grinch
02-15 07:32 AM
Yeah well if you don't want to make it look spiffy, then thats your choice!
I'm working on my entry currently, and it's coming along well, just some basic modeling and texturing, and some decent renders.
Doesn't have to look amazing or whatnot!
And deadline can be altered if you wish.
I'm working on my entry currently, and it's coming along well, just some basic modeling and texturing, and some decent renders.
Doesn't have to look amazing or whatnot!
And deadline can be altered if you wish.
wallpaper See All Captions
franklin
07-03 06:34 PM
with out a reliable website, we can't communicate and do all the important things(productive) you are talking. maintaining a reliable website doesn't need much funds.
Anti immigrants will not know our plans if we may this a paid website.
Yes, there are other ways that in an emergency you can keep in touch with IV. Total waste of valuable money, for the couple of occasions it has happened
Anti immigrants will not know our plans if we may this a paid website.
Yes, there are other ways that in an emergency you can keep in touch with IV. Total waste of valuable money, for the couple of occasions it has happened
jamesbond007
09-11 12:41 PM
Wow those guys/gals are fed with so many lies - numbers usa and programmers guild is projecting this bill as if creation of "new" half a million visas and propagating that so many new "foreigners" will take up jobs. Do they understand the word "recapture" and also these are unused 'greencard' recapture - many of beneficiaries are in us for way too long and they are not going to change the job market a bit.
Does IV already have a propaganda group of their own to thwart such baseless silly accusations?
If not, this group ought to be formed; made up of people who are patient, have very good communication skills (both verbal and written) and be well aware of the current immigration process in the US.
I am afraid that the clueless media might see these lies on Dice (which is one the top job search sites), and assume that what is posted there is accurate. If they run with it as a story without doing proper investigation, it will get unnecessary negative publicity. It needs a proper counter argument, supported by the facts. eg: the legislation that limits the current EB level at 140K per year; and the legislation that does not allow spillover of the unused visas from one year to the next.
There are a lot of ignorant people around. Some knowledge transfer to them will help us all. (There will be some people who are not receptive to knowledge. No one can help them.)
Thanks
Does IV already have a propaganda group of their own to thwart such baseless silly accusations?
If not, this group ought to be formed; made up of people who are patient, have very good communication skills (both verbal and written) and be well aware of the current immigration process in the US.
I am afraid that the clueless media might see these lies on Dice (which is one the top job search sites), and assume that what is posted there is accurate. If they run with it as a story without doing proper investigation, it will get unnecessary negative publicity. It needs a proper counter argument, supported by the facts. eg: the legislation that limits the current EB level at 140K per year; and the legislation that does not allow spillover of the unused visas from one year to the next.
There are a lot of ignorant people around. Some knowledge transfer to them will help us all. (There will be some people who are not receptive to knowledge. No one can help them.)
Thanks
2011 funny captions pics with
nomi
12-11 02:23 PM
Originally Posted by god_bless_you
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Originally Posted by Nomi
I agree with you. Why we don`t explore this option ???? USCIS make so many rule by itself then why they don`t make this rule to file 485 while PD is not current without going in Senate. Like they start premium processing of I-140. They make this rule without any bill in US Senate. correct me if I am wrong
I think, core team should look this option or ask us to find more information about it. I think, core team can meet with high official from USCIS.
what do you guys think about it ??
thx.
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Originally Posted by Nomi
I agree with you. Why we don`t explore this option ???? USCIS make so many rule by itself then why they don`t make this rule to file 485 while PD is not current without going in Senate. Like they start premium processing of I-140. They make this rule without any bill in US Senate. correct me if I am wrong
I think, core team should look this option or ask us to find more information about it. I think, core team can meet with high official from USCIS.
what do you guys think about it ??
thx.
more...
prinive
02-20 04:27 PM
EB3 india wont move further... With PD Sep 2001 EB3 Indi. Still waiting...
Here is Mr. Gotcher's perspective on EB3 movement ...
In terms of EB3 movement for India do you think that the slow movement as predicted will atleast move the cut off dates to Dec 2001 (India) by end of FY 08 ?
I doubt very much that we will see any EB3 cutoff date movement until October.
James Ronald Gotcher
Here is Mr. Gotcher's perspective on EB3 movement ...
In terms of EB3 movement for India do you think that the slow movement as predicted will atleast move the cut off dates to Dec 2001 (India) by end of FY 08 ?
I doubt very much that we will see any EB3 cutoff date movement until October.
James Ronald Gotcher
immigrant2007
07-29 09:13 AM
Yea sure, be scared of corporatiions and defamation suits and let them enslave you. Sheeple mentality.
Add, the "now dead" Sun Microsystems to the list.
