trueguy
08-20 11:49 PM
Thats exactly what it is... Now folks take a look here. These were the dates before July 2007.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3236.html
It will be resonable to assume that these will be the dates in OCT bulletien for Eb3-I.
Finally, 5882 is our only hope for now.
On what basis you are saying that Oct'2008 PD will be similar to Jun'2007. Didn't you read the note in Sep'2008 VB that PD for EB3 category will retrogress further.
If you cann't support EB3 community then at least don't misguide people here. EB3-I is in severe pain right now and people like you can't understand it.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3236.html
It will be resonable to assume that these will be the dates in OCT bulletien for Eb3-I.
Finally, 5882 is our only hope for now.
On what basis you are saying that Oct'2008 PD will be similar to Jun'2007. Didn't you read the note in Sep'2008 VB that PD for EB3 category will retrogress further.
If you cann't support EB3 community then at least don't misguide people here. EB3-I is in severe pain right now and people like you can't understand it.
wallpaper NEW Emma Watson haircut style
singhsa3
08-20 10:37 PM
My understanding is that this is incorrect:
In the old system any unused visa from EB3 Row would got EB1 India/China first and then EB2 -I/C and then Eb3 -I/C.
What you described ("last few rows") is what they are following now, Einstein!!!
[Except this piece EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)]
So what will be the flow? I guess the following
EB1-> EB3-ROW (until current)
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
Once Eb3-ROW becomes current
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
EB3-ROW -> EB3-I/C
EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)
In the old system any unused visa from EB3 Row would got EB1 India/China first and then EB2 -I/C and then Eb3 -I/C.
What you described ("last few rows") is what they are following now, Einstein!!!
[Except this piece EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)]
So what will be the flow? I guess the following
EB1-> EB3-ROW (until current)
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
Once Eb3-ROW becomes current
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
EB3-ROW -> EB3-I/C
EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)
drona
07-09 06:39 PM
The flowers must go to USCIS. Let them forward it to the hospital. We need them to go to USCIS to make the media story. I don't think they can intervene our orders.
2011 Crazy Lady Gaga haircut
walking_dude
01-11 04:19 PM
1. Ball park figure is total of 218,000 visa wasted from previous years. How much of it will go to EBs (and others) will be based on how the recapture gets implemented. If we don't do anything and sit quiet, it may as well be ZERO. Nurses will walk away with the cake
2. President can pass an 'Executive Order' to provide interim relief. So it should be possible. It'll depend on the independent interpretation of the law by the White House, and it won't be based on whatever you read elsewhere.
1. How many unused visa numbers can be re-captured? Out of those re-captured, how many can be applied to EB categories? I know this is difficult to estimate this but if we believe that recapturing unused visas would help the retrogression issue, we ought to have some idea (in hundreds? thousands? more?) as to how many visa numbers can be re-captured and used towards EB categories.
2. Does the President have the authority to implement an administrative relief in this matter, particularly to recapture the unused immigrant visas? Elsewhere I have read that only congress has the authority to do this.
Please provide links/references or analysis to back up the claims.
Thanks!
Disclaimer: This is not to discourage anybody, rather just a healthy skepticism.
2. President can pass an 'Executive Order' to provide interim relief. So it should be possible. It'll depend on the independent interpretation of the law by the White House, and it won't be based on whatever you read elsewhere.
1. How many unused visa numbers can be re-captured? Out of those re-captured, how many can be applied to EB categories? I know this is difficult to estimate this but if we believe that recapturing unused visas would help the retrogression issue, we ought to have some idea (in hundreds? thousands? more?) as to how many visa numbers can be re-captured and used towards EB categories.
2. Does the President have the authority to implement an administrative relief in this matter, particularly to recapture the unused immigrant visas? Elsewhere I have read that only congress has the authority to do this.
Please provide links/references or analysis to back up the claims.
Thanks!
Disclaimer: This is not to discourage anybody, rather just a healthy skepticism.
more...
anura
04-06 06:28 AM
Is there an admin around here to delete the spam and remove the spamming usernames?
