I just spoke to Congressional office and this is what she has to say:
Quote"""""""""""
I just spoke with our liaison at the Nebraska office and she confirmed that your motion to reopen was approved on Friday (05/15/2009). That, I am told, means Nebraska agrees to re-examine your I-485 denial and a decision should be forthcoming within 60 days. I suggest that we wait to see what that decision is before our office initiates any formal inquiries with the USCIS Nebraska Director.
""""""""""""""Unquote
But she agreed that my second MTR might have been on sidelines and the congressional office inquiry into the matter could have influenced USCIS to review my case ( probably with a supervisor) immediately. She told me that she would put another inquiry with NSC in 4 weeks if nothing comes up. Finally we have decided to forgo (just for now) the process of writing letter to the NSC Director as it might not add much weight to the process, as congressional office would be repeating the same argument that my Attorney has made regarding the AC21, which a supervisor is already looking at.
I have already waited for 3 months. Another 2 months might take its toll on my emotional drain.
God save AC21............
That is a standard message. Basically yur 485 has been reopened. Unless your priority date is current there is nothing much they can do, but if there is a need for RFE, they will send you RFE.
Congratulations. This is a standard message your case has been reopened. You must celebrate this moment.
Unless your MTR is approved, your case does not get reopened. So your MTR is also approved - usually they do not update those messages on the online system properly and thats why we do not see them.
I just spoke to Congressional office and this is what she has to say:
Quote"""""""""""
I just spoke with our liaison at the Nebraska office and she confirmed that your motion to reopen was approved on Friday (05/15/2009). That, I am told, means Nebraska agrees to re-examine your I-485 denial and a decision should be forthcoming within 60 days. I suggest that we wait to see what that decision is before our office initiates any formal inquiries with the USCIS Nebraska Director.
""""""""""""""Unquote
But she agreed that my second MTR might have been on sidelines and the congressional office inquiry into the matter could have influenced USCIS to review my case ( probably with a supervisor) immediately. She told me that she would put another inquiry with NSC in 4 weeks if nothing comes up. Finally we have decided to forgo (just for now) the process of writing letter to the NSC Director as it might not add much weight to the process, as congressional office would be repeating the same argument that my Attorney has made regarding the AC21, which a supervisor is already looking at.
I have already waited for 3 months. Another 2 months might take its toll on my emotional drain.
God save AC21............
That is a standard message. Basically yur 485 has been reopened. Unless your priority date is current there is nothing much they can do, but if there is a need for RFE, they will send you RFE.
Congratulations. This is a standard message your case has been reopened. You must celebrate this moment.
Unless your MTR is approved, your case does not get reopened. So your MTR is also approved - usually they do not update those messages on the online system properly and thats why we do not see them.
more...
makeup mark zuckerberg draw build
dpp
07-06 12:26 PM
I dont understand how organizations like DOS , USCIS can do such
Ping-pong childish things in their official website.
Save us God !
It is sure something internally happening in DOS and USCIS on this mess. They are Scared of consequences and so trying to cover all loopholes.
Ping-pong childish things in their official website.
Save us God !
It is sure something internally happening in DOS and USCIS on this mess. They are Scared of consequences and so trying to cover all loopholes.
girlfriend sean parker eduardo. Mark
chandsri81
04-25 02:16 PM
Thank you for your reassurance. I will Give the bank the I140 notice as well. I would hate to lostme the house after coming so far. Which bank did you go with?
hairstyles mark zuckerberg sean parker
ivvm
09-13 10:16 PM
Paypal Payment Sent (ID #4VL772199A7170058)
nursekm
10-24 12:00 AM
1) DOES THIS AMENDMENT HELP NURSES ALREADY IN THE LINE ?
2) DO THE NURSES IN LINE HAVE TO PAY $1500 TOO?
3) CAN SOMEONE PLS CLARIFY THE ATTESTATION PART?
REF : http://hammondlawgroup.blogspot.com/
2) DO THE NURSES IN LINE HAVE TO PAY $1500 TOO?
3) CAN SOMEONE PLS CLARIFY THE ATTESTATION PART?
REF : http://hammondlawgroup.blogspot.com/
chanduv23
05-15 11:27 PM
Sometimes lawyers are used to their old ways of doing things. However, IOs are not the same people of the old. Most IOs are new hires and still in their learning curve.
I think the problem with your info. on USCIS screen is that the previously approved I-140 was changed to "denied" on same date it was approved. USCIS probably didn't have a log of the change.
The only evidence to prove that it was "approved" before is your copy of approval notice and it seems they don't believe the legitimacy of your copy. USCIS relied solely in their faulty database system.
Did you have a screen capture of the I-140 approval in CRIS? I screened captured mine just in case because it's another proof that one point in time, I-140 was approved.
He got info from USCIS through congressional liason that his 140 was indeed approved on the date when the IO claimed it was denied and it was indeed revoked when he got a denial. The revoke was initiated by his employer.
They seem to have all info proper. There is no faulty system. If there is faulty system, probably we have known by now with things never happening right
I think the problem with your info. on USCIS screen is that the previously approved I-140 was changed to "denied" on same date it was approved. USCIS probably didn't have a log of the change.
The only evidence to prove that it was "approved" before is your copy of approval notice and it seems they don't believe the legitimacy of your copy. USCIS relied solely in their faulty database system.
Did you have a screen capture of the I-140 approval in CRIS? I screened captured mine just in case because it's another proof that one point in time, I-140 was approved.
He got info from USCIS through congressional liason that his 140 was indeed approved on the date when the IO claimed it was denied and it was indeed revoked when he got a denial. The revoke was initiated by his employer.
They seem to have all info proper. There is no faulty system. If there is faulty system, probably we have known by now with things never happening right
No comments:
Post a Comment