pmamp
07-12 10:24 AM
One possible issue with this assessment is that CIS Ombudsman released the report on June 11th and ISCIS published 'THE JULY 2007 BULLETIN' on June 12th. That may mean someone in USCIS decided ultra fast as to make all the dates current or they (USCIS top brass) knew about this report draft.
I don't know if this report really caused USCIS to come out with that bulletin. there is something else under the hood which caused this reaction....http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/smilies/mad.gif
:mad:
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
I don't know if this report really caused USCIS to come out with that bulletin. there is something else under the hood which caused this reaction....http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/smilies/mad.gif
:mad:
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
immi_seeker
07-12 08:37 PM
^^^^^^^^^
swo
07-16 02:28 PM
How can you say that ? Please explain
Murali
Dude. He was joking.
Murali
Dude. He was joking.
spam
01-04 12:08 AM
Hi,
I just joined this forum. It really looks neat for just 4 days of existence..
In my view, we need to really differentiate this forum from lot others out their, the name of which I don't have to mention. One way of doing that would be making this an "action forum" than another information forum. As a starting point we should have clear vision and mission statements.
Vision should be strong and action oriented. Not like "helping the immigrant community." I would propose " Inspiring/Organizing legal immigrants to realize/understand their rights and play their part in securing/achieving them.." or something like that.
Mission statement should be the priorities (again actions/tasks/goals) per year, set in the beginning of every year..
I propose the following for this year:
1. Making sure Retro relief is put in and passed in the Immigration reform bill
2. Identify and tie-up with at least 2 high power partners
3. Some relief for people affected by FBI name check -- This could be long shot, but I am putting it anyway because it is close to my heart:-))
4. Others..
I will stop my onslaught and get ready to hear your good/bad comments..
Thanks
I just joined this forum. It really looks neat for just 4 days of existence..
In my view, we need to really differentiate this forum from lot others out their, the name of which I don't have to mention. One way of doing that would be making this an "action forum" than another information forum. As a starting point we should have clear vision and mission statements.
Vision should be strong and action oriented. Not like "helping the immigrant community." I would propose " Inspiring/Organizing legal immigrants to realize/understand their rights and play their part in securing/achieving them.." or something like that.
Mission statement should be the priorities (again actions/tasks/goals) per year, set in the beginning of every year..
I propose the following for this year:
1. Making sure Retro relief is put in and passed in the Immigration reform bill
2. Identify and tie-up with at least 2 high power partners
3. Some relief for people affected by FBI name check -- This could be long shot, but I am putting it anyway because it is close to my heart:-))
4. Others..
I will stop my onslaught and get ready to hear your good/bad comments..
Thanks
more...
Aakaash
10-25 10:38 AM
I believe i am right when I say that one can work on an expired H1b visa provided his/her extension (I129) is pending approval!! Please correct me if wrong.
posmd
04-07 09:07 PM
I am 100 percent of this view. IV core members should review this with QGA.
We are already hearing that the whitehouse is pushing this thing to conference even without full senate approval, perhaps they know something we do not, that in some form or fashion something is going to pass the senate.
Sensenbrenner is not a guy against legal immigration per se. Some of the core members know this from the S1932 experience. There was a guy by the name of "superman" who some of the core members are aware of, who lives in sensenbrenner's district and tried his best during conference in that budget bill.
We need to involve all those forces so that he does not resist our just and fair provisions. He must be made to realise that to have a clear moral argument about the illegals he must clearly support the legal immigrant provisions.
We are already hearing that the whitehouse is pushing this thing to conference even without full senate approval, perhaps they know something we do not, that in some form or fashion something is going to pass the senate.
Sensenbrenner is not a guy against legal immigration per se. Some of the core members know this from the S1932 experience. There was a guy by the name of "superman" who some of the core members are aware of, who lives in sensenbrenner's district and tried his best during conference in that budget bill.
We need to involve all those forces so that he does not resist our just and fair provisions. He must be made to realise that to have a clear moral argument about the illegals he must clearly support the legal immigrant provisions.
more...
pointlesswait
07-29 06:06 PM
CHC speaks only for illegals...
they fear any partial immigration reforms will harm their political constituents..namely the hispanic voter base.
They will never come onboard for legals..we have to fight our own battle.
So individual constituents on this forums can have personal views..
As far as I know we HAVE NO STAND on the issue.
Our goal is simple, to seperate ourselves from "undocumented immigrants", we do not call it "illegal immigration" as per our initial IV discussions.