DesiGuy
09-13 04:54 AM
nice link from AILA where you can search based on party/location/sponsor/co-sponsor/non-sponsor, etc
http://congress.org/aila2/issues/bills/?bill=11328731
once you select the option, there is a email link.
on as side note, only 3 co-sponsors were added in this month, meaning our efforts ARE paying off but need more momentum.
ofcourse, many reps like to support it but not co-sponsor it.
http://congress.org/aila2/issues/bills/?bill=11328731
once you select the option, there is a email link.
on as side note, only 3 co-sponsors were added in this month, meaning our efforts ARE paying off but need more momentum.
ofcourse, many reps like to support it but not co-sponsor it.
more...
amitjoey
07-11 01:50 PM
Lets focus on US media. I have sent emails to ABC, CNN , DallasNews so far none of them covered :-(
Thanks for your efforts, every effort counts.
Thanks for your efforts, every effort counts.
2010 lady gaga barbie hairstyle
BharatPremi
09-24 04:39 PM
I don't get how you are getting the 8008 figure. Based on the 9%, you are right about the cap for any country being 12,600 for all EB categories combined.
Pre-adjudication has nothing to do with country quota. And 'assigning a number' is still based on country quota. With all the pre-adjudication, it is likely that 'assigned numbers' = GC approvals. The 'assigned numbers' concept was a lot more relevant till last year, when they had numbers, but still had to 'process' the applications. Now most applications seem to have been 'pre-processed'(pre-adjudicated)
I do appreciate your work. Just trying to help achieve a more accurate figure.
1) Each (EB1/2/3) - 28.6% WW quota = 40040
2) 5 subscription cataegories under each EB category: I,P,C,M,ROW
3) Assumption - USCIS distributes equal share among these 5 different subscription categories = 40040/5 =8008 in each EB category for a particular subscription category.
Example:
EB3 All = 40040 ( 0.286 x 140000)
EB3 ALL = EB3 I + EB3 C + EB3 M + EB3 P + EB3 ROW
Assuming equal share of all of these 5 subscription categories - 40040/5 = 8008 applications to be worked for "Assigning the visa number" not " for granting the visa (IN other words physical greencard order)"
7% + 2% = 9% country specific limit is meant for "Granting the visa - Ordering Physical Green card" out of "Applications which have been assigned a visa number" NOT FOR "Assigning the visa number"
Pre-adjudication has nothing to do with country quota. And 'assigning a number' is still based on country quota. With all the pre-adjudication, it is likely that 'assigned numbers' = GC approvals. The 'assigned numbers' concept was a lot more relevant till last year, when they had numbers, but still had to 'process' the applications. Now most applications seem to have been 'pre-processed'(pre-adjudicated)
I do appreciate your work. Just trying to help achieve a more accurate figure.
1) Each (EB1/2/3) - 28.6% WW quota = 40040
2) 5 subscription cataegories under each EB category: I,P,C,M,ROW
3) Assumption - USCIS distributes equal share among these 5 different subscription categories = 40040/5 =8008 in each EB category for a particular subscription category.
Example:
EB3 All = 40040 ( 0.286 x 140000)
EB3 ALL = EB3 I + EB3 C + EB3 M + EB3 P + EB3 ROW
Assuming equal share of all of these 5 subscription categories - 40040/5 = 8008 applications to be worked for "Assigning the visa number" not " for granting the visa (IN other words physical greencard order)"
7% + 2% = 9% country specific limit is meant for "Granting the visa - Ordering Physical Green card" out of "Applications which have been assigned a visa number" NOT FOR "Assigning the visa number"
more...
indio0617
05-15 11:15 PM
Hi,
Can anyone share their expert views on this scenario.
Say, I have approved I-140 (current PD) from employer A (never worked with). Work with employer B in a different. Now if employer A applies for I-485 and after it is pending for 6 months, Can I invoke AC21 to continue the GC process while still with employer B ?
Also is it possible to have 2 separate I-485 filed from different employers.
I have heard the above is possible. But, I am curious as to how AC21 is interpreted. Isn't AC21 essentially an instrument to change jobs without hampering the GC process. In this case since one is not 'really switching jobs' how will this be treated or possible ?
Thank You.
/\/\ Bump /\/\ Anyone ?
Can anyone share their expert views on this scenario.
Say, I have approved I-140 (current PD) from employer A (never worked with). Work with employer B in a different. Now if employer A applies for I-485 and after it is pending for 6 months, Can I invoke AC21 to continue the GC process while still with employer B ?
Also is it possible to have 2 separate I-485 filed from different employers.
