ghost
08-11 11:46 AM
You put it out well from your side.
BTW, are you really 2007 EB3 I? Do you have a guesstimate on when you would get GC?:rolleyes:
Folks,
In our legal immigrant community, we have the following Groups (G) of people:
G1) Handful of leaders - folks who clearly understand that only legislative fixes and administrative fixes can provide realistic help
G2) Dozens of volunteers - who are willing to take that extra step and contribute time and effort for the sake of others
G3) Hundreds of donors, both regular or one-time - who trust IV leadership and commit to the cause without any qualms whatsoever
G4) Thousands of members - who try to understand the issues we are facing but do not have a realistic assessment of how bad things are
G5) Many more - who either are not bothered by this wait or who simply gave up on this process and became dormant of some sorts of their career
While the predictions thread provided some clarity and entertainment for EB2 folks, this September 2010 bulletin is a blessing in disguise for all of us.
Current state of our Members (M):
M1) We have recently greened EB2 folks (2005-2006 EB2 folks), who have a fresh memory of the painful wait
M2) We have folks who relied on predictions (May 2006 - Jul 2007 EB2 folks), who must be frustrated and disappointed with today's bulletin
M3) We have folks who were looking forward to Jul-Sep 2011 (Aug 2007 - Dec 2008 EB2 folks), who now realize that their wait is even longer than assumed
M4) We have EB-3 folks waiting forever and feeling that they are being neglected in IV advocacy efforts
Folks who are in M2/M3/M4 state above should take some time and contemplate the options they have between now and Sep 2011.
I can see three Options (O):
O1) "Wait and Watch" option:
This applies to folks who are either close to the PD being current or folks who are on EADs or folks who are happy with their current career state
O2) "You are on your own" option:
EB-3 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-2 GC process within the next 6 months (make sure your current GC application has an approved 140)
EB-2 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-1 GC process
O3) "We are in this together" option
All EB-2 and EB-3 folks sign up for a concerted effort where IV leadership is in the driver's seat.
Each one of us should be able to relate to one combination of Group/Member/Option (GMOs) from the above list. Personally I'm G3M3O3, what are you?
BTW, are you really 2007 EB3 I? Do you have a guesstimate on when you would get GC?:rolleyes:
Folks,
In our legal immigrant community, we have the following Groups (G) of people:
G1) Handful of leaders - folks who clearly understand that only legislative fixes and administrative fixes can provide realistic help
G2) Dozens of volunteers - who are willing to take that extra step and contribute time and effort for the sake of others
G3) Hundreds of donors, both regular or one-time - who trust IV leadership and commit to the cause without any qualms whatsoever
G4) Thousands of members - who try to understand the issues we are facing but do not have a realistic assessment of how bad things are
G5) Many more - who either are not bothered by this wait or who simply gave up on this process and became dormant of some sorts of their career
While the predictions thread provided some clarity and entertainment for EB2 folks, this September 2010 bulletin is a blessing in disguise for all of us.
Current state of our Members (M):
M1) We have recently greened EB2 folks (2005-2006 EB2 folks), who have a fresh memory of the painful wait
M2) We have folks who relied on predictions (May 2006 - Jul 2007 EB2 folks), who must be frustrated and disappointed with today's bulletin
M3) We have folks who were looking forward to Jul-Sep 2011 (Aug 2007 - Dec 2008 EB2 folks), who now realize that their wait is even longer than assumed
M4) We have EB-3 folks waiting forever and feeling that they are being neglected in IV advocacy efforts
Folks who are in M2/M3/M4 state above should take some time and contemplate the options they have between now and Sep 2011.
I can see three Options (O):
O1) "Wait and Watch" option:
This applies to folks who are either close to the PD being current or folks who are on EADs or folks who are happy with their current career state
O2) "You are on your own" option:
EB-3 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-2 GC process within the next 6 months (make sure your current GC application has an approved 140)
EB-2 folks - can try find a job where the employer is ready to start their EB-1 GC process
O3) "We are in this together" option
All EB-2 and EB-3 folks sign up for a concerted effort where IV leadership is in the driver's seat.
Each one of us should be able to relate to one combination of Group/Member/Option (GMOs) from the above list. Personally I'm G3M3O3, what are you?
wallpaper Getting Your Ear Piercing
jayleno
07-28 09:23 AM
The best way to protest is to STOP DRINKING. Just kidding. Dont worry...Lord Ganesha will punish those sinners.
If you are not sure if you can open a thread for this here...most probably you shouldnt.
If you are not sure if you can open a thread for this here...most probably you shouldnt.
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
2011 Ear Piercing
at0474
12-21 07:56 PM
lazycis,
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
According to 245(k), does it mean that "unauthorized stay" (or stay with expired I-94) of more than 1 year is wiped out if a nonimmigrant went out of the country, entered back with a new I-94 and maintained legal status ever since? He/she should not have any problems in adjusting status with 485?
I like your insight into immigration policies and the way you express them.
Thanks.
more...
snathan
11-13 01:28 AM
It not about law... it is about following the law...
If you want quick action shoot letters ALL AT THE SAME TIME.... Just decide the name and the address of recipients .... Attach the copy of the rule and write the letter .....
