swede
09-19 08:49 AM
All speeches and performances were great. I did not intend to leave anyone out. The song that was written for the occasion(!) was cool. Jay's speech was powerful. And everything else. It was all great. People who were not there really missed something. As someone said, "America is about fighting for your rights." and I was glad to see that so many decided to do that yesterday!
wallpaper american flag wallpaper, rebel
akred
06-12 11:52 AM
CIR needs to die for the simple reason that the processing workload for the illegals on the USCIS will add another 3 years of wait for everybody. Simple fact of the matter is that the system has not finished recovering from the last 245(i) amnesty that ended in 2001. That was when the DOL received 6 years of applications in one week and everybody ended up waiting 3 years or more.
coopheal
11-12 09:58 AM
IV core should have two focus: long term plan and a short term plan.
Long term plan is anything that involves visa increase.
Short term plan is anything that does not involve visa increase, but that provides some kind of releif to us. A no-nonsense, non-controversial and simple measure that can be added to an appropriation bill is a best example.
I hope the core is reading this post...
If you have an idea, and possibly a suggestion on how to implement it, post it. Even an old idea with innovative implementation may help us.
However, please do not wait on contribution thinking until something happens I don�t have to contribute. IV core is already working on many issues, and your monthly contribution would help stabilize resource needs for current items.
Long term plan is anything that involves visa increase.
Short term plan is anything that does not involve visa increase, but that provides some kind of releif to us. A no-nonsense, non-controversial and simple measure that can be added to an appropriation bill is a best example.
I hope the core is reading this post...
If you have an idea, and possibly a suggestion on how to implement it, post it. Even an old idea with innovative implementation may help us.
However, please do not wait on contribution thinking until something happens I don�t have to contribute. IV core is already working on many issues, and your monthly contribution would help stabilize resource needs for current items.
2011 hot california flag wallpaper.
h1techSlave
02-08 02:44 PM
sts_seeker, We are perfectly happy to wait "before everyone who filed earlier." If you as a Nepali had a PD in 2001 and my PD is in 2002, I have no problems in you getting your GC before me. In this situation, you have filed before me, so it is fair that you should get your GC before me.
But today with the Country quota in place, your PD could be in 2007 and my PD could be in 2002. Guess, who would GC first?
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
But today with the Country quota in place, your PD could be in 2007 and my PD could be in 2002. Guess, who would GC first?
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
more...
rayoflight
06-11 09:57 AM
Sent to MD Senators
rsayed
03-12 08:25 AM
It's a classic case of "khoda pahaad, nikla chuha"...(dug a mountain, only to find a rat)...:D
more...
EB3_SEP04
05-26 05:11 PM
I wonder what are the required documents for America born citizens if they don't have passports. Just a driver license? or they have to carry birth certificates always?
US citizens are not required to prove that they are citizens, only the non-citizens are required to prove their status, and that's what angers me. If you answer the question as "Citizen" no further question is asked, and that is the RULE. Hence illegal people are trained to say the word "citizen" no matter what question they are asked. But as law abiding people most legal immigrants/non-immigrants won't lie just for the sake of avoiding the hassel of showing papers.
US citizens are not required to prove that they are citizens, only the non-citizens are required to prove their status, and that's what angers me. If you answer the question as "Citizen" no further question is asked, and that is the RULE. Hence illegal people are trained to say the word "citizen" no matter what question they are asked. But as law abiding people most legal immigrants/non-immigrants won't lie just for the sake of avoiding the hassel of showing papers.
2010 California Flag Live Wallpaper
kumar1
12-11 12:05 PM
Agreed! But when you call your bank to send you a debit card, they send it in days if not in weeks....that shows a sign of inter-dependability and a sense of need for each other. Sort of...I need you, you need me. You do not have to file MTR if they don't send you a debit card within 10 days.
Compare that with US consulate and DOS VISA bulletin and GC process...
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
Compare that with US consulate and DOS VISA bulletin and GC process...
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
more...