IV stands as an organization for Employment Based Legal Immigration and nothing BUT that. So, again, in short we HAVE no stand on "illegal immigration".
they fear any partial immigration reforms will harm their political constituents..namely the hispanic voter base.
They will never come onboard for legals..we have to fight our own battle.
So individual constituents on this forums can have personal views..
As far as I know we HAVE NO STAND on the issue.
Our goal is simple, to seperate ourselves from "undocumented immigrants", we do not call it "illegal immigration" as per our initial IV discussions.
IV stands as an organization for Employment Based Legal Immigration and nothing BUT that. So, again, in short we HAVE no stand on "illegal immigration".
immigrationvoice1
02-27 02:23 PM
Hope this documents appears in the sites run by the "anti-employment based immigrants" supporters.
more...
gc_on_demand
02-11 11:38 AM
Thank you for your input Pappu and we appreciate your diligence in the efforts to IV. However the question is: will this bill have the potential to move forward?
As I last recall, Zoe Lofgreen had tried a similar bill 3 years ago (2008) that would have eliminated visa backlog, but we all know that bill went no where.
At this point in time, does this bill have the potential to bring aboard the change we all are seeking for so long? I hope it does. As this journey has been quiet long and tedious.
Thank you
2008 was election year and we didnot have advocacy day month after bill was introduce. We were just month away from presidencial election. CIR was keeping hostage. Since Obama has talked about Legal High skilled immigrants in SOU , we got support from President and as usual many republicans support high skilled bills. Also some moderate dems support it.. so chances are better if we can push it for by summer.
as we have see as fall approach things are getting tough to pass through.we should make it for advocacy day and meet with our lawmakers with just single agenda. STEM bill.
Most of Eb2 ( Not all ) are qualified for STEM and may release up to 30k visas each year to EB3. that will clear Eb3 backlog in 1-2 years. Don't forget that we have some Eb3 people with STEM degree too.
As I last recall, Zoe Lofgreen had tried a similar bill 3 years ago (2008) that would have eliminated visa backlog, but we all know that bill went no where.
At this point in time, does this bill have the potential to bring aboard the change we all are seeking for so long? I hope it does. As this journey has been quiet long and tedious.
Thank you
2008 was election year and we didnot have advocacy day month after bill was introduce. We were just month away from presidencial election. CIR was keeping hostage. Since Obama has talked about Legal High skilled immigrants in SOU , we got support from President and as usual many republicans support high skilled bills. Also some moderate dems support it.. so chances are better if we can push it for by summer.
as we have see as fall approach things are getting tough to pass through.we should make it for advocacy day and meet with our lawmakers with just single agenda. STEM bill.
Most of Eb2 ( Not all ) are qualified for STEM and may release up to 30k visas each year to EB3. that will clear Eb3 backlog in 1-2 years. Don't forget that we have some Eb3 people with STEM degree too.
sonline
05-20 06:01 PM
Not favoring Wipro or quitting person here. General comment..
we need to be careful and review all aspect of issues with mgr and HR before leaving service companies. If we really want to come and work in US then come as independent companies on H1. People keep quite and say 'yes' for everything until H1 is filed in offshore and once a high paid offer comes then leaving and start saying 'sue' this company etc.
they pay fees for H1/air-fares/insurances for commitment for onsite work for some period. If person A goes out, they have to invest same amount of $ on new person B to get there and loosing credit at client also. Are these factors not overhead to these kind of companies?
Becoming so much emotional for money matters is quite common. Be practical and think wisely and negotiate peacefully with HR/MGR. Sending mails with lot of anger and threats to companies etc really don't much help in practical life and things go worse. this kind of stories is not first time and has been going for many years, think it from both sides.
Be practical, thinking peacefully. All the best.
we need to be careful and review all aspect of issues with mgr and HR before leaving service companies. If we really want to come and work in US then come as independent companies on H1. People keep quite and say 'yes' for everything until H1 is filed in offshore and once a high paid offer comes then leaving and start saying 'sue' this company etc.
they pay fees for H1/air-fares/insurances for commitment for onsite work for some period. If person A goes out, they have to invest same amount of $ on new person B to get there and loosing credit at client also. Are these factors not overhead to these kind of companies?
Becoming so much emotional for money matters is quite common. Be practical and think wisely and negotiate peacefully with HR/MGR. Sending mails with lot of anger and threats to companies etc really don't much help in practical life and things go worse. this kind of stories is not first time and has been going for many years, think it from both sides.
