greyhair
06-10 07:30 PM
For whatever reason, rumors are flying all over the Internet that the end of H1B and EAD employment authorization is at hand. This is complete nonsense. The purported basis for these rumors is an amendment offered in the Senate (S. Amdt. 4319) to a tax bill previously passed by the House (HR 4213). As written, this proposal would prohibit companies from filing H1B petitions if the company has laid off any employees in the last year. It would also void all existing H petitions for a company if the company lays off personnel.
Let's put this in context. Microsoft decides to lay off some of its loading dock personnel because they want to outsource that work. Under this proposal, they would then have to terminate all of their H1B engineers. That simply doesn't pass the laugh test.
Like most of Grassley's proposals, this amendment is pure idiocy. I suppose that's what happens when your parents are siblings. This bill has absolutely no chance of ever becoming law. .
It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. Pandering to the client base will not help the clients, it will only help the service provider.
Let's put this in context. Microsoft decides to lay off some of its loading dock personnel because they want to outsource that work. Under this proposal, they would then have to terminate all of their H1B engineers. That simply doesn't pass the laugh test.
Like most of Grassley's proposals, this amendment is pure idiocy. I suppose that's what happens when your parents are siblings. This bill has absolutely no chance of ever becoming law. .
It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. Pandering to the client base will not help the clients, it will only help the service provider.
wallpaper (sorry I am quoting a quote…
GCKaIntezar
02-21 11:14 AM
Sorry I had 2/26 as Sunday in my previous post.
Thanks Sekar, please bring as many friends as you can. I plan to be there around 3:30pm.
Hi Guys when are you meeting in Durga temple Let me know I can come with some of my friends
Sekar
Thanks Sekar, please bring as many friends as you can. I plan to be there around 3:30pm.
Hi Guys when are you meeting in Durga temple Let me know I can come with some of my friends
Sekar
CSPAvictim
07-10 05:38 PM
Note: Administrators/Moderators, please move this post to the appropriate thread, or delete it if this has already been posted elsewhere.
Source: http://www.murthy.com
Update on AILF's Legal Action Center Visa Bulletin Litigation (Updated 7/10/07) Posted 2:45pm
The response has been so strong that currently we do not need any more potential plaintiffs who submitted an adjustment application for receipt in July, unless the individuals have an unusual situation or especially compelling facts, such as an aging-out child. At this time, we also would like to hear from the �non-filers� -- people who did not and do not plan to submit an adjustment application for receipt in July but would have done so �but for� the DOS and USCIS actions. These individuals will represent a separate class of plaintiffs. And we�d like to hear from more �other worker� adjustment applicants who applied in June, even if they have not yet received a rejection notice. These individuals will represent a separate class as well.
If the lawsuit is successful (and we fully expect it will be), the court will certify classes, and all people who meet the class descriptions will receive the relief the court orders. The class members will not need to �sign up� with AILF to enjoy those rights.
Regarding �non-filers� � As our July 7 InfoNet update explained, and as we explain in our FAQ, we will include a class of people who would have submitted their adjustment applications for receipt in July, �but for� the government�s actions. The government may try to, or the court may want to treat this class differently from the class of people who submitted applications for receipt in July. Our aim is to do the best possible for both groups.
How soon will we file the law suit? Very soon. It is not easy or quick to prepare class action litigation involving numerous people and numerous claims, but we are working quickly because of the urgency of these events for so many people.
Injunction? AILF knows many people want a quick resolution, as do we. A temporary or ill-conceived order might create more chaos and confusion than we saw in late June / early July. And the government presumably would immediately appeal, creating even more confusion about whether applications were being accepted. By contrast, we intend to seek an injunction that will be forward-looking and will not create another crisis situation for AILA members or the government.
Source: http://www.murthy.com
Update on AILF's Legal Action Center Visa Bulletin Litigation (Updated 7/10/07) Posted 2:45pm
The response has been so strong that currently we do not need any more potential plaintiffs who submitted an adjustment application for receipt in July, unless the individuals have an unusual situation or especially compelling facts, such as an aging-out child. At this time, we also would like to hear from the �non-filers� -- people who did not and do not plan to submit an adjustment application for receipt in July but would have done so �but for� the DOS and USCIS actions. These individuals will represent a separate class of plaintiffs. And we�d like to hear from more �other worker� adjustment applicants who applied in June, even if they have not yet received a rejection notice. These individuals will represent a separate class as well.
If the lawsuit is successful (and we fully expect it will be), the court will certify classes, and all people who meet the class descriptions will receive the relief the court orders. The class members will not need to �sign up� with AILF to enjoy those rights.
Regarding �non-filers� � As our July 7 InfoNet update explained, and as we explain in our FAQ, we will include a class of people who would have submitted their adjustment applications for receipt in July, �but for� the government�s actions. The government may try to, or the court may want to treat this class differently from the class of people who submitted applications for receipt in July. Our aim is to do the best possible for both groups.
How soon will we file the law suit? Very soon. It is not easy or quick to prepare class action litigation involving numerous people and numerous claims, but we are working quickly because of the urgency of these events for so many people.
