maximus777
06-29 04:04 PM
Publicity stunt before the elections ?
Absolutely!!
Absolutely!!
wallpaper smiley face cartoon with
chanduv23
10-13 04:26 PM
can you hold these meetings on saturdays? weekdays are impossible for me with a 1.5 hr commute (common with most tri-state folks).
informal get togethers can be held at the flushing hindu center on sunday evening, at least for those who are hindus living in queens. (the majority here, i guess)
The idea was to make it easy for majority folks who work in Manhattan and surrounding areas. We were also concerned that the tri state folks travel long distances and work long hours during weekdays will need the weekends for themselves and a Friday night after work must be the best time.
But, yes, based on majority of the folks's response, we plan to do one more on a Saturday, but not in Flushing, location will be decided soon.
informal get togethers can be held at the flushing hindu center on sunday evening, at least for those who are hindus living in queens. (the majority here, i guess)
The idea was to make it easy for majority folks who work in Manhattan and surrounding areas. We were also concerned that the tri state folks travel long distances and work long hours during weekdays will need the weekends for themselves and a Friday night after work must be the best time.
But, yes, based on majority of the folks's response, we plan to do one more on a Saturday, but not in Flushing, location will be decided soon.
kaisersose
05-13 03:42 PM
One interesting point that came out of that recent hearing.
PD movement results in both 485 approvals + new 485 filings. CIS blames backlogs partly due to the policy that allows 485 filing whenever PDs are current. if PD movement results in 5 approvals, it also results in 10 new 485 filings and thus a backlog is built over which they have no control.
So in their opinion, PD movement should only control approvals & 485 filings should be controlled separately. If this happens, there would no backlogs and no one will ask them any questions or drag them to court for hearings!
PD movement results in both 485 approvals + new 485 filings. CIS blames backlogs partly due to the policy that allows 485 filing whenever PDs are current. if PD movement results in 5 approvals, it also results in 10 new 485 filings and thus a backlog is built over which they have no control.
So in their opinion, PD movement should only control approvals & 485 filings should be controlled separately. If this happens, there would no backlogs and no one will ask them any questions or drag them to court for hearings!
2011 happy face cartoon images.
shimul99
10-25 03:54 PM
No vkkkk, I'm not playing. What some people are saying is logic and what i'm saying is the fact. You seems new in this form. But i think most of the people here are serious and try share their sufferings, free help from freinds (virtual).
Anyway, My lawyer used the PERM. right after i received my Labor (may 2006) I had to renew my H1b which took 6 months (regular processing). After i received my renewal I sent my I-140 application. I didn't even bother to use the premium processing for my i140 because the i485 was not current that time, instead it way way back as a EB3. anyway, you know the rest of the story.....
You signature shows like
Labor approved May 06
I-140 Applied Feb 8, 2007 (Approved Sep 18, 2007)
I-485 Applied Jun 29,2007...Received Receipt on July 31, 2007
Status - Pending
but how it is possible
I-140 Applied Feb 8, 2007 (Approved Sep 18, 2007).
currently 140 processing dates around Nov/dec-06.
Are you trying to play with people feelings?
Anyway, My lawyer used the PERM. right after i received my Labor (may 2006) I had to renew my H1b which took 6 months (regular processing). After i received my renewal I sent my I-140 application. I didn't even bother to use the premium processing for my i140 because the i485 was not current that time, instead it way way back as a EB3. anyway, you know the rest of the story.....
You signature shows like
Labor approved May 06
I-140 Applied Feb 8, 2007 (Approved Sep 18, 2007)
I-485 Applied Jun 29,2007...Received Receipt on July 31, 2007
Status - Pending
but how it is possible
I-140 Applied Feb 8, 2007 (Approved Sep 18, 2007).
currently 140 processing dates around Nov/dec-06.
Are you trying to play with people feelings?
more...
map_boiler
07-06 12:54 PM
CAdude, possibly you're the person in DENIAL mode. You are free to take the chill pill or any other pill you want (I am not seeking your advice for that purpose anyways). If you have a direct response to the point I made, feel free to respond, otherwise, please don't bother...