Just make enough noise so that they can not ignore this rule...
Count me in for this...
If you want quick action shoot letters ALL AT THE SAME TIME.... Just decide the name and the address of recipients .... Attach the copy of the rule and write the letter .....
Just make enough noise so that they can not ignore this rule...
Count me in for this...
paskal
07-03 09:13 PM
If this is true, then everyone who thinks this is unfair must write letters to USCIS, Ombudsman, WH etc
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
USCIS does not read our forums and will not take action from a forum post.
If you see something wrong, and you feel strongly about it, Do not let it happen.
In hindsight I think we should have done it for labor substitution too.
nixstor, you right of course. i was not comparing it to labor sub, just pointing out that there are a myriad of loopholes. the EB1C is hardly meant for employees already here- sending them out and bringing them back is legal- yet its very much a loophole being exploited. in many cases - again just my anecdotal observation, the position is not just a fake manager- yet the position is not the real "concept" of a multinational manager either. i have seen attorneys in big corporate firms getting EB1c by this method.
i do believe though that over time USCIS has become aware of this activity. A little skimming of EB1c posts on reveals a great deal of new scrutiny for the EB1c 1-140 petitions. The same is true when an entirely new employee is being brought in. they are asking a lot of questions on company structures, hierarchy and individual roles and responsibilities....
more...
dkjariwala
04-09 12:18 AM
The person was returning from the India trip. Anyway, I think I will shut up for now and get in touch with the person so that IV can help him and we can get some clarification on what IO can or can not do.
2010 Ear piercing is popular today.
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
more...
gc28262
06-11 09:36 AM
resent it !
hair A few nice Ear Piercing images
amitjoey
07-03 05:40 PM
When we are already doing the work (sending flowers, calling senators & media etc), why should we pay IV? Also, I would feel more comfy donating to something where I can see where the money is going.. I'm not well versed with the website, but is there a place I can get financial info from.. Thnks..
Please PM IV Core, also in regards to how the funds will be used, there is detailed text on the financial contributions page.
Please PM IV Core, also in regards to how the funds will be used, there is detailed text on the financial contributions page.
more...
hydboy77
12-10 11:16 AM
With all the porting nonsense going on eb2 will move backward and eb3 will inch forward slowly. We might end up with eb2 and eb3 in 2002. congrats to all the people who ported, the only thing you accomplished is you made sure eb2 does not progress (it does not mean you have have moved forward by porting, it just means that you have made sure you have prevented original eb2 guys from getting green card), the people who ported wont gain any benefit but they will make it worse for everyone, they have to file a second i140 which will take at least another 1 year to clear and after 1 year when the ported 140's clear the eb2 will go back to 2002. You have also accomplished another great feat, DOL is going to make it impossible to file eb2 in IT jobs so even genuine people are screwed. Before people start giving red dots and justifying there porting I have an message for you, your behavior is no different from the people who did labor substitution, the end result was DOL ended labor substitution and the result of all this porting is DOL has made it impossible to get eb2 even for genuine cases. Just because others are doing it does not mean you can do it, obviously it is wrong therefore dol removed labor substitution and now dol is making it impossible to get eb2 for IT jobs even for genuine cases. 90 % of people doing this porting are desi consulting employees, they wine and complain about desi consulting companies as blood suckers (justifiably) but they themselves are bloodsuckers on the EB2 community by doing this eb3 to eb2 porting.
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.
hot Ear Piercing
gc_on_demand
08-10 04:01 PM
10th is almost over and I thought we had this trend that when USCIS wants to maintain status quo they publish bulletin early in the month and if the bulletin is delayed there is strong probablity that there will be some positive movement
I have seen same trend for last two years. Reason was simple for last two years as they want to see demand for current month and then predict cutoff date for next month. But I don't see that same thing will happen again. As DOS must know remaining of visa # for fiscal year and also since USCIS has pre adjudicated at least 140k cases they should not take long time to calculate cutoff date.
Their job is piece of cake now. But I was wondering that since till last month it was really game of guess for VO so he was not following Mid month date ( generally 15th or around ) to release data. But now he has clear picture in mind so he may wait till Mid month which is Friday to release data.
I have seen same trend for last two years. Reason was simple for last two years as they want to see demand for current month and then predict cutoff date for next month. But I don't see that same thing will happen again. As DOS must know remaining of visa # for fiscal year and also since USCIS has pre adjudicated at least 140k cases they should not take long time to calculate cutoff date.
Their job is piece of cake now. But I was wondering that since till last month it was really game of guess for VO so he was not following Mid month date ( generally 15th or around ) to release data. But now he has clear picture in mind so he may wait till Mid month which is Friday to release data.
more...
house Ear Piercing Paralyzed Teen
starving_dog
07-24 09:44 AM
This thread started just over an hour ago. The IV Core Team have full time jobs, families and competing interests. One of them will surely see the thread and comment in due time.
tattoo Ear Piercing by sarawestermark
GreenLantern
03-07 07:28 AM
Wow, that is nice grinch. It's pretty detailed. I like the map on the wall.