Injunction? AILF knows many people want a quick resolution, as do we. A temporary or ill-conceived order might create more chaos and confusion than we saw in late June / early July. And the government presumably would immediately appeal, creating even more confusion about whether applications were being accepted. By contrast, we intend to seek an injunction that will be forward-looking and will not create another crisis situation for AILA members or the government.
2011 Quotation Mark Tape
GCKaMaara
04-07 10:52 AM
I would not say people are intentionally lying but fact accuracy deters when transferred from one mouth to another. I would only rely on first hand information.
more...
tooclose
07-12 09:13 PM
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
wow... too many options ... do u know the source for any of these ?
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
wow... too many options ... do u know the source for any of these ?
coldcloud
06-11 09:22 AM
Sent.
more...
logiclife
12-12 10:26 AM
We have asked an immigration lawyer this question. Someone even quoted all the sections of INA and CFR(code of federal regulations) to make the point -- that you can have regulation changed to file 485.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
2010 phone to organize a quote
calgirl
07-20 02:33 PM
Few employers and few lawyers didn't apply for EAD/AP on July 2nd. My employer said they applied for 485 but not EAD/AP. They will wait for receipt notice and then apply for EAD/AP.
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
more...
serg
07-01 09:46 PM
Who gave that guy the right to ask questions to IV Core rudely ? He is questioning as if he hired IV core for resolving this Crisis and asking for status update.
He/She crossed the line somehow.
Yep, go ahead and ask to delete all newcomers who've been here less then {insert # of days}, or who can't contribute, or just anyone who was waiting for promised update (thanks Pappu for update).
He/She crossed the line somehow.
Yep, go ahead and ask to delete all newcomers who've been here less then {insert # of days}, or who can't contribute, or just anyone who was waiting for promised update (thanks Pappu for update).
hair They excerpt a quote
uma001
12-21 04:21 PM
This is from Murthy chat.
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Thats for those who are still in US. You have been put of US and reentered , so dont worry...Chill out
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Thats for those who are still in US. You have been put of US and reentered , so dont worry...Chill out
more...
rexjamla
03-07 08:49 AM
There is no need to let USCIS know about changing job after 180 days of 485 filing. U should have offer / empl letter from the employer when your priority date becomes current.
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
hot that#39;s not a quotation,
walking_dude
10-28 11:46 PM
I sent mine. Did you send yours?
more...
house a bespoke online quotation
concorde
07-23 04:32 PM
Mine reached NSC on July 2 at 9:02 AM. Got Fedex delivery confirmation and no receipt from CIS yet. Will check with my lawyer for advise.
You must be joking :-) about asking the attorney for advise :-). See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=122613&postcount=39
Unfortunately most of the attorneys don't seem to be on top of the situation
and will only list out the "obvious" possible outcomes which we ourselves can list out.!! So far, at least 2 attorneys I have approaced haven't been able to tell me how 2 485 applications for a single person are handled. Godammit, it is not some rocket science question; it has to be there in some USCIS manual/rule book or a section of the immigration law.
You must be joking :-) about asking the attorney for advise :-). See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=122613&postcount=39
Unfortunately most of the attorneys don't seem to be on top of the situation
and will only list out the "obvious" possible outcomes which we ourselves can list out.!! So far, at least 2 attorneys I have approaced haven't been able to tell me how 2 485 applications for a single person are handled. Godammit, it is not some rocket science question; it has to be there in some USCIS manual/rule book or a section of the immigration law.
tattoo quoting-a-quote Free Software Downloads and Reviews
jayZinDC
05-28 03:41 PM
I used AC21 twice. Both times I informed USCIS, EVL contained exact job description but different title. Did not have any AC21 related RFE and today got 'CP ordered email'. :) good luck to all!
Hope this helps...
Did you send the EVL to USCIS yourself or did your lawyer take care of it? Is there are specific process, document format to follow? Congrats one and all who got approved seems to be a lot of progress in the Eb-2 arena. I heard of 15 approvals of EB-2 PD03 (Jan-Apr) in my company itsef
Hope this helps...
Did you send the EVL to USCIS yourself or did your lawyer take care of it? Is there are specific process, document format to follow? Congrats one and all who got approved seems to be a lot of progress in the Eb-2 arena. I heard of 15 approvals of EB-2 PD03 (Jan-Apr) in my company itsef
more...
pictures You do know your quoting a
sc09876
08-10 02:42 PM
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
Let me just say I am not here to start a EB2 vs EB3 fight. I think the beef is that EB3 is still in 2002 while EB2 is now peeking into 2007.
However, IMHO, if you extend that logic, since EB3 has much more filings than EB2, EB2 wait time would be unrealistically high. Just my opinion that it defeats the purpose of classification, since in the end, it will be PD based and not classification based.
Instead the focus should be in "automatic" progression to higher classification if the PD has certain # of years. For example: If the job requirement had 3 years at the time of labor and 3 more years have passes since, 140 should automatically be allowed to re-classify to EB2 (filed or yet to file)
This way, working for the same employer and adding experience will be an advantage and would not need to change jobs just to re-classify or port.