All you guys in DENIAL mode. Like Home seller in todays market. take chill pill and enjoy the life (what ever left after fisaco). :)
All you guys in DENIAL mode. Like Home seller in todays market. take chill pill and enjoy the life (what ever left after fisaco). :)
JunRN
08-23 05:51 PM
The back-ground checks are sub-sets of "pre-approval process". I don't know if the word "pre-approval process" is official terminology used by USCIS. What I am usually reading is "adjudication process".
more...
ggyro
07-20 05:59 PM
I believe best mode's analysis is correct based on the following from the daily dairy
"By 55 yeas to 40 nays .. Senate rejected the motion to waive ...with respect to Cornyn Amendment No. 2339 (to Amendment No. 2327), to provide interim relief for .... Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment, was not germane, was sustained, and the amendment thus fell. "
My interpretation: the vote was not on Cornyn's amendment; ...; it was out of order because it did not qualify as an amendment to this bill.
Because 40 Dems voted no on the waiver does not mean they are opposed to the amendment; they just did not want to vote on this amendment on this bill.
"By 55 yeas to 40 nays .. Senate rejected the motion to waive ...with respect to Cornyn Amendment No. 2339 (to Amendment No. 2327), to provide interim relief for .... Subsequently, the point of order that the amendment, was not germane, was sustained, and the amendment thus fell. "
My interpretation: the vote was not on Cornyn's amendment; ...; it was out of order because it did not qualify as an amendment to this bill.
Because 40 Dems voted no on the waiver does not mean they are opposed to the amendment; they just did not want to vote on this amendment on this bill.
2010 cartoon happy face pictures.
pmb76
07-19 04:13 PM
EB2 India - PD Nov 2005 Reached July 2, 9:01 am
more...
a1b2c3
10-20 10:57 PM
In Dec DOS will move the EB2I date to april 01, 06. And USCIS exhaust the visa number by approving the 06 cases and retrogress back to april 01, 03.
And whoever has the 03 and 04 PDs will be screwed as usual.:mad:
It is not just the USCIS , DOS is also the culprit.
If that happens, it will give me a stronger reason to return to India. In fact, at times I feel that is exactly what's going to transpire. The dates probably will keep inching forward and then make a U turn somewhere and I'll be back in India much sooner. And I don't think it would be that bad considering growth opportunities back home and of course our accumulated savings which will go out of the country along with us.
And whoever has the 03 and 04 PDs will be screwed as usual.:mad:
It is not just the USCIS , DOS is also the culprit.
If that happens, it will give me a stronger reason to return to India. In fact, at times I feel that is exactly what's going to transpire. The dates probably will keep inching forward and then make a U turn somewhere and I'll be back in India much sooner. And I don't think it would be that bad considering growth opportunities back home and of course our accumulated savings which will go out of the country along with us.
hair Sad Face cartoon 6 - search ID
hebron
06-30 12:43 PM
Only when the democratic party weakens things can move forward for the skilled (EB- GC ) folks. Democratic party is never for skilled immigratiion, it is all for illegal masses only.
Agree 100%. Atleast when Bush was in office there were bills introduced that encouraged skilled immigration Eg: Those who have been around for a while would remember the Cornyn-Kyl bill from 2005.
Everybody likes to talk about the Clinton era, but don't forget that Republicans had majority then. So we may see good things happen after the November 2010 elections if dems lose majority in both house and senate. And it will be good for Mr.Bamster to govern from the center going forward than to hang out with the far-left, may even fetch him another 4 years.
Agree 100%. Atleast when Bush was in office there were bills introduced that encouraged skilled immigration Eg: Those who have been around for a while would remember the Cornyn-Kyl bill from 2005.
Everybody likes to talk about the Clinton era, but don't forget that Republicans had majority then. So we may see good things happen after the November 2010 elections if dems lose majority in both house and senate. And it will be good for Mr.Bamster to govern from the center going forward than to hang out with the far-left, may even fetch him another 4 years.
more...
srinivas_o
07-09 11:36 AM
I downloaded the 2004 file as you said and searched it, but could not find any information about my labor. Do you think the labor apps processed by backlog centers are in a separate file???
If you click on the link called "PERM" on the left hand side - there is an MDB file called 2004 (in a zip file). Try to download an Access reader and go for it.
If you click on the link called "PERM" on the left hand side - there is an MDB file called 2004 (in a zip file). Try to download an Access reader and go for it.
hot with hat and smiley face.
learning01
04-26 04:29 PM
Try sending a PM to zhongweizhu or wu1. It's a guess. Looks like Chinese members to me. I am not Chinese.
It would be so great if our Chinese members told us more about this portal, and any others where we could get the word out.
It would be so great if our Chinese members told us more about this portal, and any others where we could get the word out.
more...
house animated smiley face
eb_retrogession
01-18 12:40 PM
I don't have a paypal account, but I would like to contribute, is there any other way that I can send my money to you?
Thanks.
CWYGC,
you don't need a paypal account. Once you click on the paypal link on the IV homepage, it will give you an option to just use your credit card. That's how I contributed too.
Good Luck :-)
Thanks.
CWYGC,
you don't need a paypal account. Once you click on the paypal link on the IV homepage, it will give you an option to just use your credit card. That's how I contributed too.
Good Luck :-)
tattoo sad cartoon girl face.
makemygc
07-06 11:30 AM
Guys,
Here are my thoughts:
---------------------
There are Four group of people (Became current with July bulletin) who are affected and suffered.
1) The people whose applications reached to USCIS before 10:00 AM
07/02/07, i.e. before USCIS's new revision/update.
Note: Legally this group is the SAFEST one as their file reached to the
USCIS table on time while USCIS's first bulletin was in effect. Their
case is strong as far as "Law and Justice" is concerned.
2) The people whose applications reached on 07/02/07 but after USCIS's
declaration of new revision.
Note: This group can be fit in a category "Who did not receive ample
notice from USCIS for its intention to change the bulletin. And so
may be considered "Probable beneficiaries" by the judiciary
3) The people whose applications reached or will reach to USCIS from any
time between 12:00 AM 07/03/07 to 11:59 PM 07/31/07.
Note: This group will have a "Strongest" weak argument and case. Their
act of sending files perhaps may not be considered "Law-abiding" as
they have already received ample notice from USCIS and clear
statement of USCIS about "Rejecting applications upon receiving"
then also this group sent the applications.
4) The People who will not send applications at all with respect to the
USCIS's revision.
Note: In my oinion and mostly I believe in Judiciary's opinion thsi group will
be considered "Law-abiding" and who acted as per USCIS's
instruction within the periphery of respecting legal authority.
Now other points to be noted are as under:
-----------------------------------------
DOS and USCIS screwed up? Yes... Did not happen ever and now it happened , yes.. People suffered stress..expenses.. yes. Now what we must stress on is one time bulletin per month is a tradition and it is a long time tradition but probably DOS has a power to change that... It seems that there is no such law that DOS can not do that so there exactly Lawsuite filer may have a week case. Nos USCIS is supposed to follow DOS and make bulletin as per DOS's guideline and that is what USCIS did so where is the "Law-Breaking" ? USCIS acted perfectly in legal manner. Probably if Lawsuite filer decide to file the lawsuite on the basis of "Why the helll USCIS decalred "All Current" at the first place" then there they have a chance to make a case strong but if they go another route like "Why USCIS revised the bulletin" then I personally do not see "much worth".
Now having said this, to me it looks like whether you file till in July or not OR whether you become plantiff or not, it should not matter. AILF and/or any other organization ethically and perhaps legally can not define "Class" narrowly to the limited group of people. If real justice is prevalent in this country judiciary should not allow any entity to define "Class" narrowly. To me "ALL affected" is the "Class" and if judiciary is considering it as a "class action" then it should consider "All affected" as a class. Now US justice system would go this way, I do not know but if it is not going that way then I would consider that as abig black loop hole in justice system itself. My guess is that if AILF would go defining "Class" narrowly, there will be some mechanism by which individually or with group you should be able to challenge that legally as well.
Now Judiciary, in my opinion may not take stand that ok this is a "Class lawsuite" and now Mr.X has become the plantiff so he would only be the beneficary if lawsuite is won. Either ALL affected should be considered for whatever the benefits come out ot everbody looses it. Same argument goes for people who are not filing. By not filing they are obeying the leagl instruction of government department of USA and for that they should not be punished and can not be punished by not granting any benefit to them whereas granting the benefits to the people who clearly challenged USCIS's revision by filing from 07/03 and onwards....
If USCIS is smart, it should accept all files now and create the process to have them rotted in the queue for years and that way it will be able save it face and limit on visa numbers wil automatically send whole bunch of files for eating the dust for years.
I personally see our strong point only at have reimbursement of the money and time if "We are not getting current before one year (Validity of Medicals)
Any thoughts?
How do you define "All effected"?
Here are my thoughts:
---------------------
There are Four group of people (Became current with July bulletin) who are affected and suffered.
1) The people whose applications reached to USCIS before 10:00 AM
07/02/07, i.e. before USCIS's new revision/update.
Note: Legally this group is the SAFEST one as their file reached to the
USCIS table on time while USCIS's first bulletin was in effect. Their
case is strong as far as "Law and Justice" is concerned.
2) The people whose applications reached on 07/02/07 but after USCIS's
declaration of new revision.
Note: This group can be fit in a category "Who did not receive ample
notice from USCIS for its intention to change the bulletin. And so
may be considered "Probable beneficiaries" by the judiciary
3) The people whose applications reached or will reach to USCIS from any
time between 12:00 AM 07/03/07 to 11:59 PM 07/31/07.
Note: This group will have a "Strongest" weak argument and case. Their
act of sending files perhaps may not be considered "Law-abiding" as
they have already received ample notice from USCIS and clear
statement of USCIS about "Rejecting applications upon receiving"
then also this group sent the applications.
4) The People who will not send applications at all with respect to the
USCIS's revision.
Note: In my oinion and mostly I believe in Judiciary's opinion thsi group will
be considered "Law-abiding" and who acted as per USCIS's
instruction within the periphery of respecting legal authority.
Now other points to be noted are as under:
-----------------------------------------
DOS and USCIS screwed up? Yes... Did not happen ever and now it happened , yes.. People suffered stress..expenses.. yes. Now what we must stress on is one time bulletin per month is a tradition and it is a long time tradition but probably DOS has a power to change that... It seems that there is no such law that DOS can not do that so there exactly Lawsuite filer may have a week case. Nos USCIS is supposed to follow DOS and make bulletin as per DOS's guideline and that is what USCIS did so where is the "Law-Breaking" ? USCIS acted perfectly in legal manner. Probably if Lawsuite filer decide to file the lawsuite on the basis of "Why the helll USCIS decalred "All Current" at the first place" then there they have a chance to make a case strong but if they go another route like "Why USCIS revised the bulletin" then I personally do not see "much worth".
Now having said this, to me it looks like whether you file till in July or not OR whether you become plantiff or not, it should not matter. AILF and/or any other organization ethically and perhaps legally can not define "Class" narrowly to the limited group of people. If real justice is prevalent in this country judiciary should not allow any entity to define "Class" narrowly. To me "ALL affected" is the "Class" and if judiciary is considering it as a "class action" then it should consider "All affected" as a class. Now US justice system would go this way, I do not know but if it is not going that way then I would consider that as abig black loop hole in justice system itself. My guess is that if AILF would go defining "Class" narrowly, there will be some mechanism by which individually or with group you should be able to challenge that legally as well.
Now Judiciary, in my opinion may not take stand that ok this is a "Class lawsuite" and now Mr.X has become the plantiff so he would only be the beneficary if lawsuite is won. Either ALL affected should be considered for whatever the benefits come out ot everbody looses it. Same argument goes for people who are not filing. By not filing they are obeying the leagl instruction of government department of USA and for that they should not be punished and can not be punished by not granting any benefit to them whereas granting the benefits to the people who clearly challenged USCIS's revision by filing from 07/03 and onwards....
If USCIS is smart, it should accept all files now and create the process to have them rotted in the queue for years and that way it will be able save it face and limit on visa numbers wil automatically send whole bunch of files for eating the dust for years.
I personally see our strong point only at have reimbursement of the money and time if "We are not getting current before one year (Validity of Medicals)
Any thoughts?
How do you define "All effected"?
more...
pictures happy face cartoon pictures.
swaroopmukka
07-19 01:09 PM
As somebody said above, if we r getting married after Aug 17, and if we decide not to file my 485 now. My PD is May 2007 and my 140 would be approved before my H1B is expired for the second term, and if I didn't file my 485 by then, what kind of H1B extensions would I get ?? 1 year or 3 years.
To be simple : PD May 2007
140 approved by May 2010
H1B expires Nov 2010.
485 not filed.
From Nov 2010, what kind of H1B extension I'd get (1 year or 3 years) ??
Thanks
To be simple : PD May 2007
140 approved by May 2010
H1B expires Nov 2010.
485 not filed.
From Nov 2010, what kind of H1B extension I'd get (1 year or 3 years) ??