:thumb:
:thumb:
more...
pictures Ear Piercing
sbabunle
01-02 12:51 AM
There are many ethnic TV channels in the USA. For instance Asianet is Kerala Channel. Sun TV is Tamil I guess. Can we think of doing advertisement on some of these channels? It could be expensive, but I think it would be worth trying....
dresses Extreme piercings plus ear
webm
04-24 11:53 AM
Thank you all for the warm response. I appreciate it and wish the same for absolutely all of you. I hope my heated discussions with various officials about TSC's lack of action will clear some logjam for everyone else who is current but still waiting.
Thanks much!!
Thanks much!!
more...
makeup A few nice Ear Piercing images
psaxena
03-09 02:50 PM
I think this fits for everyone of us. :eek:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/blog.php?b=56
lol..dont say 2019..my PD is almost same as yours and I aint hanging around till 2019..by that time I will be old and no idea what will I do with..GC..probaly hope for citizenship and apply for retirement benefits :confused::confused::confused:
Edit: Never mind..yours is EB3..so may be mine will come in 2015
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/blog.php?b=56
lol..dont say 2019..my PD is almost same as yours and I aint hanging around till 2019..by that time I will be old and no idea what will I do with..GC..probaly hope for citizenship and apply for retirement benefits :confused::confused::confused:
Edit: Never mind..yours is EB3..so may be mine will come in 2015
girlfriend Ear cartilage piercings
mihird
07-09 03:58 PM
I dont think legally you can sue someone, because they have worked harder.
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can present in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
It took them 6 months to consume 66K visas and then another 15 days to process another 66K.
It is reasonably safe to assume, either correct procedures were not followed in the past or were not followed in the last 2 weeks. Only a judge can order USCIS to elobarte on what processes were followed in the last 2 weeks (FBI name checks and security clearances skipped...etc. etc.)
They made people expend (or rather waste) millions of dollars in preparing the paperwork...and then changed the process abruptly on July 2nd..with no advance notice...they could have published a guidance in the July bulletin itself of this possibly happening, if not published a guidance sometime later...
There is no doubt, that the entire chain of events were premeditated...and the communication mix-up as claimed by Condoleezza Rice on TV was a deliberate one..
I doubt if this will all fly in court...they certainly owe the millions of wasted dollars and thousands of wasted hours in preparing the paperwork, back to the applicants/attornies...at the least...
Keep in mind, the AILF rarely files a law suit against the government, and most of their law suits have had favorable outcomes..
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can present in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
It took them 6 months to consume 66K visas and then another 15 days to process another 66K.
It is reasonably safe to assume, either correct procedures were not followed in the past or were not followed in the last 2 weeks. Only a judge can order USCIS to elobarte on what processes were followed in the last 2 weeks (FBI name checks and security clearances skipped...etc. etc.)
They made people expend (or rather waste) millions of dollars in preparing the paperwork...and then changed the process abruptly on July 2nd..with no advance notice...they could have published a guidance in the July bulletin itself of this possibly happening, if not published a guidance sometime later...
There is no doubt, that the entire chain of events were premeditated...and the communication mix-up as claimed by Condoleezza Rice on TV was a deliberate one..
I doubt if this will all fly in court...they certainly owe the millions of wasted dollars and thousands of wasted hours in preparing the paperwork, back to the applicants/attornies...at the least...
Keep in mind, the AILF rarely files a law suit against the government, and most of their law suits have had favorable outcomes..
hairstyles different piercing types.
DDD
03-15 12:17 PM
hhmmm.....architecture would be cool. But I think that would focus to much on the rendering than the modelling. I really would like to do a character contest. SOmething robotic that leaves the modeller to make it as detailed or as not detailed. But it is up to you. I need to add more 3d pieces to my folio, so I am really going to do it the this time lol. Since the time frame will be so long. We should try to have intermediate deadlines or WIP posts to keep interest in the contest.
vandanaverdia
09-11 07:08 PM
"All men dream but not equally.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes to make it possible."
- T.E. Lawrence
Don't we all dream of getting a GC???
What is stopping you from to DC???
Come & join hands & lets be heard!!!!
Go IV!!!
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes to make it possible."
- T.E. Lawrence
Don't we all dream of getting a GC???
What is stopping you from to DC???
Come & join hands & lets be heard!!!!
Go IV!!!
ewana
08-22 10:38 PM
Hi, I hope somebody helps in my dilemma.
I am currently on an L1A visa. I heard that my main office (where I am now working) is closing the foreign office where I come from. Based on L1 requirements and facts, it states that once the subsidiary closes, my L1 becomes invalid. Given this, the company is willing to sponsor my green card as soon as possible. It will probably still take a year before the subsidiary officially closes. What are my options? If they have to close the company while my green card is being process, would it be cancelled ?
Thanks.
I am currently on an L1A visa. I heard that my main office (where I am now working) is closing the foreign office where I come from. Based on L1 requirements and facts, it states that once the subsidiary closes, my L1 becomes invalid. Given this, the company is willing to sponsor my green card as soon as possible. It will probably still take a year before the subsidiary officially closes. What are my options? If they have to close the company while my green card is being process, would it be cancelled ?
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment