RNGC
12-23 09:49 PM
Hello everyone...
IV is doing a great job.....I suggest to send email to the individuals private email about these conference calls and meeting etc in atleast 2-3 in advance, ....We get so busy that we may not be able to check IV daily, but we do check our inbox...Planning to go to the CT meeting tomorrow....Anyone from plainsboro send me a PM
Ranga
Plainsboro, NJ
IV is doing a great job.....I suggest to send email to the individuals private email about these conference calls and meeting etc in atleast 2-3 in advance, ....We get so busy that we may not be able to check IV daily, but we do check our inbox...Planning to go to the CT meeting tomorrow....Anyone from plainsboro send me a PM
Ranga
Plainsboro, NJ
wallpaper wallpaper Smoking kills.
shukla77
03-09 12:23 PM
Where is the great predictor :D
delax
07-20 02:28 PM
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
2011 SMOKING KILLS
ramus
07-02 07:42 PM
Thanks..Please ask others to contribute too.
Contributed : 100 couple of hours back
Order Details - Jul 2, 2007 11:49 GMT-07:00
Google Order #516773533199673
Contributed : 100 couple of hours back
Order Details - Jul 2, 2007 11:49 GMT-07:00
Google Order #516773533199673
more...
saroj76
07-28 03:38 PM
Lord Ganesha picture on the India Pale Ale is a warning symbol. It means that if you drink too much beer, do not exercise, and use mouse as your vehicle then your belly will be as big as Lord Ganesha's belly LOL
Hi all,
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
Hi all,
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
sc3
10-18 10:32 PM
Kumar:
Don't worry, I gave you green. I wish 'critiques' are out in open for discussion to get to our objective. But those moroons like hiding
Just imagine the cowardice of these people!. Online forums already have sufficient anonymity that you dont have to reveal your true name. Despite that people hide behind comment system to give reds (and tell things like "you suck" and what not). I hope the admins shut down this misused feature. Or make the system non-anonymous so that we can drag out these people and take up their comments in open forum.
Don't worry, I gave you green. I wish 'critiques' are out in open for discussion to get to our objective. But those moroons like hiding
Just imagine the cowardice of these people!. Online forums already have sufficient anonymity that you dont have to reveal your true name. Despite that people hide behind comment system to give reds (and tell things like "you suck" and what not). I hope the admins shut down this misused feature. Or make the system non-anonymous so that we can drag out these people and take up their comments in open forum.
more...
logiclife
12-20 07:14 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Logiclife. I enter U.S in the first week of Feb, 2001. The economy was bad and I didn't manage to get a job. In fact, I didn't managed to get a job for a year. My then employer didn't revoked my H1B and the I-94 was valid until Oct, 2002. I didn't know that I was out of status till now. I don't remember seeing any section in I-485 form, asking for information about out of status. I did attach my previous H1-B approval notice(2000 -2002) while filing I-485. One thing I want to know is, did anyone got a query(RFE), asking to provide all W2 forms since their entry into this country? I am interested to know that.
Ok, yes, I think you're right. On 485, it doesnt ask about whether you were out of status in the past or not. Its on 485 supplement A , which is used only if you are applying for adjstment of status under section 245(i). Obviously you havent applied under 245(i) as the deadline for 245(i) was April 30 2001 and that is a history now.
Ok, so great. They havent asked and so there is no wilful misrepresentation. In that case, just stay put and hope that they dont find out.
Regarding the chances of them asking for w-2 and paystubs, I honestly dont know, but it is not rare.
If they ask for last 3 years or last 4 years of W-2 or paystubs, then you are fine, because your out-of-work period is ancient history now.
Ok, yes, I think you're right. On 485, it doesnt ask about whether you were out of status in the past or not. Its on 485 supplement A , which is used only if you are applying for adjstment of status under section 245(i). Obviously you havent applied under 245(i) as the deadline for 245(i) was April 30 2001 and that is a history now.
Ok, so great. They havent asked and so there is no wilful misrepresentation. In that case, just stay put and hope that they dont find out.
Regarding the chances of them asking for w-2 and paystubs, I honestly dont know, but it is not rare.
If they ask for last 3 years or last 4 years of W-2 or paystubs, then you are fine, because your out-of-work period is ancient history now.
2010 smoking kills people. smoking
vine93
11-12 02:36 PM
Vin13
Thanks for nice draft. I can take initiatives at my state.
