thirdworldman
02-15 09:17 PM
I don't usually like to post until I'm done, but here's what I've got so far; I'm going the "light study" route.
http://www.tweakmedia.com/casey/3dsubway.jpg
http://www.tweakmedia.com/casey/3dsubway.jpg
wallpaper wallpaper 3d hd nature.
vin13
02-28 11:18 AM
I may be able to help get air tickets to a couple of individuals.
Please PM me with your Name, phone number, and good time to reach (with time zone) if you are in need of air ticket help for the advocacy event.
Thanks
Please PM me with your Name, phone number, and good time to reach (with time zone) if you are in need of air ticket help for the advocacy event.
Thanks
rajuram
10-25 09:38 PM
Reason: All of us(between 2002-4) were rotting in BEC for years...BEC just
vomited us out between Jan 2007 to September 07.
Lets get for another round of rotting
vomited us out between Jan 2007 to September 07.
Lets get for another round of rotting
2011 3d nature wallpaper.
bheemi123
10-03 01:25 PM
Hi friends,
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
u can be in L1 status..just go out of the contry and come back in L1b status..u r status will be autoamtically be L1 again...however u have to remember that u r h1b will be wasted...my friend did same thing last week..
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
u can be in L1 status..just go out of the contry and come back in L1b status..u r status will be autoamtically be L1 again...however u have to remember that u r h1b will be wasted...my friend did same thing last week..
more...
nat23
06-13 08:41 AM
Interesting Article on the revival of the CIR
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_070613.htm
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_070613.htm
kuhelica2000
01-09 11:29 AM
Absolutely wrong. Becasue of false 5/6 year experience, the genuine guy with 2/3 years fo experience didn't even get the interview. Misrepresentation in your resume works becuase American system is mostly based on trust. All the places I have worked, no one ever asked to even see my diploma. Becuase, they trusted me. Unfortunately we are taking advantage of this trust and that's why we will be seeing laws to eliminate consulrtng all together because some low ethics like you want credit for doctoring resume.
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
more...
va_dude
05-26 04:32 PM
carrying your gc is understandable, its just a card like your license.
But expecting folks to carry their immigration papers all the time, even when they haven't travelled abroad is a bit too much. As long as i have my license or state id with me, it should suffice.
This is just a classic case of harassing immigrants.
But expecting folks to carry their immigration papers all the time, even when they haven't travelled abroad is a bit too much. As long as i have my license or state id with me, it should suffice.
This is just a classic case of harassing immigrants.
2010 wallpapers nature.
kondur_007
07-12 04:30 PM
E. APPLICABILITY OF INA SECTION 202(a)(5)(A)AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF �OTHERWISE UNUSED� NUMBERS
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
This is simply the explanation as to why will EB2 India get a huge number and not so much for EB2 China (so when year end statistics come out, there would not be too much noise about why EB2 India got several thousands of visa numbers more than any other category).
Indication that EB2 India will get huge numbers...this is just explanation as to why:)
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
This is simply the explanation as to why will EB2 India get a huge number and not so much for EB2 China (so when year end statistics come out, there would not be too much noise about why EB2 India got several thousands of visa numbers more than any other category).
Indication that EB2 India will get huge numbers...this is just explanation as to why:)
more...
GCapplicant
07-18 10:23 AM
Mine reached on July 2nd 9:01 AM. I don't think they must have rejected any application. I think, if someone is saying "rejected" means USCIS refused to accept the fedex, in which case package should be returned back to lawyers in 3/4 days.
If your package was accepeted by USCIS then it would be on hold and based on yesterday's news, now it should be ready for processing. I am checking this with couple of lawyers and I will update this thread with anything I find out.
Exactly,Even I think so...If they did not want to accept they would have done at the door step.So I think better we can wait and see for another week if any cases are like that.My lawyer mentioned she hasnt got any rejections until now.She has been sending continuous applications even a week before during this problem.She mentioned last week that she is still sending applications in and has Fed ex delivery confirmations for all the applications.