Thanks
dresses Smiler cartoon 5 - search ID
thomachan72
12-31 10:31 AM
Hi Thomachan thanks for the good advice but just curious; Do you really practice what you preach??:confused:
more...
makeup Face clip art
24fps
02-15 07:28 PM
Look, the H1 quota was not sufficient even when it was set at 115,000 pre-2000. It was only when it was set to 195,000 in 2001 that the quota exceeded demand. Now thanks to the report by USCIS last year, we know that about 20% of the H applications had fraud or technical violations. Even if you assume that the USCIS does a perfect job and catches this 20%, the quota that will be freed up won't be enough for the rest of the applicants.
The issues we face have less to do with fraud and more to do with the anti-immigration forces who dislike the 1965 immigration law. Claiming fraud, cheap labor, harm to the environment from increased population are just convenient means to couch opposition to permanent immigration in.
actually pre 2000 the visa's were available all year long , then there was a crunch due to the y2K and then when the bubble burst it shrank again.
when USCIS said 20% were fraudulent , they meant complete fraud like , people paid $$ bought in here as programmers and then worked in gas stations , driving cabs etc
and again 20% was just taken from a sample space of about 260 or so
if USCIS were to count every case where a body-shopper has a guy on bench with no pay , h1b procured when no project available that 20% will double up atleast.
the Anti-immigrant lobby will always be present whatever year/century it is , its human nature , so that fight will always be there , in boom time or recession or whatever
but this country is smarter in terms of dealing with anti-immigrants unlike UK and parts of europe where they completely cave in.
The issues we face have less to do with fraud and more to do with the anti-immigration forces who dislike the 1965 immigration law. Claiming fraud, cheap labor, harm to the environment from increased population are just convenient means to couch opposition to permanent immigration in.
actually pre 2000 the visa's were available all year long , then there was a crunch due to the y2K and then when the bubble burst it shrank again.
when USCIS said 20% were fraudulent , they meant complete fraud like , people paid $$ bought in here as programmers and then worked in gas stations , driving cabs etc
and again 20% was just taken from a sample space of about 260 or so
if USCIS were to count every case where a body-shopper has a guy on bench with no pay , h1b procured when no project available that 20% will double up atleast.
the Anti-immigrant lobby will always be present whatever year/century it is , its human nature , so that fight will always be there , in boom time or recession or whatever
but this country is smarter in terms of dealing with anti-immigrants unlike UK and parts of europe where they completely cave in.
girlfriend smiley face cartoon pictures.
BharatPremi
11-08 01:03 PM
Someone gave me a Red and posted this message "by promoting hatemongers - you promote hate" - I would like to know in what way I am promoting hate?
Well, that is the real skin and mind state of that doer. It speaks volumes about him/her/"".
Well, that is the real skin and mind state of that doer. It speaks volumes about him/her/"".
hairstyles Smiley-face-tunes.
ajay
05-13 12:16 PM
We stay in Northern Virginia around 25 miles to DC. We will be happy to host any guests who are willing to stay with us during their trip to DC.
siravi
10-12 05:27 PM
yes
see you then.
see you then.
chi_shark
07-26 10:04 PM
assuming you have done everything for registration of the company... you are all set... no other formalities. you may want to write bye-laws of the company if you wish to pursue vc funding or partners... other than that you should be good..
if you are a new company, very likely that you got a credit card that is backed by your personal credit... thats somethign to take care off.
After incorporating the company in one of the states. What are the next important things one as a owner of the company needs to take care of especially if it is in IT product development area ( ofcourse including consulting but not purely comparable to predominent desi consultancy services)
Specifically in the following category:
1. If you are selling IT software products and services, what are the legal necessary formalities one needs to take care of?
2. How about expanding the branches in outside USA? May be a branch office in India to leverage huge technical resources? Any legal or other things to be taken care of ?
3. Bank Accounts next steps
4. Credits Credit Cards. What are the precautions one needs to take care of?
Any other thoughts....
if you are a new company, very likely that you got a credit card that is backed by your personal credit... thats somethign to take care off.
After incorporating the company in one of the states. What are the next important things one as a owner of the company needs to take care of especially if it is in IT product development area ( ofcourse including consulting but not purely comparable to predominent desi consultancy services)
Specifically in the following category:
1. If you are selling IT software products and services, what are the legal necessary formalities one needs to take care of?
2. How about expanding the branches in outside USA? May be a branch office in India to leverage huge technical resources? Any legal or other things to be taken care of ?
3. Bank Accounts next steps
4. Credits Credit Cards. What are the precautions one needs to take care of?
Any other thoughts....