Be practical, thinking peacefully. All the best.
more...
jayleno
03-11 06:02 PM
Buddy,
Are you the same person as the one who posted this? Has someone hijacked your id or your brain?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=129163#post129163
You are asking an employer to do you a favor by sponsoring you a labor certification without a bonafide intent on your part to join the company.
I am sure you would be willing to pay money to the employer for that.
Please just get off this immigration boards these are for broad issues not a forum to encourage dubious if not illegal activity.
This is a very subjective question of intent? If the employer has no problem and willing to support the petition and a job offer when the RFE arrives, how will the UCSIS ever determine intent.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
Are you the same person as the one who posted this? Has someone hijacked your id or your brain?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=129163#post129163
You are asking an employer to do you a favor by sponsoring you a labor certification without a bonafide intent on your part to join the company.
I am sure you would be willing to pay money to the employer for that.
Please just get off this immigration boards these are for broad issues not a forum to encourage dubious if not illegal activity.
This is a very subjective question of intent? If the employer has no problem and willing to support the petition and a job offer when the RFE arrives, how will the UCSIS ever determine intent.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
perm2gc
09-14 12:35 AM
I have an emergency to go to India to take care of my sickly mom and I need to return back to work on July first. I am also trying to get emergency appointment. I couldnt. Could you please suggest the way I can get emergency appointment in any of the consulate. You can get appointment in any consulate in india for VISA revalidation.You can call them and collect more information.
https://www.vfs-usa.co.in/Home.aspx
https://www.vfs-usa.co.in/Home.aspx
more...
senthil1
07-12 12:01 AM
Various conspiracy theories are
1. They made all PD current for July to encourage legal immigrants to support CIR. CIR is failed they backed out on July. But it has weak argument as they moved PD for about 2 years in previous month.
2. They made PD current based on rules and regulations as 60k Visa was available. But USCIS may lose fees increase so they backed out to get more revenue. If this is correct they will make all PD current in Oct 2007. But I do not think this will be reason as just for more money for Organization anyone will risk their career. If anyone gets personal financial gain then they might do but here there is no chance for that
3. Because first 2 weeks of June not much approvals of I485 DOS made all PD current. But when USCIS started approving cases they realized that there were enough applications already and alerted DOS and DOS issued revised VB
4. USCIS does not want flooding of I485 applications as that will be shown up as backlog. To prevent that they asked DOS to issue revised VB
There is going to be 3 important questions in Lawsuit(If court accepts lawsuit for consideration) or congress hearing(if happens)
1. Whether DOS or USCIS violated law in issuing revised VB.
2. Whether they violated law in bypassing FBI check for applications to make Visa numbers unavailable
3. Why they could not accept the I485 applications based on First VB? What is the need for issuing revised VB?
If this is true it's really horrible and scary that this gov. agency is handling our applications.
1. They made all PD current for July to encourage legal immigrants to support CIR. CIR is failed they backed out on July. But it has weak argument as they moved PD for about 2 years in previous month.
2. They made PD current based on rules and regulations as 60k Visa was available. But USCIS may lose fees increase so they backed out to get more revenue. If this is correct they will make all PD current in Oct 2007. But I do not think this will be reason as just for more money for Organization anyone will risk their career. If anyone gets personal financial gain then they might do but here there is no chance for that
3. Because first 2 weeks of June not much approvals of I485 DOS made all PD current. But when USCIS started approving cases they realized that there were enough applications already and alerted DOS and DOS issued revised VB
4. USCIS does not want flooding of I485 applications as that will be shown up as backlog. To prevent that they asked DOS to issue revised VB
There is going to be 3 important questions in Lawsuit(If court accepts lawsuit for consideration) or congress hearing(if happens)
1. Whether DOS or USCIS violated law in issuing revised VB.
2. Whether they violated law in bypassing FBI check for applications to make Visa numbers unavailable
3. Why they could not accept the I485 applications based on First VB? What is the need for issuing revised VB?
If this is true it's really horrible and scary that this gov. agency is handling our applications.
kaisersose
05-30 10:17 AM
Hi gurus, Please advise
I have an approved I-140 and july 485 filer, also have valid h1 till 2010.
I work for company X and have an offer from company Y.
What are my best options now
1. Transfer H1 to Y - if yes what impact would this have on my GC processing?
should the new H1-B Job code match with my Labor Certification?