If your package was accepeted by USCIS then it would be on hold and based on yesterday's news, now it should be ready for processing. I am checking this with couple of lawyers and I will update this thread with anything I find out.
Exactly,Even I think so...If they did not want to accept they would have done at the door step.So I think better we can wait and see for another week if any cases are like that.My lawyer mentioned she hasnt got any rejections until now.She has been sending continuous applications even a week before during this problem.She mentioned last week that she is still sending applications in and has Fed ex delivery confirmations for all the applications.
hair nature wallpaper hd.
njboy
04-04 03:41 PM
if this bill is signed into law...most desi consultant companies with one h4 aunty doing the accounting work + recruiting + administrative work will have to shut down
more...
Jaime
09-10 09:55 PM
Microsoft using cricket to try to stop Reverse Brain Drain!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/...oft_cricket_dc
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/...oft_cricket_dc
hot free wallpapers for desktop
eb3India
07-01 10:26 PM
Hi guys techmia just created his ID and he must be from other side of the aile who just want see us as failure, please ignore these post and keep faith, remeber always we are legal and we follow law, this land is suppose to be land of law and no one is above it. if there is in justicse IV should fight with out fear, our strength is in our integrity and faith that we did;nt anything wrong and we should not be afraid of anything
more...
house 3d nature wallpapers. 3D Nature Wallpapers For; 3D Nature Wallpapers For
GC9180
01-17 06:54 PM
xyzgc,
"If he had lost his job, he wouldn't bull-shitting around like this on public forums."
What he spoke was what one goes thru at that point of time, this happens to people who have lots of responsibility..maintain family, medical insurance, loans etc. If one has few $$millions$$ (i assume you have, as you assumed about him bull-shi**ing) then one does not worry about layoff or madoff..for the job was just a pass-time.
"pretend to be shell-shocked" to accuse anybody without proof, in soft words you spoke lies about him, in hard words one can call you a liar.
"If he had lost his job, he wouldn't bull-shitting around like this on public forums."
What he spoke was what one goes thru at that point of time, this happens to people who have lots of responsibility..maintain family, medical insurance, loans etc. If one has few $$millions$$ (i assume you have, as you assumed about him bull-shi**ing) then one does not worry about layoff or madoff..for the job was just a pass-time.
"pretend to be shell-shocked" to accuse anybody without proof, in soft words you spoke lies about him, in hard words one can call you a liar.
tattoo 3d nature wallpaper
ArunAntonio
04-23 05:54 PM
[/QUOTE] Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.[/QUOTE]
Logic Life -- YOU ROCK MAN !!
Logic Life -- YOU ROCK MAN !!
more...
pictures Free download Wallpapers - 3D
EndlessWait
02-12 04:02 PM
Its like what NAZIS did to Jews.. Cmon this is America, lets post this to President Obama's website
dresses Tagged with: 3d wallpapers,
askreddy
06-25 05:31 AM
Hi NJ members,
Iam joined yesterday this forum.
My PD is 9/2003 and EB3.
Iam having issue with birth certificate.Can any one from india pls send me non availability and affidavits you have. you can erase your imp details. i just want the format.
thanks in advance....
Iam joined yesterday this forum.
My PD is 9/2003 and EB3.
Iam having issue with birth certificate.Can any one from india pls send me non availability and affidavits you have. you can erase your imp details. i just want the format.
thanks in advance....
more...
makeup 3D Nature Wallpaper
GCBy3000
07-13 12:27 AM
Dear friend, I agree with you on this one if she had done it on July 3rd or 4th and not later. It is for mere publicity and I have heard several bad things about her in the past. May be she is very knowledgeable in the immigration laws, but if the knowledge is not used in the right way then it is not going to help the society.
People, I think it is best we not doubt the intentions of anybody willing to speak on our behalf. It is a critical hour and we will take all the help we need. Murthy could've just not sent the letter and kept quiet. What would you say to that ? What do you say to other lawyers who have not even done this simple thing of writing a letter to Chertoff ?