They even give you an offer letter/appointment letter which says "We will file for your greencard", and then dilly-dally about it for 4 years.
fuck em.
Take control of your own destiny.
Did the companies ever give in written that our gc will be filed? and H1 extension will be applied? If yes you have a case at hand otherwise frustration
Add, the "now dead" Sun Microsystems to the list.
They even give you an offer letter/appointment letter which says "We will file for your greencard", and then dilly-dally about it for 4 years.
fuck em.
Take control of your own destiny.
Did the companies ever give in written that our gc will be filed? and H1 extension will be applied? If yes you have a case at hand otherwise frustration
more...
GCNirvana007
10-10 09:55 PM
It is unreasonable to carry a passport at all times when you are living here. What happens if you leave it behind in the grocery store by mistake or leave it in the cab or something? I think the issue reported by the OP is more relevant close to the border. Nobody asks for your passport in Vegas or Denver.
Which part you didnt understand?
Once you enter USA, doesnt matter Vegas or Denver, you need to carry documents with you. Thats LAW. They dont stop everybody but if they do, we are answerable to them.
Its similar to speeding. For a 55 miles speed limit, usually cops dont stop if you drive 70. However they are legally entitled to fine you if you drive 56. Its LAW.
Now if you leave it by mistake, thats not their problem, you got to deal with it.
Which part you didnt understand?
Once you enter USA, doesnt matter Vegas or Denver, you need to carry documents with you. Thats LAW. They dont stop everybody but if they do, we are answerable to them.
Its similar to speeding. For a 55 miles speed limit, usually cops dont stop if you drive 70. However they are legally entitled to fine you if you drive 56. Its LAW.
Now if you leave it by mistake, thats not their problem, you got to deal with it.
2010 writing caption on cat is
lazycis
01-19 08:50 PM
When my Mother-in-law came here a few years back, she was stopped at the passport control. They wanted to ask a few questions, but as she does not speak English at all and they could not find an interpreter, they let her go after a few minutes. She just showed an invitation letter and did not say a word in English. It does work.
more...
uma_vishi
07-14 11:03 PM
Hi All,
here is my situation.I'm working in USA on L1B visa which is about to complete 5 years in sep 2010.my company A (employer and client )want to apply for L1A. Also another company B is filing H1B. now to make my stay here without going to india for the time being is this possible.
1) can both the companies apply for two different visa for a single person.
2) what are the pros and cons.
3) for conversion of L1B to L1A , is petition enough to stay in USA or do i need to go get the stamping.
also H1b start time is OCt and my petition expires in sep 2009 but i'm having I-94 till Nov 2011.
now how to manage one month time without going out of this country.
can anybody please help me with this.
Thanks in Advance.
here is my situation.I'm working in USA on L1B visa which is about to complete 5 years in sep 2010.my company A (employer and client )want to apply for L1A. Also another company B is filing H1B. now to make my stay here without going to india for the time being is this possible.
1) can both the companies apply for two different visa for a single person.
2) what are the pros and cons.
3) for conversion of L1B to L1A , is petition enough to stay in USA or do i need to go get the stamping.
also H1b start time is OCt and my petition expires in sep 2009 but i'm having I-94 till Nov 2011.
now how to manage one month time without going out of this country.
can anybody please help me with this.
Thanks in Advance.
hair See All Captions
gcma08
06-06 04:28 PM
We got the "card production ordered" emails today. Here are our dates.
Labor Approved: 10/10/2006
I-140 AD: 11/27/2006
I-485 RD: 07/09/2007
EAD, AP: Sep/Oct 2007
RFE: 11/29/2007 Responded: 12/6/2007
LUD/AD: 6/6/2008 (Card Production Ordered)
Labor Approved: 10/10/2006
I-140 AD: 11/27/2006
I-485 RD: 07/09/2007
EAD, AP: Sep/Oct 2007
RFE: 11/29/2007 Responded: 12/6/2007
LUD/AD: 6/6/2008 (Card Production Ordered)
more...
pappu
06-14 01:13 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/TransformationConOps_Mar07.pdf
hot See More Captions For This
texanmom
09-26 11:40 AM
Please deluge both the author (Eilene Zimmerman) and the editor with emails pointing out the misrepresentation of IV's agenda.
Using words like 'defamatory' , "unethical reporting" and 'misrepresentation' catches their attention since they are always afraid of law suits.