I have heard the above is possible. But, I am curious as to how AC21 is interpreted. Isn't AC21 essentially an instrument to change jobs without hampering the GC process. In this case since one is not 'really switching jobs' how will this be treated or possible ?
Thank You.
/\/\ Bump /\/\ Anyone ?
hair The Next Lady GaGa Hairstyle?
cnag
09-09 01:43 PM
I am from Texas. I called the representatives from Texas who are on the list:
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236
Will call the other reps. now
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236
Will call the other reps. now
more...
shortchanged
10-09 05:06 PM
I also did send a second set on August 16th.For me and family we have already got EADs,AP and AOS receipts and are all finger printed.
I have also requested stop payments on the August checks,and had addressed"not to be opened in Mailroom-for Center Director" Explained to disregard the second set if my earlier filing on July2nd has already been accepted for processing.So far no further info.Will keep fingers crossed and see what happens!
I have also requested stop payments on the August checks,and had addressed"not to be opened in Mailroom-for Center Director" Explained to disregard the second set if my earlier filing on July2nd has already been accepted for processing.So far no further info.Will keep fingers crossed and see what happens!
hot Lady Gaga#39;s long yellow blonde
pappu
09-09 11:38 AM
Update as of Sept 22:
HR 5882 is being marked up for 1pm tomorrow (Sept 23rd 2008). Please continue to call the judiciary committee members below and express your support.
Update on Sept 12th
------------------------------------------------------
We have learned that in all probability House Judiciary committee will finishing marking up HR5882 in the next committee meeting. The bill is likely to be brought to the House floor the following week. We have been told that if our bill(s) pass the House, Senate will include the language of the bill(s) in another Senate bill that has majority support. We must admit that the time is shot but its still possible.
We request everyone that starting monday, please call all the members of Judiciary committee. Thanks to the members who have already made phone calls to the lawmaker's office. We request you to please call again to show your support starting Monday.
Thanks,
IV has just now got a green light from our lobbyists. We need to start calling now.
Someone please consolidate all information and create a campaign for this. Now is the time to follow up with anybody on the full committee with whom we have previously met or been in contact. Don’t call people who are already cosponsors. Only select people in the committee that are not co-sponsors. Make sure to say that you are a member of immigration voice so that it complements our lobbying efforts.
Please pool your energies and create a list of people to call, phone numbers and what to say. Any moderator will add in the first post of this thread.
Please keep posting your feedback on the thread when you have called. Once the campaign details are posted, post them on other websites too.
_______________
House Judiciary Committee Members
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND & TALKING POINTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HR5882 was sponsored by Congresswoman Lofgren and Congressman Sensenbrenner. This bill recaptures all the unused visa numbers that have been lost since 1992 due to processing delays in Employment based category and Family category. It is estimated that 216000 green cards will be recaptured which would help to eleviate the employment based backlogs.
Please use the instructions provided below to make the phone calls.
(1) Call the congressman/woman office and request to speak with the aide who handles Legislative and Immigration matters
2) If they are not available leave a VM for them -
"I would like Representative "Representative Name" to support HR 5882, bill to recapture the green cards lost due to processing and bureaucratic delays. As you may already know that this is a bi-partisan bill with wide bipartisan support in the house and will help improve American competitiveness & reduce the back logs associated with USCIS. This bill is non controversial measures that will help US to stay competitive with a highly educated and skilled work force and address family based backlogs also.
To All congress-critters:
In a nutshell, this bill allows USCIS to manage their workflow more effectively, which provides better customer service, and will eventually lead to better turn-around times.
To Democrats: More people will be able to get their citizenship in reasonable times.
To Republicans: Companies will be able to attract more talent which improves economic performance."
(3) As usual Do NOT get into the CIR issue or illegal Immigration. If the aide is confusing with CIR or illegal immigration, just tell them that these are legal immigration bills.
(4) If the aide asks whether you belong to the district or not, tell them NO if you don't. Mention to them that you already spoke with your representative and would like the congressman/congresswoman
support.
The list of key representatives along with their contact information is provided in this post.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If asked please say that you are a member of Immigration Voice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the staffer ask - "did you call the representative in your area", say that -
"Yes I did. Congressman/Congresswoman is a prominent member of Immigration Sub-committee which makes him a national figure of great importance. Congressman's decision and support is very important for people inside and outside of your district and as such I urge you and the Congressman to support HR5882."