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?
hair mexican flag wallpaper.
javadeveloper
01-30 12:15 PM
have you submitted the new G-28 form when you changed employers?
You can go back to your original GC sponsoring employer also right?
You can go back to your original GC sponsoring employer also right?
more...
rbms
10-15 08:29 PM
Will mail on Friday
hot Aceh flag background
diptam
07-24 11:14 AM
Guys,
I signed a bond of 10G for getting a hardcopy of this letter mailed out by June 29th from my company's NJ office. This is initial evidence that you have FUTURE job offer and without it the 485 will be rejected.
If someone is lucky let they be - Do NOT make this mistake of not sending this letter in ORIGINAL.
Thanks,
I will try to dig out the actual memo. But this is from the oh law firm page:
---
06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing
* As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
* One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."
---
I signed a bond of 10G for getting a hardcopy of this letter mailed out by June 29th from my company's NJ office. This is initial evidence that you have FUTURE job offer and without it the 485 will be rejected.
If someone is lucky let they be - Do NOT make this mistake of not sending this letter in ORIGINAL.
Thanks,
I will try to dig out the actual memo. But this is from the oh law firm page:
---
06/17/2007: Flexible RFE/NOID Response Time Rule and Advisory for July EB-485 Filing
* As we advised earlier, the USCIS published a new rule that allows the USCIS to have more discredtion and control over the two issues: One is shortening of the timeframe for responses to RFE from previous 12 weeks to any period of time which they see fit. The second rule is their authority to either reject or deny petitions or applications without issuing RFE where "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Previously, the so-called Yates memo indirectly required the agency to avoid rejection and denial with a recommend to issue RFEs as much as possible. This part of the Yates memo is overridden by the new rule who took effect yesterday, June 16, 2007. It is thus likely that the Service Centers will more aggressively reject or deny the I-485 applications where the "initial evidence" are missing in the filing packet. It is thus very important that people understand the definition of "initial evidence." The initial evidence varies between the nonimmigrant and immigrant proceedings and for that matter, each type of proceedings. The immigration regulation lists in details the initial evidence. However, the instructions sheets to each petition or application lists the initial evidence that are required for filing. Accordingly, beginning from today, people may want to read the instruction sheet for I-485 form carefully to learn the list of initial evidence and not to miss omitting these evidence in filing I-485 applications.
* One of the initial evidence which is listed is the sealed I-693, the Medical Examination results completed and sealed by the USCIS designated civil surgeons who examined the applicants per the immigration rules. As we reported yesterday, attorneys asked the USCIS authorities to accept I-485 applications without the medical result, but their answer was that they were taking it under advicement but as it stands now, the sealed medical report would be required as initial evidence, accoring to the USCIS authorities who were present at the AILA Annual Conference in Orlando. We understand that in some areas, there are a huge backlog in the physician's clinics for such medical examination. However, people can shop around the authorized physicians in much broader areas. For instance, people usually were asked to schedule such medical examination in the local "district" office where the applicants resided. The definition of "district office" has been broaden lately. Former district offices have been turned into field offices of a district office. Accordingly, people can schedule the medical examination through a physician located outside of their residence if the area falls under the jurisdiction of "district" even if it is outside the jurisdiction of "field office."
---
more...
house american flag wallpaper.
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
tattoo American Flag Wallpaper USA
ya3
03-08 01:07 AM
hmm... I may join... If I get time. We'll see :D
Those WIPs are looking excellent, ppl. Especially Eilsoe's :thumb:
btw, if anyone wants to learn a 3d app without any prior knowledge... go CINEMA 4D:beam:
Those WIPs are looking excellent, ppl. Especially Eilsoe's :thumb:
btw, if anyone wants to learn a 3d app without any prior knowledge... go CINEMA 4D:beam:
more...
pictures quotes
raysaikat
07-28 09:01 AM
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
Would you be offended if the image of Ganesh is used on a sack of rice or sugar or a bottle of cooking oil? If not, then what's the problem in using it on an alcoholic beverage bottle?