Atleast she's not trying to add millions of hits to her website by writing sensational news every hour, unlike some other lawyers :)
I think she deserves a "Thank you" for this nice gesture.
Full Disclosure : My lawyer is not Murthy. I have spoken with her once long time ago and decided not to go with her for other reasons.
People, I think it is best we not doubt the intentions of anybody willing to speak on our behalf. It is a critical hour and we will take all the help we need. Murthy could've just not sent the letter and kept quiet. What would you say to that ? What do you say to other lawyers who have not even done this simple thing of writing a letter to Chertoff ?
Atleast she's not trying to add millions of hits to her website by writing sensational news every hour, unlike some other lawyers :)
I think she deserves a "Thank you" for this nice gesture.
Full Disclosure : My lawyer is not Murthy. I have spoken with her once long time ago and decided not to go with her for other reasons.
girlfriend nature wallpaper hd Picture
hara_patta_for_rico
07-10 08:12 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
hairstyles 3d nature wallpaper hd.
roseball
07-09 03:35 PM
I was surprised to see that nowhere it was mentioned that USCIS processed 25k petitions over the weekend (or nearly 60k in 2 weeks) as reported by some USCIS officials last week and in many cases broke their own regulations by approving several cases with pending background/name checks. That definitely sounds to me like a conspiracy against July filers....In my view, that should have been one of the strongest points we can use against USCIS. I dont think we have a case against DOS as they had to revise the bulletin as USCIS requested more than available Visa numbers and exhausted the quota.....Even Dr. Rice made it clear in her NBC interview from the DOS perspective that revision of visa bulletin caused an "inconvenience" to the petitioners....
dilber
07-20 05:37 AM
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
EB2 has been on or Apr 2004 for a long time so all the ones before should have got the GC or at least most would have when we are calculation numbers for calculating retrogation We have to consider the numbers in in a particular category 11000 number as you say includes all the EB categories you have to discount out the EB1's because they have got their GCs long back. EB3 will also have to cut out form the calculation because they are not being counted. even if you consider 40% of these to be EB2 (a conservative estimate) then total GC needed including the dependents will be closer to 11000 (Total not just primary) and as Vdlrao and others have shown there should be more than this number available in this fiscal year alone. So I will have to agree with them that the numbers will go back but not all the way to Apr 2004 It should easily come in 2005 range may even come to 2006 since there were very few cases applied during 2005. Also can some one let me know if during 2005 when perm was instigated was regular labor processing also going on or was it completed stopped during that time.
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
EB2 has been on or Apr 2004 for a long time so all the ones before should have got the GC or at least most would have when we are calculation numbers for calculating retrogation We have to consider the numbers in in a particular category 11000 number as you say includes all the EB categories you have to discount out the EB1's because they have got their GCs long back. EB3 will also have to cut out form the calculation because they are not being counted. even if you consider 40% of these to be EB2 (a conservative estimate) then total GC needed including the dependents will be closer to 11000 (Total not just primary) and as Vdlrao and others have shown there should be more than this number available in this fiscal year alone. So I will have to agree with them that the numbers will go back but not all the way to Apr 2004 It should easily come in 2005 range may even come to 2006 since there were very few cases applied during 2005. Also can some one let me know if during 2005 when perm was instigated was regular labor processing also going on or was it completed stopped during that time.
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
Ramba
03-17 11:08 AM
Between 2001 and 2004 all EB catagories were current for all countries (thanks to AC21 visa recapture). No one, (particularly Indians) cared about EB3 and EB2, till DOS indicated in Dec 2004 visa bulliton that EB3 India will retrogress in Jan 2005. Till that point (dec 2004) most of the labor filed are EB3 (75% is EB3 and 25% may be EB2). After Jan 2005, the filings were reverse. After Jan 2005, everyone tried to file EB2, unless they are not absolutly qualified for EB2. Till recent months, DOL was very liberal in approving LC with EB2 qualifications. Now it is difficult. Therefore EB2 India will move fast till Dec-2004 (unless most EB3 guys did not convert to EB2, by PD porting). After DEC-2004 it will be very-very slow.