Thanks for nice draft. I can take initiatives at my state.
more...
sheela
07-13 08:53 AM
Let us see the approvals trend till october. I am guessing the PD will move back to MID 2005 or 2004 by October for EB-2 India.
I don't agree. It will stay same or forward in small increments with new fiscal yr numbers available. I am saying so because EB2 I stayed for such long at 04/07 and everyone knows fewer LCs were filed/approved between 04 and 05.
I don't agree. It will stay same or forward in small increments with new fiscal yr numbers available. I am saying so because EB2 I stayed for such long at 04/07 and everyone knows fewer LCs were filed/approved between 04 and 05.
hair Smoking Kills
ronhira
04-10 10:40 AM
Time and again I am telling. EB 3 problem is due to 245(i) cases. Once 245(i) primaries are over, their dependent will come into the picture, who are waiting back home. All 245(i) cases have PD before April 2001. For time being, EB3 I or Mexico move beyond April 01 but again retrogress back to the April 01 when cases are accumulate at CP. This is the reason why EB3 I and Mexico is not moving since last many years.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
what r u...... y don't u file foia to prove your twisted racist theories.... y r u always attacking mexican immigrants or 245(i)...... 245(i) was a LEGAL provision in the law...... who made that law..... congress....... assuming any merit to u'r racist theory.... y r u faulting the people who filed 245(i)..... y not fault the congress for passing 245(i) & not passing immigration bill....
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
what r u...... y don't u file foia to prove your twisted racist theories.... y r u always attacking mexican immigrants or 245(i)...... 245(i) was a LEGAL provision in the law...... who made that law..... congress....... assuming any merit to u'r racist theory.... y r u faulting the people who filed 245(i)..... y not fault the congress for passing 245(i) & not passing immigration bill....
more...
engineer
06-12 08:18 PM
http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00008032&channel=civic%20center.
note: I wrote to editors at chowk.com to add in foot note that is press release from Immigrationvoice.com.
Please go there and interact to get more people aware of this issue.
Chowk is read by many Southeast Asian people....
For those who don't know Chowk.com here is an excerpt from their website:
"Chowk's Success
Ideas (the written word). Identities (the members). Interactions (the discussion). Over 3500 published articles, 20,000 registered members, 300,000 moderated discussions, and innumerable forum style impromptu responses. "
note: I wrote to editors at chowk.com to add in foot note that is press release from Immigrationvoice.com.
Please go there and interact to get more people aware of this issue.
Chowk is read by many Southeast Asian people....
For those who don't know Chowk.com here is an excerpt from their website:
"Chowk's Success
Ideas (the written word). Identities (the members). Interactions (the discussion). Over 3500 published articles, 20,000 registered members, 300,000 moderated discussions, and innumerable forum style impromptu responses. "
hot smoking-kills 25
walking_dude
10-29 10:22 PM
I'm surprised only 70 members are interested in accurate prediction of future VB movements, and orderly processing of 485 applications instead of the current random lottery!
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
more...
house smoking kills
gcma08
06-06 07:44 PM
My PD is Jan 2004 (EB2-RIR, India), I filed thru NSC
Which service center are you form?
Which service center are you form?
tattoo sticks - smoking kills.
pitha
01-16 07:10 PM
I actually don't think this is the main concern of many people who have not contributed. I have talked with many friends who got stuck with their GC applications regarding IV and urged them to contribute. However, not many of them were very passionate about this. They just simply believed that they could not achieve their GCs faster with IV's effort than without. $20 per month is not a big deal for them. But without any confidence and hope, they did not even want to bother to register and contribute. Most of my friends are EB2 with PD 2004 or later. Some who have filed 485s see no sign for SKIL being passed and are fine with their APs and EADs. Those who have not filed their 485 truly believe that they could file their 485s in about 2 years and got used to this waiting.
So I think maybe we can let people know what IV has achieved in the past one year(not just how many members or how much money IV has achieved..., but things really matter to people) and inspire them.
Maybe we are better off without having people with such defeatist attitudes as our members. If you cannot even help yourself how can others help you. Even I had friends with such attitude, I told them about IV and when they started saying IV cannot help blah blah blah nonsense. I just left it at that. If anybody who is interested goes through IV forums for 10 to 15 minutes they will understand what IV has achieved in the last 1 year with meager resources and funds. Lets leave alone such bad apples. On the other hand, I also had friends who went through IV when I mentioned it to them and have already contributed. If we keep trying and spread the word around we will eventualy find the people who have the passion to do something for themselves and join IV.