Using words like 'defamatory' , "unethical reporting" and 'misrepresentation' catches their attention since they are always afraid of law suits.
more...
house Funny cats – pictures of funny
webm
12-15 11:48 AM
Well said Chandu..it's true..
tattoo funny-
file485
12-22 07:34 PM
thanks UN for the reply..
what can I say..!! lost sleep for many days,but now there is nothing I can do and just hoping all will be positive...
now with a labor filed in 2003,485 in 2007 and the PDs rolled back to 2000 god knows when our GC misery ends..The GC sponsoring employer will help with all the letters we need...if our dates become current in another 2 yrs..so 2009 - 2003 i.e 6yrs gap between the labor and GC adjuctication, will this raise an eyebrow of the IO officer...? the GC sponsoring employer is a 80 million $ construction company..
also another question..I see conflicting opinions about letting USCIS know bout the change in job and using AC21...some say wait till RFE and some say send a letter upfront..what is the best option..? also if we use AC21 do we still need to show that we have intentions to join the original GC sponsored employer A or the latest GC sponsor becomes the AC21-ed company..
jeez ..so stressed out of this GC mess..
pls let us know..
what can I say..!! lost sleep for many days,but now there is nothing I can do and just hoping all will be positive...
now with a labor filed in 2003,485 in 2007 and the PDs rolled back to 2000 god knows when our GC misery ends..The GC sponsoring employer will help with all the letters we need...if our dates become current in another 2 yrs..so 2009 - 2003 i.e 6yrs gap between the labor and GC adjuctication, will this raise an eyebrow of the IO officer...? the GC sponsoring employer is a 80 million $ construction company..
also another question..I see conflicting opinions about letting USCIS know bout the change in job and using AC21...some say wait till RFE and some say send a letter upfront..what is the best option..? also if we use AC21 do we still need to show that we have intentions to join the original GC sponsored employer A or the latest GC sponsor becomes the AC21-ed company..
jeez ..so stressed out of this GC mess..
pls let us know..
more...
pictures funny cat photo captions.
gimme_GC2006
05-12 03:14 PM
Online MBA from University of Maryland University College matches the criteria you mentioned (to a larger extent). Also you can have MBA degree in 2 yrs. The course work is demanding and one would need TOEFL if not educated in US or few other countries. GMAT is not required.
Thanks ss777, I will checkout..do you how it is ranked?
Thanks ss777, I will checkout..do you how it is ranked?
dresses Funny Cat Pictures | Caption
grinch
03-11 03:26 PM
Gah BlueSun, I love your render, especially the lighting...
I CAN'T GET THAT!! AHHH I HATE MAYA
I CAN'T GET THAT!! AHHH I HATE MAYA
more...
makeup Funny Cats With Captions.
GC_ASP
03-18 05:28 PM
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
girlfriend funny cats
saurav_4096
07-15 10:10 PM
Somehow I have feeling the case in this thread in more fake then real...
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
hairstyles funny cat pictures
sc3
10-16 04:45 PM
Read your above sentence, then read your below sentence. If I try to find a relation between these two sentences I do not know what you are talking.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
Again I am not sure what you are saying but MY PD is in early 2004 and RD was in Aug, they moved my application to another centre and my new RD is Oct. then I saw 2006 and 2007 cases getting approved. This is not right, why are they going by RD and not on PD?.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues). It is unfortunate that due to your application movement to another center you got a bad "RD" -- you should probably work with them to get the RD fixed.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Exactly dude, there should be some synchronization between DOL and USCIS. Just saying that USCIS is not responsible for DOL’s actions does not solve the problem, they can conveniently blame each other and take till eternity to process applications and you will keep saying the same thing that USCIS is not to be blamed.
No, you did not say that, all you said was USCIS is not doing anything wrong.
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
makemygc
01-30 08:33 PM
[QUOTE=logiclife]Unpaid bench means you are "Out of Status". Not illegal.
I don't agree at all with this statement. People can go on a unpaid maternity leave and still maintain status.
Out of status is anyway no better than illegal.
I don't agree at all with this statement. People can go on a unpaid maternity leave and still maintain status.
Out of status is anyway no better than illegal.
jcgc
02-21 10:43 AM
NOT EVERYONE REGISTERS AT THESE POS SITES. lol
C'mon be realistic.
Exactly...If everyone registers, then we wouldnt need to estimate any ratios. Would we?
Also even when people do register their case on this site, not many register their dependents cases.
in FY08 we know for sure that EB2 Inida quota has been consumed. That gives a definite number of approvals to use for estimation. When i estimate that represents 6.75% of these cases (all cases upto Dec03), this ratio is a reasonable estimate of all the people who do not register.
C'mon be realistic.
Exactly...If everyone registers, then we wouldnt need to estimate any ratios. Would we?
Also even when people do register their case on this site, not many register their dependents cases.
in FY08 we know for sure that EB2 Inida quota has been consumed. That gives a definite number of approvals to use for estimation. When i estimate that represents 6.75% of these cases (all cases upto Dec03), this ratio is a reasonable estimate of all the people who do not register.