HR 5882 is being marked up for 1pm tomorrow (Sept 23rd 2008). Please continue to call the judiciary committee members below and express your support.
Update on Sept 12th
------------------------------------------------------
We have learned that in all probability House Judiciary committee will finishing marking up HR5882 in the next committee meeting. The bill is likely to be brought to the House floor the following week. We have been told that if our bill(s) pass the House, Senate will include the language of the bill(s) in another Senate bill that has majority support. We must admit that the time is shot but its still possible.
We request everyone that starting monday, please call all the members of Judiciary committee. Thanks to the members who have already made phone calls to the lawmaker's office. We request you to please call again to show your support starting Monday.
Thanks,
IV has just now got a green light from our lobbyists. We need to start calling now.
Someone please consolidate all information and create a campaign for this. Now is the time to follow up with anybody on the full committee with whom we have previously met or been in contact. Don’t call people who are already cosponsors. Only select people in the committee that are not co-sponsors. Make sure to say that you are a member of immigration voice so that it complements our lobbying efforts.
Please pool your energies and create a list of people to call, phone numbers and what to say. Any moderator will add in the first post of this thread.
Please keep posting your feedback on the thread when you have called. Once the campaign details are posted, post them on other websites too.
_______________
House Judiciary Committee Members
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND & TALKING POINTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HR5882 was sponsored by Congresswoman Lofgren and Congressman Sensenbrenner. This bill recaptures all the unused visa numbers that have been lost since 1992 due to processing delays in Employment based category and Family category. It is estimated that 216000 green cards will be recaptured which would help to eleviate the employment based backlogs.
Please use the instructions provided below to make the phone calls.
(1) Call the congressman/woman office and request to speak with the aide who handles Legislative and Immigration matters
2) If they are not available leave a VM for them -
"I would like Representative "Representative Name" to support HR 5882, bill to recapture the green cards lost due to processing and bureaucratic delays. As you may already know that this is a bi-partisan bill with wide bipartisan support in the house and will help improve American competitiveness & reduce the back logs associated with USCIS. This bill is non controversial measures that will help US to stay competitive with a highly educated and skilled work force and address family based backlogs also.
To All congress-critters:
In a nutshell, this bill allows USCIS to manage their workflow more effectively, which provides better customer service, and will eventually lead to better turn-around times.
To Democrats: More people will be able to get their citizenship in reasonable times.
To Republicans: Companies will be able to attract more talent which improves economic performance."
(3) As usual Do NOT get into the CIR issue or illegal Immigration. If the aide is confusing with CIR or illegal immigration, just tell them that these are legal immigration bills.
(4) If the aide asks whether you belong to the district or not, tell them NO if you don't. Mention to them that you already spoke with your representative and would like the congressman/congresswoman
support.
The list of key representatives along with their contact information is provided in this post.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If asked please say that you are a member of Immigration Voice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the staffer ask - "did you call the representative in your area", say that -
"Yes I did. Congressman/Congresswoman is a prominent member of Immigration Sub-committee which makes him a national figure of great importance. Congressman's decision and support is very important for people inside and outside of your district and as such I urge you and the Congressman to support HR5882."
more...
house Gaga says her hairstyle
bobby
05-21 04:32 PM
I am curious to know what USCIS actually does when they adjudicate adjustment of status cases. I know a security/name check is done when they have your fingerprints but what else? Do they use your social security number to look at your credit history or do they contact the IRS for transcripts of your tax returns etc, how do they verify information on your employer etc etc? Does anyone know what procedures/actions USCIS takes when adjudicating cases? Thanks...:confused:
tattoo 2009 bob hairstyle from Lady
darslee
07-10 11:37 PM
Wow! I am so happy that the flowers brought such joy! And we made our point.
more...
pictures Lady GaGa Platinum Blonde
snathan
09-24 01:18 PM
THe reason USCIS is showing low numbers for the reason that , no one will then raise the question for recpature. Looking at the numbers they will say, O, the numbers are so low, whats the need for recapture and we will be left hanging cold and dry.
This is a plot of a well planned strategy.
So the question araise is why the dates are not moving or not current?
This is a plot of a well planned strategy.