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
Would you be offended if the image of Ganesh is used on a sack of rice or sugar or a bottle of cooking oil? If not, then what's the problem in using it on an alcoholic beverage bottle?
dresses eBay (US) : California State Bear Flag Wallpaper Border 15 ft x 7quot; (item
Tito_ortiz
11-19 12:09 PM
Please do not take any precipitated steps that harm yours status ! Calm down. This is still the strongest economy in the world. You don't want to miss this unique opportunity !
more...
makeup California Flag Live Wallpaper
rajuram
11-10 10:34 PM
We have no more excuses now.
1. Elections are over. So all arguments like "wait till the elections are over" do not apply.
2. We have a pro immigration president now.
3. Democrats are incharge of the house and the senate.
This is a good time to act. What is IV waiting for...
Ofcourse economy will grab the headlines, but it does not mean nothing else can be done. Do something before democrats start worrying about 2010 elections. Time to highlight that immigrants can help by buying houses (NPR had devoted some time to it recently, so they are aware, we just need to give it more publicity)
1. Elections are over. So all arguments like "wait till the elections are over" do not apply.
2. We have a pro immigration president now.
3. Democrats are incharge of the house and the senate.
This is a good time to act. What is IV waiting for...
Ofcourse economy will grab the headlines, but it does not mean nothing else can be done. Do something before democrats start worrying about 2010 elections. Time to highlight that immigrants can help by buying houses (NPR had devoted some time to it recently, so they are aware, we just need to give it more publicity)
girlfriend Texas State Flag Wallpaper for
div_bell_2003
01-20 02:53 PM
Buying a house is treated more as an investment (so you are told by the mortgage brokers) and like any investment it has its ups and downs. The OP probably wanted to get into this down market to get a house at a far lower price that what it used to be 10 months back ( similar to buying stocks now if you want to play long ). I really don't see a point lambasting OP for that choice, it's an individual decision.
However, I also do believe that one has to weigh in their options before they plan to make an investment. If you are expecting a kid and your wife is planning on taking time off work to raise the kid, it's probably not a good idea to get such a huge loan on one's back since it's a well known fact, it's going to take some time before anyone see any +ve value on their house prices. It's also imperative in this market to have a decent cash reserve , in case there is no dual income to cover for expenses in case of a job loss. If someone didn't do it, no use crying now !
However, I also do believe that one has to weigh in their options before they plan to make an investment. If you are expecting a kid and your wife is planning on taking time off work to raise the kid, it's probably not a good idea to get such a huge loan on one's back since it's a well known fact, it's going to take some time before anyone see any +ve value on their house prices. It's also imperative in this market to have a decent cash reserve , in case there is no dual income to cover for expenses in case of a job loss. If someone didn't do it, no use crying now !
hairstyles confederate flag wallpaper.
GooblyWoobly
03-20 02:09 PM
I have no idea why u guys get riled up about EB3->EB2 conversion? It's Not your Ration line FIFO. Are you trying to say someone who has 10 years of experience (5 years in the last company, so EB3) stands to get GC AFTER someone with no experience but a MS? There are many other loopholes through which EB3's can fall through. Just because you are frustrated with the wait, don't take it out on someone who is also on the same boat.
Also your assumption of "Reputed companies don't do EB3->EB2" is outright wrong. I work for one of the most reputed companies in the valley, and they do it on a selective basis (read, if you're good enough, they'll do it for you).
Remember this, someone can move to EB2 only if he qualifies to. It's not that you can just jump boat with no qualification. And if someone qualifies, I don't see why he/she should stay back!!
I'm a original EB2 filer (no EB3->EB2 conversion) and not a LC transfer. EB3->EB2 increases timeline for getting my GC. But I do not believe that's wrong.
Each one to his own!! My 2c.
Hi Coopheal:
With Due respects to your Seniority and Agony/ Frustration being retrogessed.