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
Let me just say I am not here to start a EB2 vs EB3 fight. I think the beef is that EB3 is still in 2002 while EB2 is now peeking into 2007.
However, IMHO, if you extend that logic, since EB3 has much more filings than EB2, EB2 wait time would be unrealistically high. Just my opinion that it defeats the purpose of classification, since in the end, it will be PD based and not classification based.
Instead the focus should be in "automatic" progression to higher classification if the PD has certain # of years. For example: If the job requirement had 3 years at the time of labor and 3 more years have passes since, 140 should automatically be allowed to re-classify to EB2 (filed or yet to file)
This way, working for the same employer and adding experience will be an advantage and would not need to change jobs just to re-classify or port.
dresses ago to provide a quotation
GCVivek
03-21 02:42 PM
UMA001,
Your case may be sad and I understand your frustration but the fact that you joined the company ONLY FOR GC is itself ILLEGAL. You should have known this was coming. There is no legal standing for them to sponsor your GC without having a job for you (needing your services) AFTER you are granted GC.
This is simply the truth!
-Vivek
Mayhemt,
Please dont talk without knowing the truth.
I joined the company only for green card, I was a consultant for them before I became full time. They told me this 'We will sponsor green card, will you become full time' I said if you do green card I will join. But they did not keep their promise. Thatis give and take. They already gained from their investment, Thats y they dont want to sponsor anymore. They do green card for what we do for 6 years not for sticking with them for 20+ years.
if I was in my company shoes , I would not take the documents, drag for 2.5 years and say 'We found candidates' . I would have either said in 6 months sorry we cant do or file green card.One need to have honesty. If I am that smart likemy employer I would ve started a company already and firing H1 guys left n right
Your case may be sad and I understand your frustration but the fact that you joined the company ONLY FOR GC is itself ILLEGAL. You should have known this was coming. There is no legal standing for them to sponsor your GC without having a job for you (needing your services) AFTER you are granted GC.
This is simply the truth!
-Vivek
Mayhemt,
Please dont talk without knowing the truth.
I joined the company only for green card, I was a consultant for them before I became full time. They told me this 'We will sponsor green card, will you become full time' I said if you do green card I will join. But they did not keep their promise. Thatis give and take. They already gained from their investment, Thats y they dont want to sponsor anymore. They do green card for what we do for 6 years not for sticking with them for 20+ years.
if I was in my company shoes , I would not take the documents, drag for 2.5 years and say 'We found candidates' . I would have either said in 6 months sorry we cant do or file green card.One need to have honesty. If I am that smart likemy employer I would ve started a company already and firing H1 guys left n right
more...
makeup quoting in essays. in a quote
amitjoey
07-03 11:50 PM
I understand that a lot of people have a genuine concern about why we would need funds for a law-suit, especially when AILF is doing it and it wont cost members to participate.
I am not core IV member, and I do not know the right answer, so I might be wrong, but last time there was a discussion about lawsuit, and previous occasions when it was discussed, it was clear that lawsuits have to be accompanied by a simultaneous campaign of lobbying, media coverage, and buying print and radio space. If we have to make a big splash, and make it really red and dark. That will also put a lot of pressure on the concerned authorities. These related activities need $$. Again, I might be totally offbase here. Pappu can answer this.
I am not core IV member, and I do not know the right answer, so I might be wrong, but last time there was a discussion about lawsuit, and previous occasions when it was discussed, it was clear that lawsuits have to be accompanied by a simultaneous campaign of lobbying, media coverage, and buying print and radio space. If we have to make a big splash, and make it really red and dark. That will also put a lot of pressure on the concerned authorities. These related activities need $$. Again, I might be totally offbase here. Pappu can answer this.
girlfriend quoting-a-quote Free Software Downloads and Reviews
hpandey
04-10 11:17 AM
seem kind of depressing . It looks like there are a lot more people from mid 2004 and before than from 2005 onwards.
is the sample size too small ( 939 people only ) or does it really signify that even the end 2004 people are in for a long long wait !!:rolleyes:
is the sample size too small ( 939 people only ) or does it really signify that even the end 2004 people are in for a long long wait !!:rolleyes:
hairstyles by her quoting a six-time
lvinaykumar
07-16 07:40 PM
Can we sue them for spreading false information
nixstor
07-05 02:33 PM
I found the forum by chance and didn't realize there was more to this website until a while after I signed up. On second thought look at my sign up date, I think I'll just let you old timers battle this one out.
I am neither taking shots at you nor pointing fingers at you. Its not about old timers or new comers. I hope it will not take for ever for you to be convinced that your favorite website needs contributions from every one
I am neither taking shots at you nor pointing fingers at you. Its not about old timers or new comers. I hope it will not take for ever for you to be convinced that your favorite website needs contributions from every one
anilsal
12-10 09:48 AM
A movement of 15 days in EB3-I is a good movement. Big movement in EB3 without law change is not possible.
You are correct. In fact, without some legislation or a bill for recapture getting passed, large movement in dates in not possible.
You are correct. In fact, without some legislation or a bill for recapture getting passed, large movement in dates in not possible.