So the question araise is why the dates are not moving or not current?
dresses Click on a Picture to see it
she81
06-29 07:59 PM
And I was hoping that my labor stuck at the BEC's will *hopefully* arrive just in time (before september - per what's embedded in BLACK LETTERS on the July VB and DOL) to give me enough to file 140/485... what an awful pathetic joke
more...
makeup Lady GaGa#39;s hairstyle,
mallickarjunreddy
03-26 01:33 PM
what happens if ur wife gets hired by CAP one and she has problems after getting into a organization .. so i think you can think about fighting but also look for other options and would u do the same thing if you were in India assuming u r from India or just move on
Right but the here problem is that how to come up with written evidence of discrimination? These jerks do not send you an email "Hey, we do not consider EAD". Their pattern is generally as under.
You get an first email for their interest as your resume matches teh job
description and they want you to spit out everything in your reply
Say you have written " Authorized to work for Any employer in USA" for
work status, they do not communicate to have you spitted out specifics.
They call you. If you do not spit out, they would not go ahead. If you spit
out "EAD" smart ones do not even talk further and you find all
communication stopped. Now this is my own experience. Tell me how can
I convert this into "evidence of discrimination". Even if I have tape
recorded conversation, that guy did not utter any single word after I
spitted out "EAD"
Right but the here problem is that how to come up with written evidence of discrimination? These jerks do not send you an email "Hey, we do not consider EAD". Their pattern is generally as under.
You get an first email for their interest as your resume matches teh job
description and they want you to spit out everything in your reply
Say you have written " Authorized to work for Any employer in USA" for
work status, they do not communicate to have you spitted out specifics.
They call you. If you do not spit out, they would not go ahead. If you spit
out "EAD" smart ones do not even talk further and you find all
communication stopped. Now this is my own experience. Tell me how can
I convert this into "evidence of discrimination". Even if I have tape
recorded conversation, that guy did not utter any single word after I
spitted out "EAD"
girlfriend Lady Gaga new hairstyle?
desi3933
08-21 04:33 PM
I am thinking a Flower Campign to Sen Lofgren??..what do you guys think..
""Forget Me not ..I am EB-3 India (Highly skilled) waiting a decade for my Green Card"..Please pass the Visa recapture bill! ""
As per your profile
Labor Approval Date: 04/21/2003 I140 Mailed Date: 05/05/2007
May I ask you the reason for 4 year gap for I-140 filing? Are you using Labor Substitution?
One more -
Since you are waiting for decade, I assume your PD is 1998 or 1999. Is that correct?
""Forget Me not ..I am EB-3 India (Highly skilled) waiting a decade for my Green Card"..Please pass the Visa recapture bill! ""
As per your profile
Labor Approval Date: 04/21/2003 I140 Mailed Date: 05/05/2007
May I ask you the reason for 4 year gap for I-140 filing? Are you using Labor Substitution?
One more -
Since you are waiting for decade, I assume your PD is 1998 or 1999. Is that correct?
hairstyles pictures Lady GaGa inspired ow
prinive
07-09 08:33 PM
he and his some of his staffs are member of IV. {shhhhh that is a secret}
How did he came to know about this, where as many big media heads are unaware of this........any idea?
How did he came to know about this, where as many big media heads are unaware of this........any idea?
mail2me_Ds
09-08 06:27 PM
I received CPO email yesterday night, But the dependent application status is pending. Please let me know what steps I need to take to followup with the dependent's case.
arkrish68
09-10 02:06 PM
Today I and my wife had an infopass appointment and were told that our I485 case is in Adjudication review and should expect an interview soon. I asked the officer is there anything wrong and he replied back that everything is fine. I am not sure what adjudication review is and why there is an interview if everything is fine :confused:
We also opened SR on 9/1/2010 and I got the response today for the SR request and it has the following details
"Your case is currently under review. You should receive a decision or notice of other action within 60 days of the date of this letter." Does this mean that we will not get the GC atleast in the next 60 days?
Did anyone had an interview before or anyone know what should we expect in the interview.
Thanks in advance.
We also opened SR on 9/1/2010 and I got the response today for the SR request and it has the following details
"Your case is currently under review. You should receive a decision or notice of other action within 60 days of the date of this letter." Does this mean that we will not get the GC atleast in the next 60 days?
Did anyone had an interview before or anyone know what should we expect in the interview.
Thanks in advance.