2. Use EAD - the complication here is my desi employer filed my labor
as an IT Manager which i am not and i am not sure the new employer would
give me the matching offer letter.
Thanks,
Krishna:confused:
You are saying "H-1b or AC21". It should be "H-1b or EAD" as using either to change jobs at this time is possible only under the AC21 provision.
H-1b or EAD, your new job description should be similar to the job description in your GC Labor. Otherwise, you are at risk if you get an RFE or an interview call.
I have an approved I-140 and july 485 filer, also have valid h1 till 2010.
I work for company X and have an offer from company Y.
What are my best options now
1. Transfer H1 to Y - if yes what impact would this have on my GC processing?
should the new H1-B Job code match with my Labor Certification?
2. Use EAD - the complication here is my desi employer filed my labor
as an IT Manager which i am not and i am not sure the new employer would
give me the matching offer letter.
Thanks,
Krishna:confused:
You are saying "H-1b or AC21". It should be "H-1b or EAD" as using either to change jobs at this time is possible only under the AC21 provision.
H-1b or EAD, your new job description should be similar to the job description in your GC Labor. Otherwise, you are at risk if you get an RFE or an interview call.
more...
pappu
10-23 11:01 AM
Significance of Priority date???
PD is important to get your dates current faster. Earlier PD will get a better shot at being current early.
After your PD becomes current your 485s are assigned visa numbers (if your FP, namechecks and processing are done) GCs are allocated based on 3 important factors : Dates must be current, date the I485 was received (FIFO as per their SOP but factors like namechecks make it unfeasible) and country of chargeability. It is thus tough to review approval trends on tracker threads and sites because of small and incomplete data set and no info on factors that influence faster or slower I485 approvals.
Coming back to the country quota, I do not know how country quotas are allocated throughout the year. How overflow happens each month/quarter and how future demand is predicted each month for the entire year when providing visas to oversubscribed countries from the quota of under subscribed countries. This will be a good topic to research.
PD is important to get your dates current faster. Earlier PD will get a better shot at being current early.
After your PD becomes current your 485s are assigned visa numbers (if your FP, namechecks and processing are done) GCs are allocated based on 3 important factors : Dates must be current, date the I485 was received (FIFO as per their SOP but factors like namechecks make it unfeasible) and country of chargeability. It is thus tough to review approval trends on tracker threads and sites because of small and incomplete data set and no info on factors that influence faster or slower I485 approvals.
Coming back to the country quota, I do not know how country quotas are allocated throughout the year. How overflow happens each month/quarter and how future demand is predicted each month for the entire year when providing visas to oversubscribed countries from the quota of under subscribed countries. This will be a good topic to research.
siddar
09-04 01:41 PM
This is as per USCIC:
06/05/08. Previous editions will be accepted only for medical exams conducted before August 1, 2008. Medical exams conducted on or after August 1, 2008, require use of the 06/05/08 edition (link at bottom of page).
Goto www.uscis.gov and click on 'Immigration Forms' and scroll down for I-693.
06/05/08. Previous editions will be accepted only for medical exams conducted before August 1, 2008. Medical exams conducted on or after August 1, 2008, require use of the 06/05/08 edition (link at bottom of page).
Goto www.uscis.gov and click on 'Immigration Forms' and scroll down for I-693.
more...
msingh
06-12 09:06 AM
Hi,
While in the process of filing for labor certification my company has found 2 suitable citizens who are eligible for the job.
Now what are my options going forward and how does this affect my chances of a successful PERM filing ??
I'm filing in EB3 category right now. Also I need to file for labor before oct since my H1 will expire its original 6 year length next Oct (Oct 2010).
While in the process of filing for labor certification my company has found 2 suitable citizens who are eligible for the job.
Now what are my options going forward and how does this affect my chances of a successful PERM filing ??
I'm filing in EB3 category right now. Also I need to file for labor before oct since my H1 will expire its original 6 year length next Oct (Oct 2010).
nidar
03-05 11:04 AM
just did
desidas
01-22 10:55 AM
<bump>
Jeff Wheeler
11-30 01:11 AM
why would flash people move on to flex ? That makes no sense at all.
Either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you think you do, but you really don't.
Is this directed at me?
Either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you think you do, but you really don't.
Is this directed at me?
laksmi
03-06 01:02 PM
EAD correction is very simple and they will fix with in 4 months worse case.
No comments:
Post a Comment