So I think maybe we can let people know what IV has achieved in the past one year(not just how many members or how much money IV has achieved..., but things really matter to people) and inspire them.
Maybe we are better off without having people with such defeatist attitudes as our members. If you cannot even help yourself how can others help you. Even I had friends with such attitude, I told them about IV and when they started saying IV cannot help blah blah blah nonsense. I just left it at that. If anybody who is interested goes through IV forums for 10 to 15 minutes they will understand what IV has achieved in the last 1 year with meager resources and funds. Lets leave alone such bad apples. On the other hand, I also had friends who went through IV when I mentioned it to them and have already contributed. If we keep trying and spread the word around we will eventualy find the people who have the passion to do something for themselves and join IV.
more...
pictures Smoking Kills, do you smoke?
designflaw
04-09 10:59 PM
ROW moved 2 months, I will take it. If it keeps moving 2 months at a time, then my turn would come up in 3 years. Highly unlikely cause ROW PD per USCIS is expected to be in 2005/2006 by end of year. I think my PR for ROW would be pretty much catching up.
dresses Share Graphic- Smoking kills.
crazyghoda
01-30 03:17 PM
Ok now I am very very confused :confused:
Your statement mentions that the 485 does not cover out of status from last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing. I have always been working during that time. No issues. After filing 485, I exited and reentered twice using my H1. Last entry was in March 2008 I think. After that, I changed employers using AC21 and got my H1 transferred so I was still on an H1 status. Finally I departed the US in Dec 2008 for vacation while still on H1 status with an active job. I got laid off while I was out of the US.
Now, at that time I had a stamped H1 as well as an AP. I could have used either. However, I felt that using the H1 would be wrong as I no longer had a job with the H1 employer. So I decided to brave the secondary inspections and entered on AP. Since then I have been looking for a job.
My question is - Is the time I havent been working considered as Out of Status?
Your statement mentions that the 485 does not cover out of status from last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing. I have always been working during that time. No issues. After filing 485, I exited and reentered twice using my H1. Last entry was in March 2008 I think. After that, I changed employers using AC21 and got my H1 transferred so I was still on an H1 status. Finally I departed the US in Dec 2008 for vacation while still on H1 status with an active job. I got laid off while I was out of the US.
Now, at that time I had a stamped H1 as well as an AP. I could have used either. However, I felt that using the H1 would be wrong as I no longer had a job with the H1 employer. So I decided to brave the secondary inspections and entered on AP. Since then I have been looking for a job.
My question is - Is the time I havent been working considered as Out of Status?
more...
makeup “Smoking kills almost six
pcs
04-21 08:10 AM
Keep calling people to get active & contribute
girlfriend dresses ASH - Smoking kills
sc3
10-16 06:05 PM
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people’s answers.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
hairstyles Smoking Kills. Smoking Kills
qesehmk
02-12 02:29 PM
I disagree. This thread is not about some immigration lawyer. This thread is about visa numbers wasted due to USCIS inefficiency. That's what the title of the thread says. Why do I or anybody else care about some immigration lawyer? Why is he/she relevant if its specifically proven with facts that there is no wastage of visa number. You continue to advertise the name of the immigration lawyer. The reason I say this is because in my experience immigration lawyers comment on these issues as if they have direct access to USCIS Director or god. Even after disproving the visa wastage theory with facts you still continue to over analyze immigration body shop instead of discussing the issue. I am just wondering, why would you that? Are you that immigration lawyer or employee of his law firm? Just curious.
It's a pity to be desperate. But it's requires supreme stupidity to achieve this kind of cynicism. No I am not "That Lawyer" or his employer.
Before emptying the garbage in your mind, you wouldve done well to read my posts carefully.
It's a pity to be desperate. But it's requires supreme stupidity to achieve this kind of cynicism. No I am not "That Lawyer" or his employer.
Before emptying the garbage in your mind, you wouldve done well to read my posts carefully.
mps
02-13 01:30 PM
"ash123" - you need to correct your post for such a absurd choice of words ! :confused:
Just do some research on phrase "ethnic cleansing." :confused:
Just do some research on phrase "ethnic cleansing." :confused:
qesehmk
02-12 02:46 PM
No rally, No pubic initiative.
You mean PUBLIC !!
Thanks .... you made me laugh after greyhair beat the daylights out of me!!
You mean PUBLIC !!
Thanks .... you made me laugh after greyhair beat the daylights out of me!!