Standard Companies donot opt for having two I140s approved for a particular employees which is a "Logical Fallacy" of EB concept. Leave alone Rat Desi Companies.. They can do anything and turn the boards off..
If your arguement is right: first you have to stop L1s getting Gcs in less than 10 months.. (on an average). Porting EB3 to Eb2 is a big junk and disrepct to the EB2 Qualifier. Now, Qualifying Eb2, if you feel, is not a big deal, why the companies did not preferred it out for Eb3s in first place because lack of Job Requirements. (infact, this portings have to be highlighted to USCIS as Junk technique and illegal).
So the whole arguement doesnot workout. Soon, wait and see Portings would bestopped, with Desi companies messing itaround like Approved labors (infact, it isa refined version of approved labor scams).
Please donot jump on me.. its a waste of time.. But the logic holds good EB2 Vs. EB3. If allowed, People may even qualify for EB1, (People would work it out also sooner or later) Let's respect each other profiles.. and its a matter of time we are all there.
This is my Honest Advice.. Trust me. I am a 2003 eb3 victim.. No way to jump lines.. its inhuman.
Thanks,
Also your assumption of "Reputed companies don't do EB3->EB2" is outright wrong. I work for one of the most reputed companies in the valley, and they do it on a selective basis (read, if you're good enough, they'll do it for you).
Remember this, someone can move to EB2 only if he qualifies to. It's not that you can just jump boat with no qualification. And if someone qualifies, I don't see why he/she should stay back!!
I'm a original EB2 filer (no EB3->EB2 conversion) and not a LC transfer. EB3->EB2 increases timeline for getting my GC. But I do not believe that's wrong.
Each one to his own!! My 2c.
Hi Coopheal:
With Due respects to your Seniority and Agony/ Frustration being retrogessed.
Standard Companies donot opt for having two I140s approved for a particular employees which is a "Logical Fallacy" of EB concept. Leave alone Rat Desi Companies.. They can do anything and turn the boards off..
If your arguement is right: first you have to stop L1s getting Gcs in less than 10 months.. (on an average). Porting EB3 to Eb2 is a big junk and disrepct to the EB2 Qualifier. Now, Qualifying Eb2, if you feel, is not a big deal, why the companies did not preferred it out for Eb3s in first place because lack of Job Requirements. (infact, this portings have to be highlighted to USCIS as Junk technique and illegal).
So the whole arguement doesnot workout. Soon, wait and see Portings would bestopped, with Desi companies messing itaround like Approved labors (infact, it isa refined version of approved labor scams).
Please donot jump on me.. its a waste of time.. But the logic holds good EB2 Vs. EB3. If allowed, People may even qualify for EB1, (People would work it out also sooner or later) Let's respect each other profiles.. and its a matter of time we are all there.
This is my Honest Advice.. Trust me. I am a 2003 eb3 victim.. No way to jump lines.. its inhuman.
Thanks,
dontcareanymore
07-29 01:35 PM
please let me know how to close the thread. I do not want divide IV.
Don't worry.You have no chance ...........(..........of dividing IV)
IV is ROCK SOLID :):)
.
.
.
.
.
.........
No...... Just joking.
It is already divided and you have no chance of dividing it any further. Look at EB2 Vs. EB3 posts with I am better than you attitude and EBX-I vs ROW posts.
Your thread is just a punching bag :) All had fun giving their 2 cents and this is my 2 cents.
Don't worry.You have no chance ...........(..........of dividing IV)
IV is ROCK SOLID :):)
.
.
.
.
.
.........
No...... Just joking.
It is already divided and you have no chance of dividing it any further. Look at EB2 Vs. EB3 posts with I am better than you attitude and EBX-I vs ROW posts.
Your thread is just a punching bag :) All had fun giving their 2 cents and this is my 2 cents.
singhsa3
03-03 04:22 PM
That is option # 2
How about another option for people who are going to buy shortly even though their GC approval is far far away?
How about another option for people who are going to buy shortly even though their GC approval is far far away?